Bush Sr gives public warning about dangers of unilateral action

The Times ^ | March 10, 2003 | Roland Watson

[MadIvan]

THE first President Bush has told his son that hopes of peace in the Middle East would be ruined if a war with Iraq were not backed by international unity.

Drawing on his own experiences before and after the 1991 Gulf War, Mr Bush Sr said that the brief flowering of hope for Arab-Israeli relations a decade ago would never have happened if America had ignored the will of the United Nations.

He also urged the President to resist his tendency to bear grudges, advising his son to bridge the rift between the United States, France and Germany.

“You’ve got to reach out to the other person. You’ve got to convince them that long-term friendship should trump short-term adversity,” he said.

The former President’s comments reflect unease among the Bush family and its entourage at the way that George W. Bush is ignoring international opinion and overriding the institutions that his father sought to uphold. Mr Bush Sr is a former US Ambassador to the UN and comes from a family steeped in multi-lateralist traditions.

Although not addressed to his son in person, the message, in a speech at Tufts University in Massachusetts, was unmistakeable. Mr Bush Sr even came close to conceding that opponents of his son’s case against President Saddam Hussein, who he himself is on record as loathing, have legitimate cause for concern.

He said that the key question of how many weapons of mass destruction Iraq held “could be debated”. The case against Saddam was “less clear” than in 1991, when Mr Bush Sr led an international coalition to expel invading Iraqi troops from Kuwait. Objectives were “a little fuzzier today”, he added.

After the Gulf War, Mr Bush Sr steered Israel and its Arab neighbours to the Madrid conference, a stepping stone to the historic Israeli-Palestinian Oslo accords, in much the same way that the present President has talked about the removal of Saddam as opening the way to a wider peace in the region.

In an ominous warning for his son, Mr Bush Sr said that he would have been able to achieve nothing if he had jeopardised future relations by ignoring the UN. “The Madrid conference would never have happened if the international coalition that fought together in Desert Storm had exceeded the UN mandate and gone on its own into Baghdad after Saddam and his forces.”

Also drawing on the lessons of 1991, he said that it was imperative to mend fences with allies immediately, rather than waiting until after a war. He had been infuriated with the decision of King Hussein of Jordan to side with Saddam rather than the US, but while criticising the Jordanian leader in public and freezing $41 million in US aid, he also passed word to King Hussein that he understood his domestic tensions.

Mr Bush Jr, who is said never to forget even relatively minor slights, has alarmed analysts with the way in which he has allowed senior Administration figures such as Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, to aggressively criticise France and Germany.

There are, however, signs that Mr Bush Sr’s message may be getting through.

Father and son talk regularly and it was, in part, pressure from Mr Bush Sr’s foreign policy coterie, that helped to persuade the President to go to the UN last September.

[Mo1]

Media causing trouble..

BINGO!!!

[dagnabbit]

For example, in certain quarters here in the United States, there's a certain ugly stereotyping concerning Saudi Arabia that emerged, maybe for understandable reasons, but emerged after 9/11

The Murder of 3,000 Americans planned, paid for, carried out by, and cheered by Saudis would be one understandable reason. And those “certain quarters” the last I checked, was pretty much everyone in the United States.

This stereotyping offends me, and concerns me.

Get your priorities straight.

And our President has spoken out against it several times. It suggests that because most of the hijackers were Saudi citizens, the Saudi government and the Saudi people were also anti-American. And in my view, nothing can be further from the truth.

No the words and deeds of that government and that people suggest they're anti-American, or haven't you noticed the virulently anti-USA Wahabbi propaganda, the people in that government linked to Al Qaeda, or the mostly Saudi population of Guantanamo?

We have different systems.

Yes fascism and representative democracy are indeed “different”

But, with the exception of a small fringe element that frankly exist in every society—Remember, Timothy McVeigh, a lot of people were going, "Oh, he's probably an Arab terrorist. "Jumping to stereotypical conclusions only to find that he was a right wing nut.

Tim McVeigh’s heinous act was celebrated by none, not even his fellow right-wing nuts. 9-11 was broadly celebrated in Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Laden could win national election there.

And the Saudi's are our staunch allies and friends,

Demonstrably false. A lie.

and I don't like it when some of the great newspapers in this country try to make enemies out of Saudi Arabia

Do two things Mr. Bush: Stop whining that your Saudi friends are being exposed for who they are. Register as foreign agent.

[nicmarlo]

yw, FJ; I just didn't want you to "just go away mad" with the wrong impression of the Bush Sr.....unfortunately, most people won't really know the truth; they'll just believe what the writer wrote because they aren't unable to read the truth.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

I guess it is a trick question.

But tell me, would you let an enemy run a huge shipping co. on your shores?

[Mo1]

Formers Presidents of both parties should keep their advice to themselves until the present President asks for it. What part of "SHUT THE HELL UP!" do they not understand?

Chill out a little

Bush 41 NEVER ONCE spoke out against Clinton while he was in office

Do you really think He will attack his own SON in public

I Don't THink So

[ExSoldier]

It's not "lefty spin" and I have studied the problem posed by CFR/Trilateralism et al for 15 years now and have been published on the subject. I trust Bush 43 but never Bush 41. And I stand by my convictions. Thank the Lord, I don't have to live up to YOUR expectations.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Such writers count on us all being headline scanners.

[nicollo]

You've done good on this thread. Thought I might add to it with a re-post I something I put up some time ago at ATRW at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/754695/posts?page=245#245 :

There's another thing going on here. World politics only now, with this Administration, are unraveling from the old Cold War alignments. There'r adjustments yet to be done, but I'm confident the Administration gets it.

