Bush's gaffe rings true.

Ray9

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2016
2,707
4,468
1,970
If you are a person like me and you remember what you saw not what you were told to see, then you realize just how tragic George W. Bush’s latest gaffe is. Bush must have been drinking sodium pentothal as he uttered the actual truth the other day. If anyone wonders what led to the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans at the World Trade Center in 2001, they now know. Let’s wind the clock back to 1990 when Bush’s father, George HW. Bush, dispatched US ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie, to meet with Saddam Hussein who was massing troops along the Border of Kuwait. Bush wanted Glaspie to find out What Saddam what planning.

Saddam came up with some story about Kuwait stealing Iraqi oil and that he had had enough of it. Saddam was looking for permission to invade Kuwait and take its oil for himself. Saddam assumed that because he had acted as a counterbalance to Iran and had been provided with chemical and biological weapons by the Bush administration some of which he used to exterminate Kurds, that the US would condone his invasion. He expected only some diplomatic noise as he rolled into Kuwait.

Glaspie, a long-time member of the Foreign Service, who knew full well how important diplomatic language is in sensitive potentially dangerous situations, then told Saddam that the US “Has no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts” which Saddam interpreted as “By all means, go ahead and take Kuwait, we will not do anything”. Saddam invaded Kuwait a few days later and the Gulf War ensued. Glaspie has never been held responsible for her ineptitude and the millions of deaths that incompetence led to and neither has Bush the Elder. By the way, the incident is likely the seed that spawned the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 which failed to take down the structure.

In 2001 Bush the younger was elected and the second attack on the World Trade Center utterly leveled it with skyjacked domestic airliners killing thousands. Nearly all the skyjackers were from Saudi Arabia; none had any connection to Iraq. When Bush told the American people that the people who had done this would hear from us very soon, they scratched their heads as Bush decided to attack Iraq that had nothing to do with the attack on American soil. Bush ignored the Saudi connection and promptly crafted a plan to attack Saddam Hussein under the pretense that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that Bush assumed must have still existed because his father had given them to Iraq years before.

The Entire Iraq war had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction. It was to distract attention away from Saudi Arabia, the real culprit and to cover up the ineptitude of Bush’s father who was the one responsible for all the death and bloodshed that followed. The war in Iraq was to protect the legacy of the Bush’s.

Talk about irony. Bush blurted it out nationally. It was no Freudian slip; the truth jumped from his lips.

Is George W. Bush's latest gaffe his worst of all time?

April Glaspie - Interesting stories about famous people, biographies, humorous stories, photos and videos. (fampeople.com)

Blowback as Bush gaffes Iraq war, not Ukraine, 'unjustified' | National Politics | elkodaily.com
 
Dubya invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein attempted to murder a US President, I certainly understand why he did it.
 
If you are a person like me and you remember what you saw not what you were told to see, then you realize just how tragic George W. Bush’s latest gaffe is. Bush must have been drinking sodium pentothal as he uttered the actual truth the other day. If anyone wonders what led to the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans at the World Trade Center in 2001, they now know. Let’s wind the clock back to 1990 when Bush’s father, George HW. Bush, dispatched US ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie, to meet with Saddam Hussein who was massing troops along the Border of Kuwait. Bush wanted Glaspie to find out What Saddam what planning.

Saddam came up with some story about Kuwait stealing Iraqi oil and that he had had enough of it. Saddam was looking for permission to invade Kuwait and take its oil for himself. Saddam assumed that because he had acted as a counterbalance to Iran and had been provided with chemical and biological weapons by the Bush administration some of which he used to exterminate Kurds, that the US would condone his invasion. He expected only some diplomatic noise as he rolled into Kuwait.

Glaspie, a long-time member of the Foreign Service, who knew full well how important diplomatic language is in sensitive potentially dangerous situations, then told Saddam that the US “Has no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts” which Saddam interpreted as “By all means, go ahead and take Kuwait, we will not do anything”. Saddam invaded Kuwait a few days later and the Gulf War ensued. Glaspie has never been held responsible for her ineptitude and the millions of deaths that incompetence led to and neither has Bush the Elder. By the way, the incident is likely the seed that spawned the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 which failed to take down the structure.

In 2001 Bush the younger was elected and the second attack on the World Trade Center utterly leveled it with skyjacked domestic airliners killing thousands. Nearly all the skyjackers were from Saudi Arabia; none had any connection to Iraq. When Bush told the American people that the people who had done this would hear from us very soon, they scratched their heads as Bush decided to attack Iraq that had nothing to do with the attack on American soil. Bush ignored the Saudi connection and promptly crafted a plan to attack Saddam Hussein under the pretense that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that Bush assumed must have still existed because his father had given them to Iraq years before.

The Entire Iraq war had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction. It was to distract attention away from Saudi Arabia, the real culprit and to cover up the ineptitude of Bush’s father who was the one responsible for all the death and bloodshed that followed. The war in Iraq was to protect the legacy of the Bush’s.

Talk about irony. Bush blurted it out nationally. It was no Freudian slip; the truth jumped from his lips.

