The Clinton Tsunami
Okay, I can just hear the lefties shrieking about the “Clinton-hatred” in which I indulged below. Which I could blow off easily by pointing out that I earned my political debate “combat ribbons” from that misbegotten detour long ago, and have come to accept that Clinton lies like the rest of us breathe and will always get away with it because of his towering charisma and counter-cultural “rock star” status. But I’ll scrounge up the effort once again, for old time’s sake.
Clinton claimed that Bush "walked away from our allies in attacking Iraq."
This is a lie. Bush went back to the UN and worked “multilaterally” with our allies to get weapons inspectors back into Iraq (giving Saddam an extra six months to evacuate his WMD stockpiles out of Iraq, I might add). The resulting SCR - Resolution 1441 - promised "serious consequences" which everybody knew meant war if Iraq failed to comply. And it passed unanimously, which means France and Russia and Germany voted for it. What Dubya did is call their bluff when Saddam materially breached SCR 1441 and actually back up his words with action Black Jacques Chirac, Vlade Putin, and Gerhardt Schroeder didn’t want to see taken. Thus was their corruption and double-dealing, and worthlessness as “allies,” exposed. Meanwhile, through the stalwart, courageous support of leaders like Britain’s Tony Blair, Australia’s John Howard, and Spain’s Jose Maria Aznar, we learned who our real friends are.
Clinton claimed that Bush walked away from our allies in withdrawing from the climate change treaty.
This is otherwise known as the Kyoto protocol, and it’s little wonder that Mr. Bill tried to obfuscate this, given the avalanche of negative publicity that has come to be associated with that label. In fact, the U.S. Senate rejected Kyoto unanimously clear back in July of 1997. The United States' participation in Kyoto was finally put out of its misery by the Clinton administration at the Hague conference in November 2000, two months before George Bush took office, and four months before his decision to withdraw the U.S. signature on the agreement, after European governments refused to accept a U.S.-backed pollution credit trading system considered by many to be the only cost effective way for us to have met our emissions obligations in the short-term. Furthermore, neither the Russians nor our “allies” signed onto this turkey for the same reason that Dubya withdrew our country’s imprimatur: it would have decimated their economies for little or no actual climatic gain. All GWB did was attach the toe tag, and once again expose the anti-American ill-will of so-called “allies” who view us much more as a rival to be beaten than a friend to be embraced or a leader to be followed.
Clinton claimed that Bush walked away from our allies in withdrawing from the international criminal court.
But Clinton himself only signed this treaty on the last possible day, December 31st, 2000, despite what he called "concerns about significant flaws" (i.e. subjecting American soldiers, and perhaps even future American presidents, to blatantly politicized “war crimes” charges in the event of military action in defense of US interests of which the “international community” didn’t approve – can you say “Abu Ghraib”?). Moreover, he said he would not submit the treaty for Senate ratification or even recommend ratification until these concerns were addressed, which they never were. Dubya concurred with this assessment, and did the honest, straightforward thing – he withdrew America’s signature. Just as Clinton’s signing onto the ICC was nothing but dishonest symbolism and buck-passing for just such an occasion as this convention speech.
Clinton claimed Bush walked away from its allies in withdrawing American support for the ABM treaty.
But that treaty did not involve our “allies,” none of which were original or subsequent signatories. It only involved the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – the latter of which no longer exists. Furthermore, the ABM treaty contains a mutual withdrawal provision upon six months’ advance notice, which the Bush Administration duly supplied to Russian President Putin in December of 2001. And lastly, a mere five months later Presidents Bush and Putin signed one of the most sweeping nuclear arms reduction agreements in history, reducing by two-thirds the strategic nuclear warheads of both nations – which presumably is good for our “allies.”
There’s an old saying: “No good deed goes unpunished.” Or, as NR’s Rich Lowry wrote last week:
Well, bullshit. As Clinton himself said during his own reelection campaign, “We’ll just have to win, then.”
