George Bush is the President of the United States. I’d like to think we could aspire to a higher standard than “he’s better than Saddam Hussein”.
So, if a fourteen year old girl were to be kidnapped and raped, it would bother the Iraqis less if it were committed by Saddam’s son than if it were committed by a militia?
Or perhaps that several instances of torture of journalists and political prisoners are outweighed by this one instance of Bush being unable to prevent someone from allegedly being beaten unconscious/released unharmed?
You’re right, that is strange.
Regards,
Shodan
Should we invade, occupy and kill/maim/displace the citizens of every country that flaunts human rights? Should we have gone into Uganda, or Argentina, or China, or any number of other countries? Should we have invaded Rwanda? Would you support invading Darfur?
I realize that right wingers really loathe and despise Bush 41 for not finishing off Saddam, but why was it his son’s duty to finish what his father didn’t do, especially since Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and wasn’t a threat at the time?
“They tried to kill My Dad.”
Yep, there is that. What a great excuse for causing far more deaths and damage and instability than Saddam ever did.
According to the ‘no hostage left behind’ faith-based initiative, that meets the government standard of ‘prayer’.
It would be justified, but not wise, since the resources of the U.S. military are (clearly) not unlimited.
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
That plan could prove especially awkward lately.
FWIW, I laughed.
Hindsight comes into play here, as it did when Clinton thought the political ramifications of killing Ossama along with a royal family hunting party would be unacceptable. He’d have prevented September 11 and been crucified.
My sarcasm aside, or rather perhaps reinforced, I believe George II was to a certain extent reacting to the criticism of George I not “going onto Baghdad” when the directions from the United Nations were to remove the Iraqis from Kuwait. One of the few things I agree with Bush 1st is that was the time to end the First Gulf War.
I totally disagree. The Shi’ite, likely backed by Iran, would probably have rebelled against any Sunni-dominated government. If the government broke down it’s possible that the Kurds would have declared independence which would have almost certainly involved Turkey. Basically the result would have been Afghanistan circa 1994; that didn’t turn out so well.
It was stupid for Bush to order the invasion and plenty of mistakes were made but to compare Bush to Hussein is partisan blindness. Under Hussein Iraqis had no hope of a brighter future. Currently they do, even if one thinks it is unlikely.