Is George W. Bush's latest gaffe his worst of all time?

April Glaspie - Interesting stories about famous people, biographies, humorous stories, photos and videos. (fampeople.com)

Blowback as Bush gaffes Iraq war, not Ukraine, 'unjustified' | National Politics | elkodaily.com

Hey Geezer! Weren't you alive back then and know that Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, not 2001?

The WMDs were well documented by the Iraqi government, including a nuclear program was identified by Iraq itself, even though it was completely made up. We found out the truth when we invaded.

George H.W. Bush's incompetence? WTF are you talking about? We never set foot in Iraq during Desert Storm. Check your history!

Bush instantly corrected his mistake, unlike Biden who would double down on it and force the White House staff to clarify what he actually meant.

Why are you so ignorant on a topic you chose to post on?
 
Segue here, and perhaps irrelevant to the topic. In late 1989 or early 1990, (well before Sandam's intentions on Kuwait were known) I personally saw train load after train load of modern military equipment (tanks, transports, various other vehicles all painted in dessert tan camouflage) being shipped west. Before that time, these shipments were few and far between and always NATO green. I knew something was up then. it seemed like the government was preparing for a war in the middle east before there was one. It was BUKU fishy.
 
Last edited:
Segue here, and perhaps irrelevant to the topic. In late 1989 or early 1990, (well before Sandam's intentions on Kuwait were known) I personally saw train load after train load of modern military equipment (tanks, transports, various other vehicles all painted in dessert tan camouflage) being shipped west. Before that time, these shipments were few and far between and always NATO green. I knew something was up then.
What dessert is tan? I like blackberry cobbler, but it is not tan.

Why would it be shipped west? I know! The National Training Center for the Army is located in the desert of California. NATO green shows up like a beacon in the desert. everything in the Army now is designed for a desert environment, even down to the potable water trailers pulled behind the Humvees.
 
Sorry bout that,

1. Freudian slip right?
2. Bush has come to terms what a total screw up he has always been.
3. I dislike the imbecile so much.
4. But I did vote for the moron twice.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
 
Last edited:
What dessert is tan? I like blackberry cobbler, but it is not tan.

Why would it be shipped west? I know! The National Training Center for the Army is located in the desert of California. NATO green shows up like a beacon in the desert. everything in the Army now is designed for a desert environment, even down to the potable water trailers pulled behind the Humvees.
Really. (I know this is anecdotal,) BUT coincidentally the US Army changed the overall camo scheme from NATO green to Desert tan in 1990, the very environment of the middle east, and then coincidentally in far larger shipments than even the Vietnam war. Yes, we notice stuff like that.
 
What dessert is tan? I like blackberry cobbler, but it is not tan.

Why would it be shipped west? I know! The National Training Center for the Army is located in the desert of California. NATO green shows up like a beacon in the desert. everything in the Army now is designed for a desert environment, even down to the potable water trailers pulled behind the Humvees.
Why would they be shipped west? Because the closest port to the middle east is on the west coast. I remind you, at that time most of our military was using NATO Green as a standard. We are talking 1990. Because, you know, between say late 60' Vietnam conflict and then NATO in the late 80s' we were at that time, concerned with the fucking RUSSIANS. Remember those guys? Dessert camouflage won't work well in eastern Europe. There was no rational reason to switch...UNLESS SOMEBODY somewhere KNEW we where going to be involved in Iraq a head of time.
 
Why would they be shipped west? Because the closest port to the middle east is on the west coast. I remind you, at that time most of our military was using NATO Green as a standard. We are talking 1990. Because, you know, between say late 60' Vietnam conflict and then NATO in the late 80s' we were at that time, concerned with the fucking RUSSIANS. Remember those guys? Dessert camouflage won't work well in eastern Europe. There was no rational reason to switch...UNLESS SOMEBODY somewhere KNEW we where going to be involved in Iraq a head of time.
About the same to get there from Norfolk Virginia as the west coast........

Good month to get on station.
 
Last edited:
Saddam relayed his intentions to "reclaim" what he considered part of the homeland (where have we heard this before?) to the American Ambassador...and Atlas shrugged, er Bush sat by and let it happen, so to pretend he was "outraged". Iraq made their sentiments clear on Kuwait months earlier. From Democracy press, When the US gave Saddam a green light:

WikiLeaks, April Glaspie, and Saddam Hussein​

I’m generally not inclined to take issue with my FP colleagues, but David Kenner’s recent posting on the WikiLeaks release of a cable recounting Saddam Hussein’s infamous meeting with U.S. ambassador April Glaspie deserves a response. In an article headlined “Why One U.S. Diplomat Didn’t Cause the Gulf War,” Kenner argues that the new release …

By Stephen M. Walt
January 9, 2011


I’m generally not inclined to take issue with my FP colleagues, but David Kenner’s recent posting on the WikiLeaks release of a cable recounting Saddam Hussein’s infamous meeting with U.S. ambassador April Glaspie deserves a response.