Take Pakistan for example. It was a U.S. puppet to fight the Soviets. Its enemy, India, was our enemy. Then comes Clinton. He simply looked away. So what does Pakistan do? It flips us off. What does Clinton do? Nothing. By the time he heldup the F-16 deliveries (over the Paki-bomb), it was too late. He had no leverage, and they knew he didn't care. The sad thing is that Clinton was and is the last to know it. Bush has inverted the Cold War equation without losing Pakistan. It's been marvelous to watch.

Now the Saudis are about to learn that Russia is no longer our enemy. That means they can no longer threaten to support Russia's enemies as leverage against us.

The Cold War was the biggest war in human history. Every corner of the earth was involved. Every political alliance, relation, and move was in regard to it. When the USSR collapsed, though, Cold War politics did not.

Bush 41 set about restructing the world. He used the U.N. the way he did in '91 not because he needed it but because he was trying to teach the world a new trick. He succeeded, and I think that is why his buddies have been so keyed up over the U.N. The "New World Order" was a legitimate policy statement (and very misunderstood). Clinton backslapped every Bush 41 achievement, especially in Iraq. Had he another term, Bush 41 might have pulled it off.

Clinton thought the Cold War was over, and that we could all make nice and get together and fight evil. He didn't get it. He didn't understand that although we no longer had Cold War enemies, we also lost our Cold War friends. The world learned quickly that Clinton wasn't serious. The Chicoms understood it perfectly. Clinton tried to manipulate a new world yet stuck in Cold World patterns. Had he understood it, he could have changed it. He didn't get it.

Now Dubya has done something marvelous. He has not just picked up where his father left off, he has completely restructured the world. Our enemies can no longer use our friends against us. Our friends can no longer use our enemies against us.

What the hell is a country like Syria supposed to do now? They can buy all the Russian arms they want, but Russian politics are no longer for sale. That means there is no benefit to them to oppose us, with or without Isreal. All they can do is rant for home consumption, then play U.S. regulation ball.

Bush has divided the world into little interests. The Cold War may finally be over. May we win this, and the next wars.

245 posted on 9/22/02 12:22 AM Eastern by nicollo

[ExSoldier]

I don't give a damn as to whether or not BUSH 41 said this or that recently. I DO care that HE is the one who coined the term NEW WORLD ORDER. I care that he followed the convictions of Richard M. Nixon who followed the advice of his mentor and former law office boss, Nelson Rockefeller (from the family who donated the land the UN sits upon) who told him to "speak to the right but MOVE to the left" and he always followed this sage and traiterous advice.

I care that Bush 41 indeeed did betray gun owners and the 2nd Amendment by his flurry of gun control laws and Executive Orders banning importation of firearms. When asked about this by pro-gun members of Congress, Bush 41 said the same thing Bill Clinton said of the blacks: "They'll go with it because they have no place ELSE to go."

I read the speech and I don't care. I'm damning Bush 41 for being the same sort of political entity as Bill Clinton, a globalist follower of the UN who seeks to submerge our soverignty with the UN for the greater good of the world, but not the greater good of these United States.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Okay, I sheepishly admit to taking the bait-now will someone please help me get this @#$%%^&**@ hook out of my lip?

[Belial]

Rockin' Ronnie Reagan would have bombed Iraq back to the stone age years ago, unilaterims be damned.

Actually, Reagan supported Hussein in his war against Iran.

[speekinout]

Am less than impressed that the former President gave this speech and did a question and answer session.

Remember - the press took his remarks out of context. But I agree with you - Barbara is far more press savvy than her husband. Her son is close. But that's mostly because neither of them is overly concerned about polls. :-)

[Mo1]

LOL ..

[The Wizard]

you stand tough GWB....this is your time, love your Dad, but take your own counsel

[PhiKapMom]

I knew right away the press had taken his words out of context, but when I read what he had said, I thought he could have handled his speech much better!

[timestax]

Bush senior is NOT the President . W is President and is on the correct path. We should NOT have to kowtow to France or the Germans, or the Blue helmets.

[FreeReign]

I have to say this has all the markings of a story taken well out of context.

This story is BS!

[F.J. Mitchell]

I know what you mean-this Communist China beachhead in our country has troubled me from the get go.

[FreeReign]

TLBSHOW -- I have no problem with stopping Iraq and back the President fully on it. Its the fact we say its because of the UN that we are doing it. Its for America that we are doing it I believe

What the president said at his press conference;

The President -- "I will not leave the American people at the mercy of the Iraqi dictator and his weapons."

The President -- "My job is to protect the American people."

The President -- "And since I believe the threat is real and since my most important job is to protect the security of the American people, that's precisely what we will do."

The President -- "The risk of doing nothing, the risk of hoping that Saddam Hussein changes his mind and becomes a gentle soul, the risk that somehow inaction will make the world safer, is a risk I'm not willing to take for the American people."

The President -- "My job is to protect America and that's exactly what I'm going to do."

The President -- "People can describe all kinds of intentions. I swore to protect and defend the Constitution, that's what I swore to do. I put my hand on the Bible and took that oath. And that's exactly what I am going to do."

The President -- "I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people."

The President -- "The price of the attacks on America, the cost of the attacks on America on September 11th were enormous. They were significant. And I'm not willing to take that chance again."

The President -- "And I think you will see when it's all said and done, if we have to use force, a lot of nations will be with us."

The President -- "...I make my decisions based upon the oath I took, the one I just described to you. I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat -- is a threat to the American people."

[PhilipFreneau]

Bush Sr. Don't blame me. I didn't vote for him. I did, however, vote for his son in the belief that his son was not like his father.