Clinton claimed that Bush "walked away from our allies in attacking Iraq."
This is a lie. Bush went back to the UN and worked “multilaterally” with our allies to get weapons inspectors back into Iraq (giving Saddam an extra six months to evacuate his WMD stockpiles out of Iraq, I might add). The resulting SCR - Resolution 1441 - promised "serious consequences" which everybody knew meant war if Iraq failed to comply. And it passed unanimously, which means France and Russia and Germany voted for it. What Dubya did is call their bluff when Saddam materially breached SCR 1441 and actually back up his words with action Black Jacques Chirac, Vlade Putin, and Gerhardt Schroeder didn’t want to see taken. Thus was their corruption and double-dealing, and worthlessness as “allies,” exposed. Meanwhile, through the stalwart, courageous support of leaders like Britain’s Tony Blair, Australia’s John Howard, and Spain’s Jose Maria Aznar, we learned who our real friends are.
Clinton claimed that Bush walked away from our allies in withdrawing from the climate change treaty.
This is otherwise known as the Kyoto protocol, and it’s little wonder that Mr. Bill tried to obfuscate this, given the avalanche of negative publicity that has come to be associated with that label. In fact, the U.S. Senate rejected Kyoto unanimously clear back in July of 1997. The United States' participation in Kyoto was finally put out of its misery by the Clinton administration at the Hague conference in November 2000, two months before George Bush took office, and four months before his decision to withdraw the U.S. signature on the agreement, after European governments refused to accept a U.S.-backed pollution credit trading system considered by many to be the only cost effective way for us to have met our emissions obligations in the short-term. Furthermore, neither the Russians nor our “allies” signed onto this turkey for the same reason that Dubya withdrew our country’s imprimatur: it would have decimated their economies for little or no actual climatic gain. All GWB did was attach the toe tag, and once again expose the anti-American ill-will of so-called “allies” who view us much more as a rival to be beaten than a friend to be embraced or a leader to be followed.
Clinton claimed that Bush walked away from our allies in withdrawing from the international criminal court.
But Clinton himself only signed this treaty on the last possible day, December 31st, 2000, despite what he called "concerns about significant flaws" (i.e. subjecting American soldiers, and perhaps even future American presidents, to blatantly politicized “war crimes” charges in the event of military action in defense of US interests of which the “international community” didn’t approve – can you say “Abu Ghraib”?). Moreover, he said he would not submit the treaty for Senate ratification or even recommend ratification until these concerns were addressed, which they never were. Dubya concurred with this assessment, and did the honest, straightforward thing – he withdrew America’s signature. Just as Clinton’s signing onto the ICC was nothing but dishonest symbolism and buck-passing for just such an occasion as this convention speech.
Clinton claimed Bush walked away from its allies in withdrawing American support for the ABM treaty.
But that treaty did not involve our “allies,” none of which were original or subsequent signatories. It only involved the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – the latter of which no longer exists. Furthermore, the ABM treaty contains a mutual withdrawal provision upon six months’ advance notice, which the Bush Administration duly supplied to Russian President Putin in December of 2001. And lastly, a mere five months later Presidents Bush and Putin signed one of the most sweeping nuclear arms reduction agreements in history, reducing by two-thirds the strategic nuclear warheads of both nations – which presumably is good for our “allies.”
There’s an old saying: “No good deed goes unpunished.” Or, as NR’s Rich Lowry wrote last week:
If [Bush] ignores U.N. resolutions, he is a dangerous unilateralist. If he takes U.N. resolutions on Iraq seriously, he is a dangerous unilateralist. If he doesn't get France to agree to his Iraq policy, he is ignoring important international actors. If he supports multiparty talks on North Korea, he is not doing enough to ignore important international actors.
Well, bullshit. As Clinton himself said during his own reelection campaign, “We’ll just have to win, then.”
posted by JASmius at 1:07 PM
<<< Home