Weaknesses in Bush advisors show up in July 4 Speech

| | Comments (0)

by David Remer July 8, 2003 --PoliWatch.Org--

Patricia Wilson wrote an article about George Bush's speech at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base on July 4. Bush made three statements that reflect the lack of understanding and weakness of his thinking and that of his advisors and speech writer. The President is quoted:

"The United States will not stand by and wait for another attack or trust in the restraint and good intentions of evil men," Bush said on a sun-scorched day in the U.S. heartland.

There is a lot in this statement to be criticized. First, that "we will not stand by and wait for another attack" implies that we will do all of the attacking first. This simple statement is becoming a cornerstone of America's foreign policy, in rhetoric, if not in action. As a foreign policy, this statement has grave consequences for America's support around the world. Leaders of Russia, China, Germany, France, Japan and a host of other countries have not forgotten the lessons of WWII, when Hitler, in the name of self defense, became an aggressor of unequaled magnitude. Our allies have no choice but to be very concerned by such a policy held by the most powerful nation in the world.

I say in rhetoric if not in action, because, far more dangerous nations like Iran and N. Korea, are not on Bush's radar screen when it comes to first strike policy. This is sending countries and hostile groups throughout the world the message that if you don't have any ability to withstand America's might, you have two choices. First, to succumb to the wishes of America and its allies or, second, to develop and brandish weapons of mass destruction as soon as possible, (since America does not appear to have an appetite for war against those who could inflict large numbers of American military casualties). If rogue nations and groups read Bush's policy in this manner, our allies must become very concerned about the weapons black market and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in their own regional areas and the escalation of terrorism.

Additionally, Bush's statement places the priority for the protection of America on aggression, rather than home security. Bush's statement is consistent with his lack of adequate funding for homeland defense and his unfunded mandates to the states regarding homeland security. America's emphasis on aggression is of grave concern to all peace loving persons in the world as well as third world nations who want the opportunity to develop outside of America's sphere of influence.

President Bush has taken the giant step beyond the MAD (mutually assured destruction) policy of the cold war era to one of unilateral dominance in the world through opponent assured destruction. The military industrial complex is developing new weapons for aggression. Of these is a gun capable of shooting 1 million rounds per minute, design of low yield nuclear weapons for use against small targets such as a building or bunker, furthering development of a 'star wars' defense system with orbiting attack vehicles strategically placed around the world, as well as a supersonic bomber capable of reaching any target in the world in two hours. The net outcome of all this aggressive war development will inevitably be a renewed arms race between the US and nations like China and Russia.

Make no mistake, whether intentional or not, using terrorism as a reason for development of such destructive weapons and power, is not going to hide the potential threat of the U.S. toward a future confrontation with China. China has no choice, based on historical US hostility and aggressive posture toward communism, but, to view President Bush's actions as preparation and prelude to eventual confrontation with China. China constitutes the single largest threat to the American economic system over the next two or three decades. The potential GDP growth in China is staggering and its wealth of low cost labor and development of cutting edge technology poises China to become the next economic giant in world trade and financial development. President Bush's escalation of US military development, will, without doubt, spur similar military development in China raising the specter of global war again in just two or three generations from now.

Of equal concern in Bush's statement is the remark, we will not "trust in the restraint and good intentions of evil men". First, this statement stresses the U.S.'s willingness and confidence to judge who are, and who are not, 'Evil Men', regardless of their restraint or good intentions. This is an alarming statement. For it presupposes that the US will judge the evil nature of a leader's soul and no amount of restraint or good intentions or positive actions will be permitted to alter that judgment. Based solely on the judgment that a leader or group is evil in nature, they shall become a target of US aggression and first strike regardless of what they do or how they act. This should raise alarms in the minds of all persons throughout the world. This kind of thinking belongs to a Hitler, Pol Pot, or Mao Tse Tung, not to an American head of state.

President Bush is also quoted in the same article and on the same occasion:

"Without America's active involvement in the world, the ambitions of tyrants would go unopposed, and millions would live at mercy of terrorists. With Americans' active involvement in the world, tyrants learn to fear, and terrorists are on the run," he said.

It is simply not true that without America's involvement, tyrants would thrive. Where tyrants rise and threaten their neighbors, the neighbors themselves will resist at first, then join and put down the tyrant, with, or without American involvement. If the European community perceived an imminent threat from Saddam Hussein, the European community would have responded. The fact simply was that Hussein posed no imminent threat to Europe.

Far more erroneous in judgment, is the second sentence above. When Bush states tyrants learn to fear when America becomes involved, he truly is revealing the ignorance and lack of understanding required to competently manage U.S. foreign policy. Tyrants are born of fear. They are shaped by fear. Tyrants are motivated and emboldened by fear. Any grown up who has reflected upon the bully of their childhood recognizes that the bully they were so afraid of, was himself, a very frightened person who used aggression to stay his fear. Tyrants are already afraid; else, they would not have become tyrants. To target them is to raise their fear and make even more of a tyrant of them.

A very successful strategy of the Civil Rights movement was to protest by making one's presence inescapable, and, to respond and react to aggressors without aggression. This strategy was successful, because it brought to the media the contrast between the passive nature of protesters and the ugly violence of the bigots for all to see. By targeting what Bush claims are potential tyrants, it is very likely he will make tyrants of persons who otherwise might not have been, and create hostilities that otherwise might never have been.

It is becoming extremely important for Americans and the world to look closely at the words of President Bush. For, while they sound reasonable enough on the surface, their implications, and consequences are often pregnant with new conflicts, troubles and costs for the American people that otherwise might never have come to pass.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.


Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by David R. Remer published on July 9, 2003 9:37 AM.

Today's Headlines - '04 Election Issues was the previous entry in this blog.

Want Campaign Finance Reform? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Offsite Links