Who is more responsible for the problems in Iraq, George W or his father?

Question

I just found out that, in 1990, right after Iran invated Kuwait, Iraq's
foreign minister(the guy that looks like Peter Sellers), Tariq Aziz,
was willing to negotiate a Iraq withdrawal right after the invasion.
When current Sec of State(the same guy that raun the election recount for W in 2000) went to Geneva to meet with Aziz, the instructions from Bush the elder was ,"no negotations"!
Less than half the American public at the time favored military
action.
The Senate voted for military action by only a few votes.

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/iraq2.htm

You may find it hard to read the above link., it's so intense. I warn
you that it will make you very angry by the time you finish.

We are really in this Vietnam 2 because old man Bush refused
to let Hussain come to terms. They were at the table ready to negotiate. The presidential election was coming up in a year,
so Bush moved in quick without a war declaration from Congress.
Iraq has been vital to both Bushes......

Sorry, typo about iran invading Kuwait, but the way things are going, maybe Iran really will invade Kuwait! LOL

The Bush administration, said the congressional paper,
wanted to avoid seeming in any way to reward the invasion. But a
retired Army officer, who was acting as a middle man in the
August discussions, concluded afterward that the peace offer "was
already moving against policy

The US military and President Bush would have their massive
show of power, their super-hi-tech real war games, and no signals
from Iraq or any peacenik would be allowed to spoil it. Fortune
magazine, in an ingenuous paean to Bush's fortitude, later summed
up the period before the war began thusly:

The President and his men worked overtime to quash freelance
peacemakers in the Arab world, France, and the Soviet Union
who threatened to give Saddam a face-saving way out of the
box Bush was building. Over and over, Bush repeated the mantra:
no negotiations, no deals, no face-saving, no rewards, and
specifically, no linkage to a Palestinian peace conference [a point
raised by Iraq on several occasions].{

As the 15 January deadline neared, the world held its
breath. Was it possible that in five and a half months no way
could have been found to avoid inflicting another ghastly war
upon this sad planet? On the 11th, Arab diplomats at the UN said
that they had received reports from Algeria, Jordan and Yemen,
all on close terms with Iraq, that Saddam planned an initiative
soon after the 15th that would express his willingness "in
principle" to pull out of Kuwait in return for international
guarantees that Iraq would not be attacked, an international
conference to address Palestinian grievances, and negotiations on
disputes between Iraq and Kuwait. The Iraqi leader, the
diplomats said, wanted to wait a day or two after the deadline
had passed to demonstrate that he had not been intimidated.
For the United States, with half-a-million troops poised for
battle in Saudi Arabia, this was unacceptable. Saddam Hussein
will "pass the brink at midnight, January 15"

During the entire lengthy buildup to the war, during the
war, after the war, no one was sure they understood why Bush had
intervened in the Persian Gulf, and then taken the United States
into war. Congressmen, journalists, editors, plain citizens kept
asking, almost pleading at times, for the president to clearly
and unambiguously explain his motivations, and without
contradicting what he had said the previous week. (Economists
and think-tank intellectuals found it professionally awkward to
admit their uncertainty, and thus wound up writing lots of
authoritative-sounding mumbo-jumbo.)

As P.T. Barnum said, a sucker is born every minute, and the American public that bought into the spin that created the tow gulf wars are the world suckers of history.
Goebbels himself, the PRman of the Nazi's, couldn't have dreamed up the PR
that Washington came up with, and the press regurgitated, during both gulf conflicts!

If Iraq brought it on, then why:
1.)Didn't we invade Cuba with full force?
Castro INVITED russia to provide him with nukes, and said he would use them.
Why didn't the cuban people merit a full
scale invasion, for their own sake?
2.)Why didn't Kosovo merit an invasion
sooner? We pretty much let the Serbs
invade everyone for a few years before we acted.
3.) How about all the Central American
and South American countries with
despotic rulers? We pretty much let
them kill and invade each other at will.

Finally, we pretty much let Iraq and Iran bludgeon each other throughout the 80's, gave them the weapons to do it, and let
both of them mutilate the kurds at will, even gave them the gas they used to do it

"A picture is worth a thousand words"

http://www.diosa.net/art-net/RumsfeldHussein.jpg

Why is it that when one tries to speak and uncover the truth, the establishment and its
lackeys tar-and-feather someone as a whiner and bitcher?
I suppose Woodward and Bernstein are
whiners too per the uncovery of Watergate.
Woodward has a new book out on iraq that is the number 1 best seller, and we aren't
calling him a whiner, to my knowledge.

Brother, untolnd millions have been spent
on both useless battles, untold lives haev been lost on both sides, and you still have strongmen running most countries in the middle east, with not a semblance of democracy.
Meanwhile, the real threat is in north korea,
who are blasting nukes underground at will.
Bringing up these issues makes people
understand who is responsible for huge
messes of money and lives, just like the useless Vietnam, which not only cost 50000 american deaths and 600,000 wounder, but gave us stagflation in the 70's, with an 8% unemployment rate.


Those responsible for stupidity should always be given credit

My misunderstanding is why we didn't invade Saudi Arabia after 9/11.
Most of the hi-jackers were Saudi
nationals, and the ringleader was one as well.
So, would it not have made sense to
invade Saudi, remove the House of Saud
from power, and expropriate all the oil?
Never mind the holy places, it still would have made more sense to invade Saudi.
Then we could have given THEIR people
a democracy, and run OPEC by proxy for
years.........
But no, we just picked a trump-up war
we could win. Or, THOUGHT we could win.
It all comes down to the same "Hearts
and MInds" of Vietnam.
If you are not welcome, they will make every effort to expel you from the country.
That will be just the same 200 years from now.
People aren't stupid......they know full
well when they are being jived, here and abroad.

Answer 1

It is all Bush senior's fault.. He was the one who started the gulf war and more importantly, he fathered George W. Bush !

Answer 2

I think that the mess in Iraq is the result
of improper thinking/planning on the part
of our military command structure, and
the political leadership. No effort was made
to seal the borders during the push toward
Bagdad so we lost hundreds and hundreds
of enemy who should have been detained and
disarmed.

The fight now centers around a few groups
committed to upsetting the establishment of a
working democracy in the middle east. The very
idea that people can exist with freedom to think
for themselves is an enormous threat to extremist
muslim leaders who cherrish their position of power.
The only solution to this problem is to identify
those extremists and eliminate them.

As for pinning the tail on the donkey as you suggest
as a worthwhile endeavor...Come on guy. We are
already in this mess. You want to lay down on the
floor and scream and moan about what got us here?
So your contribution is to complain and bitc**h? Wow, what a fine contribution you will have made in the long run. Where should we send your letters of commendation?

Answer 3

Bush Jr decided -- since he's The Decider; he's said so -- to pursue the war in Iraq. It's all on him.

Though, viewed in larger terms of fate, if Bush Sr's rubber hadn't broken that night...

Answer 4

I think George W. Bush and his advisors. He makes bad decisions and relies on bad information. When he does get good information he ignores it. How many times has the reason we are in Iraq been changed..

Answer 5

Both Bushies are equally culpable

Answer 6

I think George W is responsible!!

Answer 7

george w

Answer 8

iraq is the problem with iraq, we should have never been involved.

Answer 9

W

Answer 10

uuuuuuummmm.........lets see.............iraq!