lapsedmodernist: (Default)
[personal profile] lapsedmodernist
so, cumming to you from London (much like Tony Blair, as the sound of the Shrub rustling tickles his ears that really should be burning with shame, much like the Shrub's pants are burning from all the LYING):

from The Times

World News



March 10, 2003

Bush Sr warning over unilateral action
From Roland Watson in Washington



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, aggressively to 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.

Date: 2003-03-15 11:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tomorrow-devil.livejournal.com
So, okay, I guess the point of my rambling yesterday was something like this: Do you believe that the person-in-the-presidency actually has enough agency in the Presidency that his penchant for grudges. And what about Daddy Bush? I guess if his son was doing something really bad (which he is), and also really against the party line, then his criticisms might go public . . . but isn't W's clique the current Republican hegemon? I dunno, I just wonder why something like that would make it to the public; it seems like it'd just undermine the party as a whole.

Date: 2003-03-15 03:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lapsedmodernist.livejournal.com
well...i think that this is too far even for a republican platform...which, like any political platform is all about PR. the more i think about it, the more i think that dubya isn't necessarily all behind what's going on, he is just a puppet of the PNAC people, who have their own creepy interests that do not necessarily jive with the uber-republican-right-of-reagan agenda...bush sr. had better PR sense than the shrub, so i am sure that whatever he said was in the interest of the republican platform at large, which means that the insane party line at the moment is beyond the pale even for the hardcore reps.

bugging the U.N.

Date: 2003-03-15 03:11 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
speaking of news that didn't make it into the u.s. media, have you seen anything on tv or read anything anywhere in the u.s. media about the NSA memo that was leaked in britain about the electronic bugging of the diplomats who are members of the Security Council? And not just their offices or car phones, but their homes as well.

so, why did the Moron call off the u.n. vote after saying there definitely would be one (along with his veiled threat -- "we want to see who will vote against us")? because they know from electronic intercepts that they'll lose badly?

Re: bugging the U.N.

Date: 2003-03-15 03:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lapsedmodernist.livejournal.com
yeah, i read about that. the insanity of that was further exacerbated when the press took a statement from the bulgarian envoy (whose communications were also bugged, as were russian) who was like "everyone knows about it, if they bug you it means they are taking you seriously, it's like a batch of honor that you are being taken seriously in the game."

Re: bugging the U.N.

Date: 2003-03-16 05:39 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
yes, suddenly the opinion of one of three countries matters, instead of the opinion of the hundred countries that disagrees.

the media has conveniently forgotten what would happen if the news was "france eavesdrops on powell, bugging his home phone".


Profile

lapsedmodernist: (Default)
lapsedmodernist

February 2014

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
910111213 1415
16171819202122
232425262728 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 25th, 2026 04:36 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios