Guess it’s time for the old “are we better off than we were X years ago” slogan. The answer seems pretty clear. And this is just foreign policy.
That “axis of evil”? It’s here now. Thanks, Mr. President
In his first State of the Union Address in January 2002, George W. Bush deployed the expression “axis of evil” to describe the governments of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. Critics jumped on the president for his belligerent rhetoric. But the problem with Bush’s formulation wasn’t his use of the term “evil,” a perfectly apt description of the regimes of Saddam Hussein, the Iranian mullahs, and Kim Jong-il. The real issue was with the “axis” part. With the reference to the Axis powers of World War II, Bush suggested that there was some sort of alliance or cooperation among these three enemies of the United States. His turn of phrase indicated that they represented a unitary problem and implied that in taking on one, America would be dealing with all three.
Nearly five years later, we can see the damage caused by the president’s too-cute slogan and the muddled thinking behind it. By failing to distinguish clearly among the overlapping security threats presented by rogue states, nuclear proliferators, and supporters of terrorism, Bush helped bring his own nightmare to life. Thanks to his foreign policy, many of the world’s dictators do now function as a kind of anti-American axis, in a way they didn’t when he made that speech.
But the president’s biggest act of axis-enhancement was tying up our military in Iraq and antagonizing our allies. While the global cop was busy in Baghdad, the world’s other worst villains staged a jailbreak. They understood that Bush couldn’t readily respond to their provocations with force. The opportunity cost of occupying Iraq has also been felt in Syria and Sudan, among the other places where evil has gone unchecked for want of effective American leadership. At another level, our Bush- and Iraq-inspired unpopularity has spurred an informal new post-Cold War anti-American International, with Hugo Chávez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and George Galloway running for General Secretary.
It’s amazing how prescient Kim Jong-il is. He knew when he started his nuclear program that years later George W. Bush would be president, declare North Korea eveil, start a war in Iraq, and that North Korea would have this opportunity to act with impunity… Clever bastard.
It’s amazing how prescient Kim Jong-il is. He knew when he started his nuclear program that years later George W. Bush would be president, declare North Korea evil, start a war in Iraq, and that North Korea would have this opportunity to act with impunity… Clever bastard.
As a person who lives next door to two of the axis counrtries, I say ABSOLUTELY YES! Bush triggered this new arms race with his “Axis of Evil” speech.
Those countries heard the speech as a threat… a threat to be taken seriously, his invasion of Iraq.
Iran and North Korea decided they need a deterrent against invasion or attack from America … and nukes are the great equalizer of our time. So, they restarted or accelerated their nuke programs. (Bush made this easy for them by his near total disengagement.)
This isn’t something that just occurred to me… I’ve been saying it since the day after Bush’s speech… “Bush is going to trigger an arms race.” And, indeed, he did.
When I heard bush spouting about how tax cuts are helping average Americans, I was counting change for my only ‘vacation’ this year – a 4 day weekend trip.
With this kinda logic, if I say I’m a billionare, then, POOF!, I’m a billonare.
Thanks Mr., President!
Max
You know, there is a particular philosophy out there that fits political interests perfectly. You start with a solution. And then you go about looking for or creating a problem which you can then provide your solution. I just can’t remember what it’s called… Anyhoo, it’s probably the single most effective method of governing… EVER! Actually, it’s sounds a LOT like IT…
In the eyes of British voters who returned George Galloway to office — he’s characterized as a “patriot” — instead of a patsy like the lapdog at #10.
Americans who can’t get outside parochial definitions of the world probably don’t begin to comprehend that. Life and death for much of the world may revolve around America. It’s not true for politics and ideology.
Bush’s tunnel vision has created a more unstable world, more nations hating America and a presidency that is wrought with lies, corruption and ignorance. When Bush declared three countries “evil” he was at the same time declaring himself “Good” (with a capital G). Once that label is put on, THERE IS NO ROOM for anything else. This is not a view from a man who is confident in his power, but rather a man who frets that his power is in imminent danger. OR a man who wants to wield new-found power that was granted to him, sort of like that feeling when he rode, for the first time, that brand new tricycle when he was fourteen years old. What ever happen to the integrity he was supposed to bring back to the Whitehouse? Bush’s legacy won’t only be that of the worst president in American history, but also, the MOST DELLUSIONED. He is so caught up in his Good v. Evil ideology that you have to wonder how a psycho is running the asylum.
now that you can be legally rendered to a third world nation and interrogated vigorously without access to anyone who might want to help you, i would suggest that unless you are rich or famous you keep your mouth shut except to speak praises of our glorious leader george w. bush and all of his magnificient policies.
it’s the only way we can bring democracy and freedom to the rest of the world.
What it comes down to is that Washington has no interest in America except as collateral for borrowing trillions of dollars to spend and steal. Their real dreams are to be Queen of Arabia. I just hope the collapse of the US comes quickly and doesn’t drag out too many decades.
#13 I like your #6 comment better.
Basic of political science courses: leaders wanting to amplify their power, have, or create, a foreign enemy to scare people with, then offer to protect them at a cost.
You have to start with a credible bit of a threat (Yellow Hoards to invade San Diago – thank you John Burch Society, Communist take over Hollywood and from there infiltrate our kids – thank you Senator McCarthy), skin it and make a drum out of the hide which you bang on so loudly that it covers any rational challenges.
For those of you who are so worried about dying from a terrorist threat here in the homeland, compare the probability of that with the recent study that an average of 195,000 preventable deaths happened due to medical errors in hospitals. (Google Hospital deaths for the details). Which is more likely to kill you?
