Former US President George W. Bush made an embarrassing mistake when talking about the importance of democracy and the threat to democracy from abroad, and especially aimed at Russia, perhaps a Freudian slip.
Russia’s election rigged He said. “Political opponents are imprisoned or otherwise excluded from participating in the electoral process. The result is the absence of checks and balances in Russia and the decision of one man to launch a completely unjust and brutal invasion of Iraq. I mean Ukraine. “
Then Bush removed the mistake and said, “Iraq, too.” Russia was involved in Iraq in one way or another – this is not true.
In any case, whether it is a common mistake or not, this is the most perfect example of the complete hypocrisy of US politicians talking about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Bush himself launched an illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 that killed an estimated 1 million Iraqis in the first few years alone.
Everyone has been told that the war turned into a nine-year bloody campaign under the false pretense of a “weapon of mass destruction” in the hands of the then Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. The U.S. military has publicly committed war crimes, including the use of illegal chemical weapons, the killing of thousands of civilians by U.S. forces, and widespread torture. All of these violations have been confirmed by the United States or acknowledged in internal documents leaked by WikiLeaks.
The man who presided over this horrific war – the war that led to the biggest protests in human history – has the nerve to call for Russian action in Ukraine is a demonstration of narcissism. It’s so ridiculous that even he himself let it slip that, yes, what happened in Iraq was a hoax.
What makes this deception even clearer is what he was saying about Russia “A manCan start military operations without checks and balances. This is exactly what happened during the Iraq war. There are international laws and institutions to prevent such crimes from happening – all of which have been ignored. This proves that international law is not such a law, but a political tool to express a desire for domination, that is, the United States.
It is precisely this situation, this breach of international law and the consequent perception that international law does not actually protect anyone that has created the conditions for the situation in Ukraine. Prior to Russia’s intervention in the conflict, which had been ongoing since 2014, Moscow had sent to the West its legitimate security concerns – including the militarization of Ukraine and the possibility of Ukraine becoming a NATO member – but these were ignored.
Ironically, it was Bush who began the process of clearly ignoring Russia’s interests. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was hoped that Russia would become an ally of the West, not an enemy. When Russian President Vladimir Putin began his first term, he himself expressed this hope.
In fact, just as Russia was fighting terrorism in Chechnya, President Putin wanted to partner with the United States in the fight against terrorism. He pledged support for Russia’s use of its airspace and other resources in its own efforts against terrorism, including in Afghanistan.
He first met Bush at his home in Texas after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. Bush describes Putin at a local Texas high school “The leader of a new style, a reformer …, a man who is going to make a huge difference to make the world more peaceful by working closely with the United States.” Just weeks after Bush withdrew from the anti-ballistic missile deal, the administration said it wanted to protect NATO allies from a possible missile attack by Iran. Putin has publicly said the move would weaken arms control efforts and weaken European security.
This kind of duplicity has been the norm in Washington ever since. The Americans reassure world leaders that they want to cooperate, build relationships, and reduce tensions, but then immediately formulate policies contrary to their own. Under Putin’s leadership, which has overlapped with several US presidents, Russia has endured a wave of NATO expansion that has reached Russia’s doorstep and militarized Russia’s neighbor – despite verbal promises that it will not happen, ironically, President George W. Bush W. Bush.
George W. Bush thus clearly has no basis to stand in the way of illegal attacks and checks and lack of balance in foreign policy. Even Bush’s attempt to formulate a definitive view of Russia’s actions in Ukraine is ridiculous enough – the Freudian slip is just that embarrassment in all its hidden clarity.
The statements, opinions and opinions expressed in this column do not merely represent the author and RT’s.