Posted on 11/09/2010 7:36:07 AM PST by Fennie
The former president also revealed that he considered a covert attack on Syria at Israel's request in Decision Points, his 497-page account on his time in office.
Such strikes on the Middle East could have unleashed waves of revenge attacks against British and American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and might have seen Iran retaliate by blocking oil supplies to the west.
Mr Bush also disclosed in the book, published today, that he discussed an air strike or a covert special forces raid on an alleged nuclear facility in Syria at the request of Israel.
"We studied the idea seriously, but the CIA and the military concluded it would be too risky to slip a team into and out of Syria," he wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Someone should of hit those nuke sites along time ago.
But of course! OTOH, I would think a few Tomahawks could reduce that illegal reactor to a smoking pile, uh, so to speak.
So, Dubya, why not get to the real reason? The lack of deniability means UN would stomp their porcine trotters and say "No, no, NO!!!"? Hmmm???
I, for one, wish that he hadn’t written his book. It and he will be torn from limb to limb all over again. It just gives fodder to the loons. He didn’t need the money certainly. Why not just be quiet? We, who liked the man and most of his decisions don’t need to read it. Those who always disliked him will be lining up to trash him.
HF
It's not surprise at all; it's preemptive push-back by hardly veiled threat.
Bush should have taken out the factories where these IEDs were being made to kill and mame our troops. And if Imawhackjob wanted to esculate the situation, Bring It Onnnn. I’m disappointed with him for not doing this.
“Someone should of hit those nuke sites along time ago.”
The time will come when EVERYONE will be saying/writing this. But by then, of course, it will be too late.
I disagree with you. I think after laying low for two years Bush is providing a stark contrast to Obama. Maybe I’m too biased, but Bush looks like a fully capable executive with a kind heart contrasted to a cold, bumbling, incompetent, searching Obama. Personally, I think a lot of other people see this contrast too.
I suppose that's true, to a point. There are always those who will do that. But it's a valid subject, and promises to be very interesting -- I'm guessing it won't be savaged nearly as much as you might suspect.
The reason why I think it won't be savaged, is that Obama is president. This book is being published at a very interesting time -- it's just far enough into Obama's term for a whole lot of folks to have begun realizing what a mistake it was to elect him.
The comparison between Bush and Obama is quite stark, and not to Obama's benefit.
Bush had and has a very firm grasp on some basic principles, and he was very courageous in the decisions he made. In historical terms, his decision to get involved in the WOT is very similar in nature (and opposite in direction) to the decision to stop Hitler in 1935 -- Britain and France decided not to act, and we got WWII as a result. Bush decided to act ... and I think he significantly disrupted the march of Islamofascism. No, it wasn't clean, which is to be expected. But it was done.
By contrast, look at Obama -- what a callow, posturing, mealy-mouthed joke of a president. This book will make him look positively small. It's the opening of the 2012 campaign, and perhaps the beginning of the end for Obama.
And I think Bush knows the effect this book will have.
I'm looking forward to reading it, as are people from probably all sides of the political spectrum -- and I think it will probably be generally well-received.
Totally agree. You nicely expounded on what I stated in my post above you.
The "Rainbow" War Plans were so called because each color represented a war plan with or in a certain nation or territory.
The planning for a war with Canada was War Plan Crimson.
It won't happen in this Oval Office but what I'd like to see.
"Yes sir, Mr. President. The attack is imminent.. no question, sir. There could 2 - 300,000 deaths. It's that place the Left is holding their impromptu rally to counter the last Glen Beck rally. We have a prisoner who we absolutely know has the details."
"What can we do?"
"Waterboarding to make him talk, sir. You'll be torn apart, accused of war crimes but it'll save those Americans' lives, sir. . . . . . . . . . . . Mr. President?"
"I'm thinking. I'm thinking."
(Based upon one of my favorite Jack Benny skits.)
I don’t understand how anyone can think anything we do will cause MORE attacks on soldiers in a war zone.
In a guerilla war, it's generally true though.
A basic facet of guerilla warfare is that the guerillas first of all need the non-combatants around them to not support the other side, even if they also don't support the guerillas.
Thus, one of the primary tactics of the guerillas is to make the other side respond in ways that alienate them from the population; and to magnify any misbehavior by the other side into an "atrocity."
If the population is already suspicious of you -- say, you've invaded their country, overthrown the government, and now they're occupied territory -- then it's not difficult for the bad guys to turn the population against you; and thus the guerillas have pretty good freedom of movement, knowing that they won't be reported.
That's why the Abu Ghraib thing was so damaging -- fools like Hannity or the Keyboard Kommandos around here figured it was just "panties on the head." But over there, it alienated the population and made life a whole bunch easier for the A-Q insurgents.
And attacks increased.
Sure I wish Bush did everything perfectly; we--unfortunately-- expect that of someone we vote for. But I really believe Bush takes seriously the admonishment to do "my utmost for His highest"--and tried to. His efforts may have at times fallen short of the mark, but it was not for lack of love for "God and country", and that stands him in stark (and I pray and hope OBVIOUS) contrast to the man who is now our CIC!
He keeps talking about "history" rendering a verdict after he's dead, but he ignores those of us who have had to live with the consequences of his decisions already. We won't need that long, nor will we have had the luxury of living out our days in prosperous plenty, insulated from the effects of what he did and did not do.
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.