"Saddam Hussein is now taking his rightful place alongside Hitler, Stalin, Lenin and Ceausescu in the pantheon of failed, brutal dictators and the Iraqi people are well on their way to freedom." - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Apr. 9, 2003.
Posted on 12/27/2006 6:26:37 PM PST by RetiredArmy
George Bush Is a Hero
By: Edward I. Koch
Wednesday, Dec. 27, 2006
President George W. Bush, vilified by many, supported by some, is a hero to me.
Why do I say that? It's not because I agree with the president's domestic agenda. It's not because I think he's done a perfect job in the White House.
George Bush is a hero to me because he has courage.
The president does what he believes to be in the best interest of the United States. He sticks with his beliefs, no matter how intense the criticism and invective that are directed against him every day.
The enormous defeat President Bush suffered with the loss of both Houses of Congress has not caused him to retreat from his position that the U.S. alone now stands between a radical Islamic takeover of many of the world's governments in the next 30 or more years. If that takeover occurs, we will suffer an enslavement that will threaten our personal freedoms and take much of the world back into the Dark Ages.
Our major ally in this war against the forces of darkness, Great Britain, is still being led by an outstanding prime minister, Tony Blair. However, Blair will soon be set out to pasture, which means Great Britain will leave our side and join France, Germany, Spain, and other countries that foolishly believe they can tame the wolf at the door and convert it into a domestic pet that will live in peace with them.
These dreamers naively believe that if we feed the wolves what they demand, they will go away. But that won't happen.
Appeasement never works. The wolves always come back for more and more, and when we have nothing left to give, they come for us.
Radical Islamists are very much aware that we have shown fear. For example, we have allowed the people of Darfur — dark skinned Africans — to be terrorized, killed, raped, and taken as slaves by the supporters of the Sudanese government, radical Islamists.
The countries surrounding Iraq — Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan — made up of Sunni Arabs, know that for them, the wolves who are the radical Shia are already at their door. The New York Times reported on Dec. 13, 2006, "Saudi Arabia has told the Bush administration that it might provide financial backing to Iraqi Sunnis in any war against Iraq's Shiites if the United States pulls its troops out of Iraq, according to American and Arab diplomats . . .
"The Saudis have argued strenuously against an American pullout from Iraq, citing fears that Iraq's minority Sunni Arab population would be massacred . . . The Bush administration is also working on a way to form a coalition of Sunni Arab nations and a moderate Shiite government in Iraq, along with the United States and Europe, to stand against ‘Iran, Syria and the terrorists."
This Saudi response will take place notwithstanding that until now, according to the Times, "The Saudis have been wary of supporting Sunnis in Iraq because their insurgency there has been led by extremists of al-Qaida, who are opposed to the kingdom's monarchy. But if Iraq's sectarian war worsened, the Saudis would line up with Sunni tribal leaders."
The Times article went on to state the opinion of an Arab expert, Nawaf Obaid, who was recently fired by the Saudi foreign minister after Obaid wrote an op ed in The Washington Post asserting that the Saudis were prepared in the event of an American pullout to engage in a "massive intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shiite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis."
Obaid went on "suggest[ing] that Saudi Arabia could cut world oil prices in half…a move that would be devastating to Iran."
The Times reported, "Arab diplomats . . . said that Mr. Obaid's column reflected the view of the Saudi government." When writing about affairs of state in distant places, unless you are on the scene talking to knowledgeable participants, the most reliable sources to support conjecture with "facts" are the superb reporters of the great international newspapers like The New York Times.
Surely this turn of events in Saudi Arabia undoubtedly replicated in other Sunni-dominated countries — Sunnis are 80 percent of the world's Muslim population. This will give support to my proposal, advanced nearly a year ago, that we tell our allies, regional and NATO, that we are getting out of Iraq unless they come in.
That may well work, and they will come in, in large part and share the casualties of combat and the financial costs of war.
Doing what I suggest is far better than simply pulling out, which is the direction in which we are headed, notwithstanding the president's opposition. I think at the moment simply getting out and not making an attempt to bring our allies in is supported by a majority of Americans and would be supported by a majority of Democrats in the Congress.
For me, staying is clearly preferable, provided we are not alone and are joined by our regional and NATO allies, aggressively taking on the difficult but necessary task of destroying radical Islam and its terrorist agenda if we don't want to see radical Islam destroy the Western world and moderate Arab states over the next generation, or as long as it takes for them to succeed.
