Bush out ... Clinton in

Realism replaces Boomer Idealism

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA -
        1996)

The textual material on page below is drawn directly from my work A Moral History of Western Society © 2024, Volume Two, pages 366-371.

With Egypt knocked out as the leading spokesman for the Arab world, Iraq finally had the opportunity to take over that privileged position. Thus Iraq's Ba'athist military dictator (since 1979) Saddam Hussein had been pushing hard to establish himself as that Arab voice. But there were a number of problems facing him in that enterprise. The biggest problem was that Iraq itself was not truly a nation – but instead a collection of various ethnic and religious groups … which had little love for each other. Indeed, the only reason for the existence of Iraq was that the British themselves drew up the design for the country when they carved up the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War Two … adding the oil-rich Kurdish (non-Arab) community in the North to the divided Arab world (mutually hostile Sunnis and Shi'ites) to the South – all for the sole purpose of giving British Petroleum control over this vast oil-rich region. The British even set up a "British-protected" Hashemite monarchy for Iraq – which did not much outlast the withdrawal of British influence in the region after World War Two. In fact in 1958, Sunni Ba'athist officers in the Iraqi army overthrew the monarchy in a very bloody coup that year … and with General Abd al-Karim Qasim in control, began the political contest with Nasser for leadership of the larger Arab world. Qasim of course had his own goals – and problems – at home to deal with. The Kurds in the north were fighting among themselves … upsetting the Iraqi political scene greatly. And it infuriated Qasim that the British had set oil-soaked Kuwait apart from Mesopotamia (ultimately "Iraq") in the British carve-up of Ottoman Turkey – because tiny Kuwait was more likely to remain under full British control. Qasim felt strongly that Kuwait belonged to Iraq. But Qasim was himself overthrown (with British and American help) in 1963 … because he had brought the Cold War to Iraq by siding closely with the Soviets. But the pro-Western regime that then came in place did not last long before it too (1968) was overthrown by another Ba'athist coup, the one that eventually brought Saddam to power. But Saddam would find himself absorbed over the next eight years in a futile war with Iran – one that he had undertaken thinking he might lure the Arab minority living just inside Iran next to the Iraqi border to join his Iraq … and bring their own oil lands into his country. But that part of the Arab world (including most of the huge Southeastern portion of Iraq) was Shi'ite – whereas the Ba'athist were Sunni in religious affiliation. And thus the Shi'ite Arabs in Iran seemed to prefer to stay with Shi'ite Iran than join Saddam's Sunni-controlled Iraq … or at least that is how Iran played the matter. In any case, the long war led to nothing for Saddam … except deep national debt. At this point he looked to the matter of long interest to Iraq: Kuwait. Grabbing Kuwait would add enormously to Iraq oil income (the latter not always reliable because of the turmoil that often broke out in the oil lands of the Kurdish North). But grabbing Kuwait would likely bring some kind of a reaction from the oil-dependent Western world. So … Saddam (who had been heavily dependent on American support during his long war with Iran) inquired of the American ambassador at to what she thought would be the American reaction to such a move – and was given the answer that America had no interest in the boundary question with Kuwait … and wanted to stay out of a dispute over Iraq's claim that somewhat now pro-Soviet Kuwait was slant drilling in an attempt to reach Iraqi oil reserves. Saddam thus took this as a "go-ahead" response on America's part. Consequently, in August of 1990, Saddam sent Iraqi troops into largely defenseless Kuwait in order to take over the country. This was supposed to make him a great Iraqi hero ... and a tough Arab leader. But American President Bush had a very different view on the matter than his Iraqi ambassador … and answered the cry of some of the rest of the Arab world in opposition to this takeover. Saudi Arabia was particularly upset, fearing that Saddam's grab of defenseless Kuwait could prove to be merely the first step towards a takeover of an equally defenseless Saudi Arabia (which had never seen the need to possess a strong military). Thus Bush told Saddam to get out of Kuwait. But at this point, this seemed to be an impossible request … as his political reputation would be ruined by such a backdown. So the matter dragged on as both sides, Iraq and a growing American-led coalition, tried to find a diplomatic solution to the problem. Finding none, finally in mid-January (1991) a massive aerial bombardment of the Iraqi forces occupying Kuwait got