Posted on 11/08/2007 10:59:43 PM PST by james500
Critics of President George W. Bush's handling of the Iraq war are "grossly unfair" and have forgotten the brutality of deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, Bush's father said in an interview published on Friday.
"Do they want to bring back Saddam Hussein," former President George H. W. Bush said in an interview with USAToday at his presidential library in College Station, Texas.
"I don't know what they are talking about here. Do they think life would be better in the Middle East if Saddam were still there," the elder Bush, who almost never comments on his son's presidency, said in a rare interview.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Reuters can photoshop a third eye on Bush Sr. to make him look bad. No respect for that agency after what they did during the Israeli war.
If the media in our naiton were honestly reporting what is taking place in this war, Bush’s numbers would be 10-20 points higher. If the Democrats in Congress favored our side as much as they did the terrorist’s side, you could add another 5-10 points.
Bush’s border policies would cost him dearly, but he should be in the 40 to 50% range today.
No more “nice” Republicans as President.
The vast majority of Middle Easterners I’ve met in the US have been outstanding citizens. But in a cultural sense, I tend to think it’s asking a bit too much to expect them to accept hundreds of years of cultural avancement on a silver plate. In a biblical sense, do they want to be ruled by the laws of Jesus or Barabas?
The headline writers at Reuters with an infantile attempt to demean President Bush by creating a mental image of some poor kid who needs daddy to fight for him. Of course, when Hillary’s husband rises to her defense he’s a “Former President”.
But once again, U.S. foreign policy yielded to the U.N.
A lot of Middle Eastern people are very decent people. Most of them are quite conservative and are rooted in traditional values.
That is what makes our endeavor in the Middle East tricky at times. Unfortunately, “leaving them well alone” is not a viable option. They sit on top of the largest reserve of the world’s most valuable resource today. The economies of the world depend upon the oil under their feet.
While most Middle Easterners are decent people, there are extremists that live in their midst, bullies who would love to collapse the region’s governments and instate a very backwards ideology over them. These are people that, should they gain control of the Middle East’s vast oil resources, would hold enormous amounts of power and exercise it as they felt needed.
Throughout history, the greatest forces against tyranny and those whom use violence to attain their goals has always been freedom and education. We have a strongly vested interest, for the sake of our country and the world as a whole, to spread the influence of these forces throughout the Middle East. A truly free Middle East, governed by consent of the Middle Eastern peoples, benefits the world as a whole.
No one minimizes the difficulty in attaining this goal. Unfortunately, there are certain situations that call upon individuals and groups of people to rise to the occasion and do things the way they need to be done. The Middle Eastern peoples live on top of the world’s most valuable and most essential resource for our modern age. They have a responsibility and duty to the rest of the world to take their lives and rights into their own hands and either join modern society or get the hell out of the way.
Societies are like people - sometimes circumstances require that they grow up sooner than might be convenient for them.
On paper it sounds good but given other models it's going to take decades. The entire continent of Africa is a male dominated wasteland relative to Democracy, even with diamonds and oil. Russia is a male dominated mafia run country, with an abundance of natural resources. Eastern Europe is predictably between Russia and Western Europe in terms of a decent life for humanity. Central and South America have been male dominated regions where Democracy has never taken root without strong force (US presence). Asia if full of male dominated societies and only those countries with strong Western influence have been stable, at least over the short term.
In a local sense, within America, what percentage of poor inner city black kids escape the "philosophical" trap set by the Democratic White/Black elite? I'd say less than 5 % (but at least 50% for 1st generation African immigrants). Poor Hispanics…..maybe 5%. Poor Whites……maybe 10%.
Kudos to Western Civilization, but the rest of the world is quite different and if change is going to occur, models of Japan, North Korea and Singapore suggest it’s best done OVER DECADES FROM THE INSIDE OUT.
Not quite... the Democrat Congress threatened Bush Sr with impeachment if he did anything to extend the war to Bahgdad and remove Saddam.
The Democrats then helped create the mess that the now Pres. Bush had to face.
Note: please change North Korea to South Korea!
Absolutely no argument that it’s going to take time. Western civilization didn’t accomplish these things overnight, and we had certain advantages that are not present in the Middle East.
My main point was that we have a vested interest in ensuring that it does happen. Unfortunately, we’re most likely going to have to maintain a presence there in the interim and sometimes prop up cooperative governments that are less than ideal.
It’s been our policy for quite a few years and, while there has certainly been backlash, I’m not sure what alternative approach there is. Slow westernization is absolutely essential, and it certainly won’t be perfect anytime soon.
Over the past few years, I’ve heard people speak of the Muslim World needing a Reformation - I think it is much more accurate to say that they are in sore need of a Renaissance and an Enlightenment. Those things will only be possible through an increased process of secularization in those societies.
It’s a messy situation and I’m glad I’m not responsible for formulating policy to addressing these issues in the immediate future.
It’s a messy situation and I’m glad I’m not responsible for formulating policy to addressing these issues in the immediate future.
I tend to strongly agree with these statements!
I have to respectfully disagree. The US was pretty wild only a few hundred years ago. Granted, many came here with Western values already instilled but law an order had to be imposed.
I have the greatest faith in the US policies and intent. We are not a "conquering" nation like previous countries that have imposed themselves on the ME. We just had to get our foot in the door to prove it.
Absolutely my point, actually.
What I was saying was that it doesn’t matter how long this is going to take... this is simply something that needs to be done.
The US is not in the “conquest” business. This is where the foolishness of liberal critiques of our Mid East policy shows its ugly head. We are not an imperial power and never will be... for a very simple reason.
Imperialism and the mercantile policies that go with it have shown themselves to be flawed. Far greater benefit is to be had through free markets operated under representative governments. The Middle East, being stuck in the past, is not moving towards these systems on its own. Yet it needs to for the sake of the modern world.
Thus, it doesn’t matter whether free systems of government and economics are set up there overnight or over a longer period of time - it simply needs to be done. American policy is focused upon seeing that this change occurs, and sometimes this requires periods of occupation and restructure like what we are seeing in Iraq today. The Bush Administration understands this.
We’d draw minimal benefit if we were indeed trying to occupy Iraq in the manner which liberals accuse us of doing. We draw far better benefit from doing what we are in the process of doing - spreading freedom, representative government, and free markets into the region.
Conquest is SO Old World... we are doing things the New World way. It’s not our fault that the Old World, in its antiquated paradigm, fails to see this.
Amen!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.