Ugh. Have you seen the interview Bush gave to The London Times apologizing for defending America from the violent jihad? It is pathetic.
Bush regrets his legacy as a "man who wanted war"? Memo to Bush: it was not your legacy, it was al qaeda and company's legacy. Not aggressively defending ourselves is a moral depravity. Apologizing for defending this great nation is morally bankrupt. It was not Bush who wanted war, he was reading Goodnight Moon to a bunch of kindergartners in Sunny Florida (no, not Sunshine Florida, Obambi), remember? It was Islamic jihad that wanted war, they took out the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and attempted to take out the Capital building and/or White House.
Memo to Bush: STFU.
President Bush has admitted to The Times that his gun-slinging rhetoric made the world believe that he was a “guy really anxious for war” in Iraq. He said that his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran.
In an exclusive interview, he expressed regret at the bitter divisions over the war and said that he was troubled about how his country had been misunderstood. “I think that in retrospect I could have used a different tone, a different rhetoric.”
Phrases such as “bring them on” or “dead or alive”, he said, “indicated to people that I was, you know, not a man of peace”. He said that he found it very painful “to put youngsters in harm’s way”.
His finest hour!
He added: “I try to meet with as many of the families as I can. And I have an obligation to comfort and console as best as I possibly can. I also have an obligation to make sure that those lives were not lost in vain.”
The unilateralism that marked his first White House term has been replaced by an enthusiasm for tough multilateralism.
"Tough multilateralism"? WTF. Thats's the most moronic oxymoron I have heard this week and that's hard with the lunatic lefties and Obamaniacals.
He said that his focus for his final six months in office was to secure agreement on issues such as establishing a Palestinian state and to “leave behind a series of structures that makes it easier for the next president”.
Bush's second term has been an abject failure and an enormous disappointment for freedom loving peoples. Freedom ain't free and with this admission of weakness, he serves to empower the global jihad.
A terror state in the heart of the Middle East? That's what he wants to focus on in his last six months? G-d help us all.
UPDATE: Greenwald thinks this is the worst possible time to cave. Read him at Contentions here.
President Bush could not have picked a worse time to decide to soften his image. As Iran barrels towards full nuclear capability and as positive developments in the War on Terror shine a favorable light on the Bush Doctrine, we find the President at his most cuddly and contrite.
Here is the problem. Talking about talking is not effective diplomacy. Talking about bombing is effective diplomacy. We’ve reached a funny point in world history when the toughest thing a western leader is permitted to say about a potential nuclear menace is that “all options are on the table.” Let’s hope that what appears to be a kinder, gentler, and frankly weaker approach to Iran is just the President crossing his T’s and dotting his I’s before making the hardest decision a statesman can make. If the only thing standing between us and a nuclear Iran is a “multilateral framework” of European “considerations,” Bush’s legacy will bear the stain of something far more damning than excessive verbal bluster.
Read it all.
UPDATE: A weak Bush empowers the poison pygmy.