More Bad News for Bush

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Name

Still, you mentioned nothing about how Bush I was right

I disagree with the definition of long. I don't think, in the grand scheme of things, that we have been there a long time. We very well may be. And actually, he would have taken Saddam out, except the UN had not sanctioned such action. That was his primary reason at the time.

[innerSpaceman]

How can you say what was his "primary" reason at the time? Surely, you're not going by public pronouncements? That would mean that Baby Bush really did "regretfully" accept Meier's resignation of the Supreme Court nomination, rather than the truth that she was asked to drop out by the Bush Administration.

Sorry, but I'll believe what Daddy Bush wrote in his book some years later when candor was permitted.

[Alex]

Out of curiosity, have you read Bush's book or just quotes?

[innerSpaceman]

Hahahahahahahahaha, oh, um, sorry. No, I haven't.

[Gemini Cricket]

I heard Bill Clinton's book was a pop-up book.

:Ba-dum ching:

[Name]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Out of curiosity, have you read Bush's book or just quotes?

Not yet.... haven't made it down to the library to check it out yet.....

Not about to give Bush my hard earned money.....

I am probably below the poverty line and all....

BUt out of curiousity, aren't quotes supposedly straight out of the book, thus fulfilling the definition of a quote??? and since the quotes are out of the book that Bush I wrote, then they would be his words, pretty similar to reading the book, just the readers digest condensed version style.....

Or did Bush not say that he did not want to oust Saddam because he knew there would be insurgents and all, and that there was no way to come up with an exit strategy for such an event.....

If I am wrong about what Bush I wrote in his book, please, enlighten me with text from his book on the subject.

[Alex]

Accidental double post.

[Alex]

I have not idea if the quotes are accurate, as I haven't read Bush's book either. I'm sure any quotes presented are accurate. But then so are all the quote on movie posters.

The problem with quotes, particularly if they're shorter, is that they lose their context within a larger statement and nuance. I don't know that what you've seen mischaracterizes or misleads, just that it is more likely if you are only relying on secondary sources.

In A World Transformed, Bush's diary entry about why and how they needed to end the Persian Gulf War is presented. Here is the full entry (with some cuts by me for space):

It is my view that Saddam Hussein is trying to put us in a box. He wants to get his troops out, perhaps, then turn to us and say, what are [you] doing in Iraq and turn world opinion against us...We have no evidence that they're quitting, but we're not going to let him bring victory out of the jaws of defeat...The problem is that if he has his forces out of Kuwait, we'll be the ones that are trespassing...with our troops in Iraq. So we're pinning our demands on all the U.N. resolutions.

In another diary entry a few days later:

It's surprising how much I dwell on the end of the Vietnam Syndrome. I felt the division in the country in the 60s and 70s - I was in congress. I remember speaking at Adelphi and Yale was turning its back. I remember the agony and the ugliness, and now it's together. We've got to find a clean end, and I keep saying, how do we end this thing?

There may be other more damning quotes that directly equate going into Iraq with entering an endless quagmire but at least this personal recounting of the end of the war suggests his primary concern was that the coalition would break up if they persued the war into Iraq and that prolonging the war beyond the specific U.N. resolutions would break up the new found unity in the United States.

In this book, most of the mentions of "getting bogged down" are descriptions of opposition to the use of any force, that is to not even kick Iraq out of Kuwait. Here is a final quote on how Bush felt about Senator Byrd's concerns:

What worries Bob Byrd the most, and this worries the American people and other members of Congress and indeed all of us, is a ground war where we get bogged down. He talks about "mounting casualties"; other call them "body bags." He points out that if there is a high death count on the Arab side, even in winning we'd lose. In fact, he says, "Even a quick knockout of Iraqi forces might well unleash a cascade of outcomes and reactions that would reduce our long-term ability, and influence events in that region." However, I he's also underestimating the prestige that would go to the United State for being willing to stand up and support the United Nations resolutions fully, and I think he's underestimating the support we would get from many in the Arab world for getting this brutal dictator. I have it in my own mind that Saddam Hussein, in decline, will be like Causcescu was in decline. There will be dancing in the streets, and they will say that he was brutal and a bully, and they will rejoice when he's gone - I'm confident of that - but I don't think Bob Byrd is.

The bolding is mine. It doesn't sound like Bush pere thought going into Iraq would be an endless quagmire. That said, if you point me to specific quotes otherwise I would love to read them. Amazon's Search Inside feature is a wonderful thing that allows us to easily see full context without getting to the bookstore or library (on the scanned books, anyway).

I think the quotes are within fair use limits, but if whoever decides such things disagree I can go along with that.

[scaeagles]

Alex, what an outstanding post. Unfortunately, I cannot give you mojo again at this time.

[jdramj]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Alex, what an outstanding post. Unfortunately, I cannot give you mojo again at this time.

Ditto.....but on the mojo, I'll loan ya some.