Previous Next Latest

If He Only Rembered Now What He Knew Then

11/12/07, 6:36 pm EST

San Antonio News Express, 11/11/07

Ten years ago today, then-Gov. George W. Bush stood on a small road in Fort Sam Houston National Cemetery and defended his father’s decision to end the first Gulf War after 100 hours of fighting.

“There are a lot of Americans (who say), ‘Why didn’t you go get him?’” Bush told the San Antonio Express-News, referring to Saddam Hussein. “Well, I’m confident that losing men and women as a result of sniper fire inside of Baghdad would have turned the tide of public opinion very quickly.”

That Veterans Day, Bush said efforts to ferret out Saddam from his many Baghdad hideouts would have transformed the battle from a desert conflict to an unpopular “guerrilla war.”


Previous Next Latest

Comments

Merkwurdigliebe | 11/12/2007, 7:46 pm EST

hindsight is always 20/20, but let bush II be a lesson–when your generals tell you how to run a war, listen, dont fire them for doing their job of telling you how many troops its going to take, or how long its going to take

we’re finally where we are now in Iraq because bush finally implemented Shinseki’s recommendations from 2002…about 5 years too late…bush and company half-assed the war, and this is the result

ugh

Coach | 11/12/2007, 8:11 pm EST

Cheney wasn’t trumpeting an Iraq invasion in 1994 because Clinton was president and those sinister ‘neocon’ basturds didn’t want a democrat getting any ‘credit’ for ‘liberating’ Iraq, and allowing western oil to get a foothold of the third largest known oil reserve.

But, the following was my favorite part of the article: “Jones, the White House spokesman, said Saddam had become a growing threat to the United States and the world, “a murderous dictator who menaced his people, invaded his neighbors, had a history of using weapons of mass destruction” Don’t WE have a history of using the BIGGEST weapons of mass destruction?

People say it’s a complex thing, this Iraq invasion. But, in reality, it’s really not complex at all. A certain group of people have been looking for a way to get into this oil field for a long time. 9/11 allowed the avenue for it, admittedly. And, since we virtually stopped looking for the alleged mastermind of 9/11, doesn’t that mean we can’t use it as a reason anymore?

knowledge | 11/12/2007, 8:18 pm EST

Of course he knew it when he decided to go to war with Iraq. He also knew that this time he had the manufactured threat(thanks to Rumsfeld) of saddam to allow him to remain popular much longer due to fear. He knew that it would take some time for the people to realize that they had been deceived and that he and others had been salivating to get into iraq for years. He knew that it would take even longer for the people to begin to sway congress into opposing continued finance of the war. He knew that he could help make his interests much richer and get away with it, and so far he has.

Assuming he doesn’t know much just makes it that much easier for him.

bar code | 11/12/2007, 11:33 pm EST

“Clinton was president and those sinister ‘neocon’ basturds didn’t want a democrat getting any ‘credit’ for ‘liberating’ Iraq”

Actually the neocons lobbied the Clinton administration aggressively in 98-99 to go in and get Saddam. Clinton was simply smart enough not to.

“A certain group of people have been looking for a way to get into this oil field for a long time. 9/11 allowed the avenue for it, admittedly.”

Whoever they were they weren’t the oil industry. The oil lobby was against invading Iraq because they correctly assumed that securing the supply pipelines from attacks would cost more than the oil was worth. The reason the army secured the oil spigots before anything else was because Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz had publicly predicted oil revenues would fully pay for the war and didn’t want to be publicly wrong.

The oil revenue sharing agreement which favors U.S. companies hasn’t even been passed and it’s 2007. If oil were the main reason to go to war that provision would be in full force right now.

The main reason for going into Iraq was to take Saddam out because he attacked American “interests” during the Gulf War. The almost main reason was enriching Cheney, Rummy-both of whom manipulated the dimwit Bush into forgetting what he’d said-and the rest of the Neocon establishment all of whom had close ties to the defense industry. The absence of a war is bad business for these people.

DirtyDennis | 11/13/2007, 8:14 am EST

Shrub is either the doofus he appears to be or a devious genius to rival the likes of Lex Luthor and that guy in the Sherlock Holmes novels, I forget his name.

Even a cursory examination of Shrub’s ‘track record’ reveals that if he is, in fact, of the genius genre, it is a transformation of biblical proportions. His ‘tree of life’ is festooned with baubles in testimony to both his fecklessness AND his birth right. His every effort is marked by ignominious failure followed by the fortuitous intervention of ‘friends.’

To somehow credit this man with a ‘plan’ defies logic. He’s NEVER led. He’s always followed. His pique at Sadaam’s vilifying of ‘Daddy’ was easily manipulated by his ‘friends.’ They had so many markers on him, anyway, that he could scarcely say no. But he WANTED to ‘play’ Prez. He’s always had all the toys and he’s always used all the toys.

Besides, it’s a HELL of a lot easier to bomb brown-skinned heathens then it is to actually address the issues of our time. The likes of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Pearle, Wolfowitz, et al are fodder for revolutionaries. The world has shrunk. The revolution has spread.

Coach | 11/13/2007, 12:10 pm EST

DirtyOne: I agree wholeheartedly with you. Shrub’s history IS filled with virtual monetary, moral, and ethical bankruptcies. Yet, he keeps failing Up. Well, now he’s reached the peak of power, and is still failing.

Look at the reasons some people will support him:
1. If you’re rich, you love him.
2. If you’re a bigot, you love him.
3. If you’re a racist, you absolutely adore him.
4. If you’re an elitist, you want to kiss him.

Let’s face it: Our president is a flat-out joke on the highest level. This man has gone six plus years without doing ANYTHING here at home. In fact, he won’t even talk about anything except his beloved global war on terror. (Sidebar: We all know where the billions of war money goes, right?)
Iraq was NEVER a threat to America, only America’s interests. Iran is NOT a threat to America, only America’s interests. What are those interests? O I L!

Jed Clampett | 11/13/2007, 12:25 pm EST

apparently there are others realizing the gravity of the situation and the cover ups involved. Recently, a panel of Pilots, military and comercial, have requested that the government conduct an earnest investigation into the recent increase in UFO sightings. Apparently we can add Ronal Reagan to the list of credible people who have reported seeing aircraft of inconceivable origin.

Anonymous | 11/13/2007, 12:37 pm EST

Coach,

Failing Up. They never taught me about that when I went to school. Of course, I wouldn’t have understood had they tried.

Shrub, FU. I like it.

DirtyDennis | 11/13/2007, 2:25 pm EST

Oops, that anonamouse was me. Ran Crap Cleaner on my PC and it even cleaned up RS. Now, if it would only clean up MCP.

oil interests | 11/13/2007, 3:34 pm EST

Interesting point about oil companies not endorsing iraqi invasion. I figured oil was a small bit of the equation myself, but never had any substantial information to be reasonably certain. I’ll have to look that point up.

In any case, the biggest players were and still are PNAC, I believe. Even if the oil industry didn’t want the occupation these guys did:

alternet.org/waroniraq/63632

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments:



Advertisement

Advertisement