One Father's Perspective that should shake the world

In his memoirs, "A World Transformed," written five years ago, George Bush, Senior, wrote the following to explain why he didn't go after Saddam Hussein at the end of the Gulf War.

"Trying to eliminate Saddam...would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible.... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq.... there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that 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."

If only his son could read.

Who knew that George the 1st had it in him?

Unlike *, 41 is NOT stupid. He's a barbarian, but not a stupid barbarian.

Not really more I can say to that :wow:

children so rarely listen to their parents until well after it's too late.

This is good stuff!

Just ask KCDem. :)

I posted it in GD. It needs to be.

Kick this SOB so it stays on top!

:kick:

Didn't one of GW's talking heads say that about the Yellowcake hoo-hah? And didn't another chimp-handler say "He doesn't have the time to read every piece of paper that crosses his desk?"

We need a details man in the White house. Preferably one who DOES read, and if he doesn't golf every weekend while in office that would be a bonus.

Though GHWB was a Repub, he handled Gulf War one pretty well.

Wouldn't surprise if Bush The First actually wrote it, since I'm sure that's precisely (or close, anyway) the reason he didn't go after Saddam; though I bet in his heart he really, really wanted to, I have to give the guy credit for following the UN mandate to liberate Kuwait and NOT go after Saddam. But then, on the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if they had plans way back then that they'd let Saddam sit for a while, and get some ignorant puppet lacky into the white house, and let HIM go after Saddam, and take history's blame for a major, catastrophic fuckup.

But the footnote hound in me wants to know if YOU have seen that paragraph in his book, or if you posted from what someone else says that Bush The First says.

I got it in email.

I probably should have written that in the initial post.

I'm bookmarking this one (I rarely book stuff). You've got to post this on GD to keep it going.

I've been considering for some time now that Father and Son have been jousting for a long, long time on a personal level. The kid's brash actions seem to point to adolescent rebellion against good ol' dad. Not to condone any of the elder's VERY attentive concentration to the details that drive his GROUP's power agenda, but the tot's actions only go to prove his huge subconscious insecurity and overt hostility to those that stand in the road of the "end game" he seems to be seeking to engage in with Poppy.

Methinks the competition to be the "big man" has gone way too far, and not for the first time. We are chasing down a narcissistic sociopathic borderline...

Instead of competition, I see it as GWB looking for approval from GHWB. GWB's always been the chimp of the family and he's probably trying to get Dad to give him an Attaboy.

"Saddam tried to kill my daddy ..."

wrote something very similar in Time Magazine in 1998 with Brett Scowcroft. It was online at Time's web site until shortly after shrub started his own war in Iraq. see:

http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/bushsr-iraq.htm