In an article headlined “Why One U.S. Diplomat Didn’t Cause the Gulf War,” Kenner argues that the new release shows that Glaspie should not be blamed for the U.S. failure to make a clear deterrent warning to Saddam. And that is what he accuses me and John Mearsheimer (and the Washington Post) of doing. In his words, “the Washington Post described her as ‘the face of American incompetence in Iraq.’ Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer piled on in a 2003 article for Foreign Policy, arguing that Glaspie’s remarks unwittingly gave Iraq a green light to invade Kuwait.”

I agree that the WikiLeaks release may exonerate Glaspie for being personally responsible for a diplomatic gaffe, but there are two problems with Kenner’s version of events.

First, we never accused Glaspie of diplomatic incompetence, and we certainly didn’t “pile on.” Here’s what we actually said in our 2003 piece:

In a now famous interview with the Iraqi leader, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam, ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ The United States may not have intended to give Iraq a green light, but that is effectively what it did.”

Notice that we offered no opinion on whether Glaspie was free-lancing, mis-reading Saddam, or simply following orders from Washington. Our article was focused on the issue of whether Saddam was deterrable, and the key issue that concerned us about the Glaspie meeting was whether she had conveyed a clear deterrent threat to Saddam, or whether she might have unintentionally given him reason to think he could go ahead and absorb Kuwait without facing a strong military response from the United States.
 
Last edited:
Hey Geezer! Weren't you alive back then and know that Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, not 2001?

The WMDs were well documented by the Iraqi government, including a nuclear program was identified by Iraq itself, even though it was completely made up. We found out the truth when we invaded.

George H.W. Bush's incompetence? WTF are you talking about? We never set foot in Iraq during Desert Storm. Check your history!

Bush instantly corrected his mistake, unlike Biden who would double down on it and force the White House staff to clarify what he actually meant.

Why are you so ignorant on a topic you chose to post on?
What a pile of crap, Every point a ridiculous lame lie. God these butt lickers are a hoot.
 
Bushes murdered 1 0r 2 million and 5000 American heroes. Biggest lie in many decades.
 
Fact is: We could have just advised ON RECORD to Saddam NOT to invade Kuwait OR there would be consequences. Nope. Saddam told us they wanted their so called stolen territory back and then twiddled our fingers an let it happen. Great foreign policy. And then from what I say, plan this months in advance.
 
Saddam assumed that because he had acted as a counterbalance to Iran and had been provided with chemical and biological weapons by the Bush administration some of which he used to exterminate Kurds, that the US would condone his invasion.

That is not at all true.
Saddam never had any deadly WMD, and at best he had the irritant, mustard gas.
The civilians gassed in Halabja were killed by cyanide, by Iranians.
Saddam did not even have any ground forces there, and he was allied with the Kurds on the ground.
So there is no way Saddam could have used WMD on Halabja.
Nor was there any need, since the Iranian had already left.
And Saddam was allied with the Kurds at that point, not trying to exterminate them.

{...
‘Most of the casualties in Halabjah were reportedly caused by cyanogen chloride. This agent has never been used by Iraq, but Iran has shown interest in it. Mustard gas casualties in the town were probably caused by Iraqi weapons because Iran has never been noted using that agent.’[9]
...}
 
Fact is: We could have just advised ON RECORD to Saddam NOT to invade Kuwait OR there would be consequences. Nope. Saddam told us they wanted their so called stolen territory back and then twiddled our fingers an let it happen. Great foreign policy. And then from what I say, plan this months in advance.

Wrong.
You clearly did not read the Glaspie transcripts.
Saddam never intended to keep Kuwait, but to just end the reign of the corrupt emir.
The point was the emir of Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil and dumping well below prices set by treaty.
It was bankrupting Iraq.
They had heavy war debt they could make the payments on, due to Kuwait theft of oil.
So it was NOT an evil land grab as you are claiming.
It was a last ditch effort to not go bankrupt.
 
Hey Geezer! Weren't you alive back then and know that Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, not 2001?

The WMDs were well documented by the Iraqi government, including a nuclear program was identified by Iraq itself, even though it was completely made up. We found out the truth when we invaded.

George H.W. Bush's incompetence? WTF are you talking about? We never set foot in Iraq during Desert Storm. Check your history!

Bush instantly corrected his mistake, unlike Biden who would double down on it and force the White House staff to clarify what he actually meant.

Why are you so ignorant on a topic you chose to post on?

The point is we knew exactly what WMD Iraq had, and we knew they could not make sarin or VX, and had no nuclear program at all since their Osiraq reactor was blown up in 1979 by the Israelis.
We had full inspection access to anywhere we wanted, and always found nothing.
 
IMO it is worthwhile to examine the absolute insane, pernicious, satanic, neocon foreign policy the USA inflicted on the Middle East over the past few decades, the PNAC era. Not to mention back to when all the problems really started circa 1947 or so. Again, the neocon establishment has been on Iran for some time now. Ironically, Israel actually supplied Iran with weapons back in the day to use against Iraq. Now they want it destroyed. :dunno:
 

Forum List

Back
Top