underway … to which Saddam responded with his own scud missile attack on the 35-nation coalition assembled in Saudi Arabia (but also on Israel). A month later (mid-February) the coalition was ready to move on Saddam's forces in Kuwait … and in very short order threw those very troops out of the country ... with Iraqi troops setting fire to all the Kuwaiti oil wells in their retreat.1 Then this same force followed his troops into Iraq … but halted once it had become clear that Saddam had lost all further ability to conduct military operations. But much criticism was aimed at Bush during all this … at first by the Liberals in Congress for undertaking such an "imperialist" operation in the first place (protests which died away quickly when it became apparent how effective Bush's actions had been) … and then by war hawks who were upset that Bush did not finish the job and just get rid of Saddam. Only later, when Bush's Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney (at that point out of Washington and serving as Halliburton's CEO) was being interviewed, he explained that Bush was well aware that to get involved in trying to reassemble a broken post-Saddam Iraq would come at a huge cost – with no obvious benefits to America. In fact, to do so would be the equivalent of falling into a "quagmire." Wise words … soon forgotten by Cheney himself! 1But these were put out fairly quickly by Texan Red Adair's firefighters … though not before a billion barrels of oil had been lost. Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein (at one point an ally ... in his war with Khomeini's Iran.  Now an adversary President George Bush enjoys Thanksgiving Dinner with U. S. troops stationed in the Persian Gulf President Bush addressing the press  - February 11, 1991 Keesee and Sidwell, p. 633 Gulf War - Air raid over Baghdad January, 1991. Refueling an F-117 bomber over Iraq. Infrared image of a Iraqi telecommunications building about to be blown up by a Stealth-fired intelligent rocket.. Sighted missile targeting Iraq - 1991 A US bomber attack of the Iraqi positions. US tank assault on Iraqi lines - February 1991. Iraqi troops surrendering. US Marines taking Iraqi prisoners. A Saudi soldier inspects a burned-out Iraqi armored vehicle and dead Iraqi solder. America's allied Arab troops celebrating victory. February 1991 - Gulf War or "Desert Storm."  Burning oil well silhouetted by a destroyed Iraqi tank. Wreckage and burning oil fields in Kuwait in the wake of a rapidly retreating Iraqi army. US soldiers and Kuwaiti oil fields set ablaze by retreating Iraqis - 1991 The Gulf War in Kuwait - March 2, 1991 Red Adair's team putting out the Kuwaiti oil well fires started by the retreating Iraqis - 1991 Saddam Hussein is put under international restriction because of the cruel way (employing chemical and biological weapons) he put down the rebellions (encouraged – but not actively supported – by the US) of the Shi'ite and Kurdish communities in Iraq which have long resented tremendously the domination of Iraq by the Sunni community and its political arm, Saddam Hussein's Ba'athist Party United Nations inspectors destroying suspected Iraqi bioweapons - 1996 BUSH OUT ... CLINTON IN The next year (1992) was an election year in America – and Bush was having difficulty in his reelection bid with a sagging economy and a government deficit - which Bush was trying to bring under control. Actually, the economy was rebounding as elections approached in November – something most American voters were not yet aware of. Taking advantage of this situation was billionaire Ross Perot, running quite strongly as an independent – claiming that he held all the answers to a rebounding economy. The race also included, of course, a Democratic Party candidate, the Arkansas governor Bill Clinton. Thus the American vote was spread widely in November, with Clinton getting 43%, Bush 37.5% and Perot 19%. But the electoral college vote was 370 for Clinton and 168 for Bush (none for Perot). Thus Bush was out and Clinton was in as the new American President as of January 1993. Early in his career, Clinton was the youngest governor in the country … an Idealistic Boomer, whose Idealism put him out of office after a single term … but back in office when he put his Idealism aside and led the state the way he understood his people wanted to be led … perhaps a result of his lessons in political Realism he would have learned in his Georgetown University years! He would need that same wisdom now as U.S. president – particularly being married to a rigorously Idealist Boomer wife, Hillary.   