Two other requirements are needed to bring the war in Iraq to a successful conclusion: First, require the Iraqi government to allow greater autonomy for the three regions — Kurd, Sunni, and Shia. The second requirement is that the national Iraqi government enact legislation that will divide all oil and natural gas revenues in a way similar to that of our own state of Alaska.
The Alaskan state government takes from those revenues all it will need to finance government and provide services and the balance is divided among the population of Alaska, in a profit sharing program. That would settle the major Sunni problem which has been being cut out of oil revenues because the country's oil is located only in Kurdish and Shiite areas.
If the Iraqi government refuses our demands, our reply should be "Goodbye. You're on your own." This proposal was suggested to me by Mike Sheppard in Chapel Hill, N.C.
It won't be easy to implement this proposal. But President Bush has courage.
Now is the time to use it.
Thank you, Southack. I had saved your list and put a large section of it on a thread where some idiot said Bush hadn't done anything. I was so glad you had previously posted it. Keep doing that. We need to have the info at our finger tips.
Thank you!
btt
First, I agree with Koch that on Jan 21, 2009 history will write that GW did himself proud and did what he believed was the best for the country and the world.
Second, the 'we' that Koch refers to? Is that we the United States? What about the rest of the civilized world? What about France, Germany, Russia, China, etc? Why is it that only the US has a dog in the fight against terrorism and famine?
I've been pleasantly surprised by Dershowitz...but I still despise him; he was one of O.J.'s staunchest defense attorneys. That trumps a whole lot; I wouldn't sit down and have a beer with him.
Exactly............
In today's world of metrosexual mealy mouthed politicans who talk a lot but don't really say anything and certainly don't follow-up on their own policies, George W. Bush is indeed a hero and I'm delighted to read that Koch get it.
Bush isn't perfect and he'd be the first one to admit that. But he's better than we deserve and has taken a devil of a beating, sometimes at the hands of his own party.
It might do some so called "perfect conservatives" some good to remember Ronald Reagan's own words in his autobiography:
"When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn't like it. "Compromise" was a dirty word to them and they wouldn't face the fact that we couldn't get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don't get it all, some said, don't take anything.
I'd learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: 'I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.'
If you got 75 or 80% of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it."
President Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney understand the danger to the civilized world if we don't keep after those islamofascist murdering scum.
I heard him with my own ears call them Islamo facists...twice. Along with extremists, evildoers, islamic radicals, terrorists, and just about every variation on that theme. The Prez knows who we are fighting and why we have to win. That is EXACTLY why he intends to reform the arab and muslim world. And lo and behold, it's working.
There are just some Americans that hate everything he does (democrats) or hate everything that is pro-American (leftists) and some "conservatives" that think they would do a better job in this WOT, of which Iraq is but one battlefield. Bush bitch slapped the UN and World Opinion and went after Saddam (who is about to hang, BTW), had our men snuff out Uday and Qusay, Zarquwi and thousands of his evil minions. He has coerced more cooperation out of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and Yemen and Morrocco than anyone thought possible. He has conquered Afghanistan, the land where empires fall. He has consistently brushed aside democrat carping, the advice of the euroweenies, and the weak kneed conservatives that have no stomach for war. And when the Baker Report came out, he lined his bird cage with it. If that ain't leadership, there is no such thing.
Agreed. I watched practically the whole trial on Court TV and feel the same about him and that's what surprises me about his views now.
The Iraq Surrender Group had a shelf life of about five minute. Five minutes too long, IMO! But it earned the derisive comments!
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.
I do believe there is a common denominator in these 3. I have always respected Ed Koch. He shoots from the hip. Rare for a politician.
Seriously put down the smoke. Whew...
Radical Islamists are very much aware that we have shown fear.For example, we have allowed the people of Darfur — dark skinned Africans — to be terrorized, killed, raped, and taken as slaves by the supporters of the Sudanese government, radical Islamists.
No in the only case, perhaps in all of the last century, the US government has done what it was supposed to do. Stay out of the affairs of other nations
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right. Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.... Adams, 1821Suppose that last bit would include purple fingers and nation building....Funny, advice from those that were there at or near the beginning on the issue of nonintervention is seen as fear by the armchair 'warriors'. Ed, why don't you haul your tail down to Darfur if you're so concerned about it.
George Bush Is a Hero
No, he's a politician. Nothing more, nothing less.
You hit the nail on the head. BANG!
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.