How far from the tree?...er.. bush?
Wow! I'm glad daddy chose to speak up before we go stomp on international law in the name of national security. But why did he do this in a public speech, I wonder, rather than offering his advice more discreetly?
i read somewhere that brent scowcroft, who was head of the nsa under bush41, has in some ways represented the fathers position with regards to iraq in the media. it was scowcrofts oped in the new york times back in august which helped precipitate a move towards the un position favored by the colin powell faction. at that point the neocons were firmly unilateralist and ready to roll without all these encumbrances like inspectors and security council (dis)approval, not to mention streets filled with those pesky anti-war focus groups.
i have a feeling bush41 isnt a part of the true believers club like many of the ideologues that inhabit the current whitehouse. (after all, wouldnt be prudent.) that might be an overstatement as dick cheney was his secy of defense and he did spout that new world order line. but didnt bush41 hate reagan? and dont most of these folks venerate reagan and all that he represented? i think there might be something to that.
and, i mean, if anyone knows what shrub is (in)capable of, it should be his father.
meanwhile, cal pundit wasnt so impressed with the times uk piece.
|
- steve 3-11-2003 8:14 am
Wow! I'm glad daddy chose to speak up before we go stomp on international law in the name of national security. But why did he do this in a public speech, I wonder, rather than offering his advice more discreetly?
- bruno 3-11-2003 10:31 am [add a comment]
i read somewhere that brent scowcroft, who was head of the nsa under bush41, has in some ways represented the fathers position with regards to iraq in the media. it was scowcrofts oped in the new york times back in august which helped precipitate a move towards the un position favored by the colin powell faction. at that point the neocons were firmly unilateralist and ready to roll without all these encumbrances like inspectors and security council (dis)approval, not to mention streets filled with those pesky anti-war focus groups.
i have a feeling bush41 isnt a part of the true believers club like many of the ideologues that inhabit the current whitehouse. (after all, wouldnt be prudent.) that might be an overstatement as dick cheney was his secy of defense and he did spout that new world order line. but didnt bush41 hate reagan? and dont most of these folks venerate reagan and all that he represented? i think there might be something to that.
and, i mean, if anyone knows what shrub is (in)capable of, it should be his father.
meanwhile, cal pundit wasnt so impressed with the times uk piece.
- dave 3-11-2003 12:15 pm [add a comment]