Sorry Mr. Bush

Senior that is. After the first Gulf War, and through the decade that followed, I was a loud critic of George H. W. Bush's decision to not finish the job and take out Saddam. I now offer up the idea that maybe, just maybe, he had a better grip of the situation than I did. I know its hard for many readers to accept, but at 21-33 it's possible that I didn't have the same grasp of the region, politics, religion, ect as a former Congressman, former head of the CIA, 8 year VP, and current Pres.

With the talk of "officially" calling Iraq a Civil War, I came across this

"We expect to use the phrase sparingly and carefully, not to the exclusion of other formulations, not for dramatic effect. The main shortcoming of "civil war" is that, like other labels, it fails to capture the complexity of what is happening on the ground. The war in Iraq is, in addition to being a civil war, an occupation, a Baathist insurgency, a sectarian conflict, a front in a war against terrorists, a scene of criminal gangsterism and a cycle of vengeance. We believe 'civil war' should not become reductionist shorthand for a war that is colossally complicated."

But besides that, we've got this thing totally under control.

So maybe Sr. saw this on the horizon, maybe he was right, and maybe I was wrong. My Bad Mr. President.