Bush, Ross Perot and Bill Clinton during the 1992 Presidential debates William Jefferson Clinton – President: January 20, 1993 – January 20, 2001 Clinton's first Cabinet REALISM REPLACES BOOMER IDEALISM At first it appeared that Clinton would again head down the Idealist path, attempting to bring the American nation under government healthcare programming – and opening the American military to homosexuality … both programs which got blocked by the well-organized Republican Party opposition in Congress, led by hardliner Newt Gingrich (whom the Liberals would love to hate!). Gingrich had just conducted a major Republican Party takeover in Congress … and Clinton realized that he would have to learn to work with this somehow (his wife Hillary unbending in this matter however). As a realist, Clinton took on the matter of the growing national debt – but by increasing taxes rather than cutting back on government expenses (wanted by Newt's Republicans). But it certainly helped – not only slowing up the growth of that debt but actually reducing it somewhat … the last time this would occur before America fell into the habit of running up massively the national debt in the regimes that followed (Bush, Jr., Obama, Trump, and now Biden)! Clinton also (to the distress of his Democratic Party) agreed with Gingrich to shift – at least in part – government "welfare" to instead government "workfare" – involving job training and job placement instead of just money transfers to welfare recipients. He also widened trade relations with neighboring Canada and Mexico – to the horror of Democratic-Party-supporting American Labor, which feared that this would lead to the loss of jobs to both countries. However, instead of losing jobs, this expanded the American economy considerably – and the number of American jobs that went with that expansion. And there was also the electronic communications revolution underway which also increased production greatly in America … and in general in the West – as well as in China.  Gingrich explaining his "Contract with America" to the public - 1994 The media going after Gingrich – November 1995 THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT (DOMA - 1996) One issue that Clinton had to bow before, rather reluctantly, was the move by Republicans in 1996 to pass a bill that refused to recognize – thus offer federal benefits - to homosexual unions. Indeed, homosexuality was a longstanding Christian "no-no." Boomer efforts in the 1970s to liberate American culture from such "authoritarian" standards went nowhere … although it certainly engaged a lot of Christian denominations in the matter when a push was made by younger Americans (and their Liberal mentors) to recognize homosexual unions as legitimate American marriages. Such efforts came to nothing at the time – though every year from that point on, this issue would engage the Christian denominations in having to reconsider their stand on the matter at their national meetings. Not much came of the effort until the mid-1980s when the AIDS virus ripped through the homosexual community like a plague … and brought forward considerably Boomer sympathy – and the desire to take a stronger stand in support of AIDS "victims" (victims not of their own behavior, but victims of Middle America's lack of adequate homosexual sympathy and support). At this point the question of the place of homosexuals in Middle America became a crusading issue for the Boomer Left. But the Boomers had not yet replaced Vet America as the dominating force in American politics. 1989 was a big year for the homosexual community … when Denmark moved to put homosexual unions on a par with male-female marriage; when New York's judiciary ruled that homosexual unions should enjoy the same rent-control protection as marriages; and when the California State Bar Association decided that homosexual unions should enjoy all the rights that California marriages enjoyed. By the early 1990s, some of the Christian denominations were finding a growing number of pro-homosexual advocates gathering strength in the move to allow the conducting of homosexual marriages … not yet advocating the ordaining of homosexuals as priests and pastors – but clearly with this in mind as well. And in 1993, the very Liberal Supreme Court of Hawaii undercut the state's right to refuse marriage rights to homosexuals. This is what finally motivated the bill brought to Congress in 1996 as the Defense of Marriage Act. And with the Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, the bill passed easily. 343 Representatives in the House supported the measure, with only 65 opposed (only one Republican, the rest being Democrats); and 84 Senators supported the measure in the Senate – with the 14 opposing being Democrats (with 2 absentees). Two months later, Clinton signed the bill into law (Congress had the votes to override any vetoing of the bill anyway) … but made it clear that he did so under reluctance – though when he saw how popular the law was received in America he backtracked a bit and appeared to give full support to the concept. Indeed he would swing back and forth in support of the issue – or in backing away from such support – depending on how the political winds changed.   September 21, 1996 – President Clinton signing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Go on to the next section:  America Takes the Lead   Miles H. Hodges