I know the drumming makes it rather hard to hear that, but what the heck, it’s your funeral. The UK, Isreal, and Sri Lanka all have experience with how effective it is to take the fight to the terrorists. You have to do it, but not at the cost of ignoring other real problems at home.
On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four planes and attacked New York and Washington, killing more than 3000 Americans.
In response, the War of Terror was launched and the Axis of Evil was named… Nations that harbor and support terrorists.
Interestingly enough, the terrorists were predominately from Saudi Arabia and the the terror network was based in Afganistan. Why are these nations not part of the Axis of Evil? Especially Saudi Arabia…
“Why are these nations not part of the Axis of Evil?”
Oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil, oil…
#17 “OhForTheLoveOf ” – please stop making sense! It bothers the neocons on this board!
Sounds more like the President was prescient in identifying the enemies. He could have said Libya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, or others, but instead identified the ones that were the true problem. These weapons generally don’t get developed in 4 years unless you have a dream team of scientists backing you up. The New York Times reported in 2002 that North Korea’s program had been going on for years.
#16 – It’s true that leaders may use the tactics you describe to amplify their power. It’s true that Mccarthy did that. It’s true that Bush is doing that now. It should be said that there are other methods and better leaders use better methods… So I agree with you, with certain reservations.
But then you started talking about our statistical probability of being killed by terrorists… I cannot agree more. As a people, our absolute worst skills are distaster preparedness and threat assessment. We suck at it. We suck hard. We let fear trump logic and reason and so we develop a terrorist attck evacuation plan for a grade school in Butte, Montana.
wow, these bozos have really done some damage…. ….on the verge of nuclear apocalypse now… …maybe that’s what they really desired…
Too bad out of the so-called Axis Of Evil, Bush blew our wad on the one that DIDN’T have any WMD’s. His response to N. Korea: a stern warning. Time to call in Team America!
24. durka durka, mohammed, jihad.
3 Iran and North Korea decided they need a deterrent against invasion or attack from America … and nukes are the great equalizer of our time.
Agreed.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand that when POTUS makes a speech listing your country as an enemy – and then attacks another country on that list – it is time to either wave the white flag, or get your Nuclear weapons program up to speed.
That they chose to “stay the course” and not “cut and run” should be no surprise. Sadaam had the same problem – a dictator cannot appear weak…
Kim & company must be laughing and saying “I told you so!” – after Dubya’s refusal to guarantee that we would not attack NK before they had nukes, but now Condi is saying we won’t attack NK…
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2552850
I’m sure the Iranians are doing a lot of “nudge, nudge – wink, wink” amongst themselves, too…
What nuclear non-proliferation credibility is left in the world after Khan was able to walk-away – after giving an “apology”?
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/27/170108.shtml
Mr. Khan was allowed to go free and keep his nuclear black market gains in exchange for a televised apology – in English. The overwhelming majority of Pakistanis speak only Urdu.
Can someone please explain to me how Bush (elected in 2000) caused North Korea to start building nuclear weapons in the early 1990s?
#27 – Tea leaves dude… Everyone knows that Asians can use tea to predict the future….
27 …caused North Korea to start building nuclear weapons…
Dubya didn’t give them a reason to start their program, he just gave them a strong incentive to finish it.
And tipping his hand, because he thought the war in Iraq was going to be a cakewalk, just gave them even more time to finish.
27 …in the early 1990s?
Hmmm, shortly after Gulf War One??
When saber-rattling devolves into combat, every despot in the world takes notice – and takes action.
They don’t get to the top, and stay there, by showing weakness when challenged.
#27, Because that is when Donald Rumsfeld’s company went and sold North Korea the technology to build some nuclear power plants. Actually, it wasn’t just the technology, it was TWO DAMN WORKING REACTORS. And it was in the last year of Clinton’s Administration
Then the next year Rumsfeld left ABB to join Bushes cabinet. Bush dropped Clinton’s policy of diplomacy with NK and started the policy of Axis of Evil. NK responded by pledging to build a bomb. There is even evidence that Rumsfeld lobbied certain American officials to allow the sale.
In fairness though, Clinton’s administration promoted a light water reactor. These produce the least amounts of material. Clinton also promised food and fuel in return for NK allowing inspectors to watch the reactors. NK kicked out the inspectors and changed their policy after Bush stopped the food and fuel shipments. Tensions that had greatly eased under Clinton again became very bitter under Bush.
The slogan was actually penned by a canuck speechwriter, that little toad (google his picture) David Frum, ex-white house speechwriter.
What I find interesting is how many people bought the rhetoric of morality in that one. Diplomacy 101 teaches that States don’t have morals, they have interests. It was in the Bush admin’s interest to invoke the ‘axis’ – and apparently it worked sufficiently well.
#30…Mr. Fusion….Bush didn’t stop the food shipments. Kim told the relief agencies that his country no longer needed them, so please leave.
#30…Mr. Fusion…..just to save you asking for sources…..here you go. The headline of this article is typical BBC…..it notes U.S. threat….but the article is actually about why food aid came to an end. If this isn’t enough for you….try googling….north korean food relief.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4568182.stm
Tensions were definitely lower under Bill Clinton. It’s very easy when they don’t interfere with your nuke program.
I got to admit, I find it fascinating reading into the mindsets of these comments. For SOME odd reason everyone here thinks government is doing something for their citizenry. And for another odd reason, some of you actually believe that war is a good thing for your country cause it makes you safer. History repeats itself. I’m still waiting for the War to End All Wars to end…