Friday, November 09, 2007

Number 41*

President number forty-one George H.W. Bush has been busy this week.

Earlier this week he said that there are more Bush family members waiting in the political wings (eep).

He’s followed that up by espousing his son’s decision to invade Iraq.

Not only does he support his son’s invasion, he also goes on the offensive and attacks critics of the Iraq war by saying they are advocating Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical rule…

Excuse me??? Because we don’t support the reasoning for invasion… because we don’t support a war that has cost thousands of American lives… because we don’t think the war on terror went through Iraq we’re supporting Hussein’s rule?That has to be one of the most idiotic, moronic and offensive statements Bush Sr. has ever muttered… and considering the source, that’s saying a lot.

This country was founded on the principles of freedom, including the freedom to disagree with our elected leaders. But when you start attacking those that disagree with you while accusing them of supporting a leader who slaughtered thousands, if not millions, of his own citizens… then you have taken a huge step over the line and, in Bush Sr.’s case, seemingly lost your mind.

Consider this; in his book, A World Transformed, Bush Sr. wrote;

“incalculable human and political costs would have resulted from an Iraq invasion in 1991. […] We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect rule Iraq. […] Going in and thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations mandate would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. […] Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different - and perhaps barren - outcome.”

Very interesting…

Also consider that eleven years ago, Bush Sr. wrote about Saddam Hussein and said that “removing [him] from power might well have plunged Iraq into civil war, sucking U.S. forces in to preserve order. Had we elected to march on Baghdad, our forces might still be there.”

That same year he also spoke against going into Baghdad by saying that “our forces could well have bogged down in an urban guerrilla conflict in the streets of Baghdad. […] We would have instantly handed Saddam a victory out of the jaws of a humiliating defeat.”

Again, very interesting… It seems to me that the way in which the war in Iraq has progressed, or regressed, itself validates Bush Sr.’s original concerns about marching into Baghdad… and now, by championing his son’s decision to invade while ridiculing those that think differently, he seems to be grossly undermining his legacy…

God help us if there are indeed more Bush’s in the political wings… lest our country never recover.

No comments: