George H.W. Bush, American War Criminal

The national religion of the United States is American exceptionalism. And we are now in the midst of a grotesque canonization of one of its imperial saints, George Herbert Walker Bush. Every media outlet in this country, every politician, Democrat and Republican, engaged in collective eulogy based on lies — lies about who Bush was, lies about his policies, lies about the mass-killing he oversaw during his life at the highest levels of power in the United States government.

George H.W. Bush was an unrepentant war criminal who spent the overwhelming majority of his life making the world a worse place — a more dangerous place — and he leaves behind a global trail of tears, of bloodshed, of death and destruction.

This is the eulogy that George H.W. Bush should be receiving. But instead, the U.S. and international news media are engaging in sick propaganda. Leave the stories about how classy he supposedly was, how cool his marriage was, how he built a father-son relationship with Bill Clinton, how much he liked Barack Obama, how he always wore those funny socks — leave all of that to the family in their private memorials.

But for the rest of us, for the rest of the world, we must remember that his incalculable crimes were committed in public, from the highest chambers of power in the most dominant nation in the world. The accounting for his crimes should also be done in public.

If you speak honestly about who George H.W. Bush really was, then you, by necessity, will be indicting the history, the politics, the legacy of the United States. If you speak honestly about Bush, then the myth of American exceptionalism is laid bare.
siftbotsays...

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Sunday, December 9th, 2018 9:11am PST - promote requested by C-note.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by C-note.

KrazyKat42says...

Kinda disagree. His policies in Central America were terrible, but he did a lot of good things. Opening trade with China, the end of the cold war, and the he ended the invasion of Kuwait by backing off.

bcglorfsays...

Stopped watching at "The never ending killing fields of Iraq".

Now, if the speaker goes on to accuse Bush Sr. for failing to remove Saddam after having Liberated Kuwait, I judged too quickly. I'm pretty confident though that this is just more of the revisionist history garbage blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.

I mean, if you want to rail against American exceptionalism, at least have the decency to blame the presidents prior to Bush(Carter and Reagan) who supported Saddam after the Iranian revolution, rather than the American president who finally took the right side against one of the most brutal tyrants and dictators of his time.

KrazyKat42said:

Kinda disagree. His policies in Central America were terrible, but he did a lot of good things. Opening trade with China, the end of the cold war, and the he ended the invasion of Kuwait by backing off.

newtboysays...

Keep in mind, it was neither his genocidal tendencies nor his expansionism that were used as the public excuses to attack Saddam, it was a false narrative about a successful nuclear weapons program (and other fantasies about weapons of mass destruction) and another false narrative about his ties to and support of terrorists, both lies created by the Whitehouse.

I think we violated master Tzu's teachings and went to war not knowing our enemies or ourselves, a sure recipe for failure.

bcglorfsaid:

Stopped watching at "The never ending killing fields of Iraq".

Now, if the speaker goes on to accuse Bush Sr. for failing to remove Saddam after having Liberated Kuwait, I judged too quickly. I'm pretty confident though that this is just more of the revisionist history garbage blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.

I mean, if you want to rail against American exceptionalism, at least have the decency to blame the presidents prior to Bush(Carter and Reagan) who supported Saddam after the Iranian revolution, rather than the American president who finally took the right side against one of the most brutal tyrants and dictators of his time.

My_designsays...

Wrong Bush.

"That's what she said!"

newtboysaid:

Keep in mind, it was neither his genocidal tendencies nor his expansionism that were used as the public excuses to attack, it was a false narrative about a successful nuclear weapons program (and other fantasies about weapons of mass destruction) and another false narrative about his ties to and support of terrorists, both lies created by the Whitehouse.

I think we violated master Tzu's teachings and went to war not knowing our enemies or ourselves, a sure recipe for failure.

newtboysays...

No sir.

I'm addressing his comment about the invasion of Iraq happening because of "Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait." when that's absolutely not how the invasion was sold to us by W. That's only partially how Desert Shield was sold by Sr. (Keeping in mind the gassing had happened years earlier), but that didn't remove or even target Saddam and barely went into Iraq, so clearly wasn't designed to remove him from power or stop his atrocities, just to stop his expansion into our allies territories.

The invasion of Iraq and direct targeting of Saddam was by W, not Sr. and are what led to the current state of the region far more than any result of Desert Storm...what I thought he meant by "blaming Sr. for Iraq"....I read that as 'blaming Sr. for the current state of Iraq and the region'.
I may have misunderstood what he meant by "blaming Sr for Iraq", but I can tell the difference between bushes.

My_designsaid:

Wrong Bush.

"That's what she said!"

Paybacksays...

I haven't heard, and I'd really like to know...

Has Trump instigated any new mass murdering?
Like, I'm not counting from military actions from troops already in-theatre. Non-status quo.

I mean, has he gone "Hey, lets bomb the shit out of Syrians. They're like the Mexicans of Eastern Europe, aren't they? No? Oh ok, nuke Turkey."

I mean, even Obama escalated actions and robo-killed hundreds (thousands?).

I mean, for all the sleaze and stupidity, has he done anything "war criminal"-ish?

bcglorfsays...

I try and choose my words carefully, it looks like you are still responding to what you think I must mean, rather than what I said. You say you thought I meant jr and the recent war in Iraq when I reference Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. I was in fact referencing no particular Iraq war, but the overall condition Iraq is in(as per the video and my own earlier reference to same. Maybe some room to misunderstand that, but my full quot if you can read it carefully this time:
“blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.”
I did specifically name Bush Sr, which At the least should rule out thinking I’m discussing anything done by Jr.

As for Sr’s war in Iraq, Kuwait was a province of the Iraqi state when Senior came in to liberate it. He also stopped short of removing Saddam, which was imo a mistake for Iraqi’s and the one thing I’d agree would be a fair accusation against him re the overall consition of Iraq today. It left Saddam time for another genocide against the Shia Iraqi’s that had risen up thinking Senior was serious about standing with them. Public opinion though was too much against it and so American forces stopped short of removing Saddam and followed popular opinion. Saddam’s WMD programs where dismantled(which he very much had then) and northern Iraq’s airspace remained occupied by Anerican forces right through until jr’s war. Saddam also continually decieved, obstructed and kicked out the UN inspectors in Iraq there to confirm his full and continued disarmament. Enough so that before jr’s war one of the most vocal anti-war inspectors cited Saddam’s almost certain possession and use of chemical weapons as a reason risking an invasion was too dangerous...

newtboysaid:

No sir.

I'm addressing his comment about the invasion of Iraq happening because of "Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait." when that's absolutely not how the invasion was sold to us by W. That's only partially how Desert Shield was sold by Sr. (Keeping in mind the gassing had happened years earlier), but that didn't remove or even target Saddam and barely went into Iraq, so clearly wasn't designed to remove him from power or stop his atrocities, just to stop his expansion into our allies territories.

The invasion of Iraq and direct targeting of Saddam was by W, not Sr. and are what led to the current state of the region far more than any result of Desert Storm...what I thought he meant by "blaming Sr. for Iraq"....I read that as 'blaming Sr. for the current state of Iraq and the region'.
I may have misunderstood what he meant by "blaming Sr for Iraq", but I can tell the difference between bushes.

bcglorfsays...

I'm guessing there's a non-zero chance that the kind of black-ops missions under Obama(getting bin-laden, drone hits on taliban leaders in Pakistan). Aren't being brought to the commander in chief as regularly these days. I know there's plenty of actions they likely can't take without the President's sign off, but you ahve to imagine that anytime they aren't obligated to do otherwise they are trying to keep their ops off twitter.

Paybacksaid:

I haven't heard, and I'd really like to know...

Has Trump instigated any new mass murdering?
Like, I'm not counting from military actions from troops already in-theatre. Non-status quo.

I mean, has he gone "Hey, lets bomb the shit out of Syrians. They're like the Mexicans of Eastern Europe, aren't they? No? Oh ok, nuke Turkey."

I mean, even Obama escalated actions and robo-killed hundreds (thousands?).

I mean, for all the sleaze and stupidity, has he done anything "war criminal"-ish?

newtboysays...

Actually no, I responded to what you said, which could be taken to mean many things.
I said I thought you meant the current state of Iraq when you said "blaming Sr. for Iraq"...and reading this it seems I was correct.
Imo, the current state or the region is mostly due to jr, not Sr.
Many people still blame Sr for the current state there. I disagree with that theory. That's all.

Sr hardly had a war in Iraq, his barely crossed the border and was mainly in Kuwait if memory serves. They chased the Iraqis out and bombed the shit out of them as they ran.
Kuwait was considered a sovereign nation, not a province of Iraq. Saddam invaded it. Sr never tried to remove Saddam, except from Kuwait. Since he understood the problem of creating a power vacuum there, I think leaving Saddam in power was smart with no feasible plan to replace him, even though it was clearly inhumane....and we have evidence now to support that. Iraq is absolutely worse off today than it was under Saddam, no matter which group you belong to.

Fortunately, all the WMD talk was pure fabricated fantasy...we never had evidence he continued those programs after the first gulf war/Kuwait. If he had had them, Bush Jr might have started ww3 by attacking him, knowing he would use them on his neighbors like he had before. Remember, it was Jr's administration's plan to convince the public he had wmds, so it's no surprise he also had people saying they're too dangerous to attack while he had many more saying he's too dangerous to leave in power....the same people claiming he was involved in 9/11, which was asinine.

bcglorfsaid:

I try and choose my words carefully, it looks like you are still responding to what you think I must mean, rather than what I said. You say you thought I meant jr and the recent war in Iraq when I reference Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. I was in fact referencing no particular Iraq war, but the overall condition Iraq is in(as per the video and my own earlier reference to same. Maybe some room to misunderstand that, but my full quot if you can read it carefully this time:
“blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.”
I did specifically name Bush Sr, which At the least should rule out thinking I’m discussing anything done by Jr.

As for Sr’s war in Iraq, Kuwait was a province of the Iraqi state when Senior came in to liberate it. He also stopped short of removing Saddam, which was imo a mistake for Iraqi’s and the one thing I’d agree would be a fair accusation against him re the overall consition of Iraq today. It left Saddam time for another genocide against the Shia Iraqi’s that had risen up thinking Senior was serious about standing with them. Public opinion though was too much against it and so American forces stopped short of removing Saddam and followed popular opinion. Saddam’s WMD programs where dismantled(which he very much had then) and northern Iraq’s airspace remained occupied by Anerican forces right through until jr’s war. Saddam also continually decieved, obstructed and kicked out the UN inspectors in Iraq there to confirm his full and continued disarmament. Enough so that before jr’s war one of the most vocal anti-war inspectors cited Saddam’s almost certain possession and use of chemical weapons as a reason risking an invasion was too dangerous...

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More