T Nation

Could Bush Be Right?

I think that the following article illustrates perfectly that Bush’s plan is working. Bed wetting, posie sniffing, liberals just can’t seem to grasp the idea of peace through strength.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0503060337mar06,1,4918463.story?coll=chi-newsopinion-hed&ctrack=2&cset=true

                                   Who on Earth wants to be known as the last foe of freedom?

Not Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who Thursday joined a chorus of leaders telling Syrian President Bashar Assad to end his nation’s three-decade occupation of Lebanon.

Not Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who abruptly announced plans to hold the first free, multiparty election in his country’s history.

Not President Mahmoud Abbas, whose path to Palestinian independence is now blocked less by Israel than by peace-averse militant groups such as Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

And certainly not the brave peoples of Afghanistan, of Georgia, of Ukraine, of Iraq, who have raised loud their voices for freedom, often at peril to their lives. Each day, new tremors signal populist demands in lands where freedom has not thrived. This is, then, one of those explosive moments when history is written not in books, but screaming headlines.

Now it is Lebanon’s turn, with citizens by the millions heralding a “cedar revolution.” Is it possible that Iran, with its repressive and unpopular mullahs, could be next? And in sclerotic Syria, who today would buy Assad futures?

That, of course, is the dilemma dictators face in these moments of tumult: When history lurches, where will it next land?

For that matter, why does it lurch? Why is this happening now?

The prophet pro tem of the world’s spreading freedom movement is Walid Jumblatt, the influential patriarch of Druze Muslims in Lebanon. He has long been a critic of the U.S. and Israel, but of late has been a thorn to the occupying Syrians. Since he spoke to a Washington Post columnist on Feb. 23, his assessment–heresy to many listeners–has resonated around the globe:

“It’s strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.”

On the same evening Jumblatt spoke, a hitherto unthinkable headline–it, too, continues to ripple around the world–erupted on the Web site of the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel: “Could George W. Bush be right?”

Beneath that radical thought, writer Claus Christian Malzahn likened Bush’s then pending visit to Germany to President Ronald Reagan standing before the Brandenburg Gate in 1987: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”

In January, setting the tone of his second term, Bush had told reporters: “I believe democracy can take hold in parts of the world that have been condemned to tyranny. And I believe when democracies take hold, it leads to peace.”

The response in Der Spiegel: “Bush’s idea of a Middle Eastern democracy imported at the tip of a bayonet is, for [German liberals], the hysterical offspring of the American neo-cons. Even German conservatives find the idea that Arabic countries could transform themselves into enlightened democracies somewhat absurd. … Europeans today–just like the Europeans of 1987–cannot imagine that the world might change. … We Europeans always want to have the world from yesterday, whereas the Americans strive for the world of tomorrow.”

In a follow-up article posted Friday, Der Spiegel asked, “How quickly can the virus of democracy spread?”

That is the question for other despots as they contemplate the likely fate of Saddam Hussein. They’re trapped in their own spider holes. No longer can they survive solely by stoking public hatred of the Great Satan. As citizens who witness democracy in neighboring Iraq and upheaval in Lebanon ask, “Why not us?” the enemy of the tyrant becomes not so much the United States, but the aspirations of his own people.

No movement has only one catalyst: Palestinians, for example, needed to be free of Yasser Arafat before independence could emerge as an option. But Washington’s muscular diplomacy unarguably is playing a crucial role throughout the Mideast. For one repressive regime after another, the sight of American soldiers at long last enforcing United Nations resolutions–and bestowing democracy on a subjugated people–surely must concentrate the mind.

History written in headlines can reverse course just as fast. We are a long way from knowing whether the still unfinished liberation of Iraq helps transform a troubled region. But for the foes of freedom, the Mideast must feel like a suddenly smaller place.

What a great post.

Of course, the liberal doves will just find something else to whine about. World peace on the horizon? Maybe in our lifetimes? Big deal. We’re still killing the environment or whatever.

Besides, it’s all about stealing oil, right? The US isn’t actually the honorable fist of justice, it’s all about our selfishness and greed.

Unless it’s a democrat in the White House.

Very acurate.

The liberals will disagree because they cannot overcome the hatred they have for Bush.

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
“It’s strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.”
[/quote]

That can’t possibly be. The war was about oil, black helicopters, WMD. We shouldn’t have done that.

I think this is one huge Bird being shot at the Peaceniks out there who don’t think freedom is for all.

That has to be one of the most inspiring quotes I’ve ever heard.

They can see liberty breaking out in their midst, and people have an ingrained desire to taste it for themselves

Guys, Come, on. You all know that all this stuff is just one big coincidence. Actually it probably would have all happened sooner had we not invaded Iraq. I mean Uday and Qusay were practically begging thier father to hold free elections and to use his great influence to persuade other dictators to release thier reins as well. It really is a shame that this illegal war had to take place and slow the progress of the rapidly changing (for the better) middle east.

Why Bush will be lucky if the world community doesn’t arrest him and try him as a war criminal. HE authorised our troops to take funny pictures of naked terrorists, which is strictly prohibited by the geneva convention.

He ordered our secret underground weapons unit to launch an earthquake in the indian ocean to divert attention from the middle east so we could steal more oil without anyone looking. Then he tries to take credit for relief efforts when he is the one who started the tsunami, plus he should have put much more effort into the relief effort, our country should have made up much more than 50% of the total relief effort.

And now his latest evil deed, an itailian reporter who bush knew was going to uncover his war crimes after she secretly got “captured” by terrorists, gets shot under bush’s direct order. There is even some speculation from the female reporter that bush might have actually been manning the maching gun turret himself. She can’t be 100% sure though because her car was going fast and swerving making it hard to make faces out.

On a side note, if any of you want to go across the brooklyn bridge, you will have to pay me 5 dollars a peice, I just bought it yesterday.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
“It’s strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.”

That can’t possibly be. The war was about oil, black helicopters, WMD. We shouldn’t have done that.

I think this is one huge Bird being shot at the Peaceniks out there who don’t think freedom is for all.

That has to be one of the most inspiring quotes I’ve ever heard.

They can see liberty breaking out in their midst, and people have an ingrained desire to taste it for themselves
[/quote]

I agree. One of the most inspiring quotes regarding the results of the American invasion of Iraq. I think the dripping libs on this site are not going to respond to this one so the thread drops in the ranks as quickly as possible and eventually vanishes.

The latest, greatest changes started because Arafat died. Pure and simple.

http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_Interventions_WBlumZ.html

Wow Jay, can I get you some more ice for your Kool-Aid? Here’s a quote from your link you posted:

So the fact that IRAQ INVADED ANOTHER COUNTRY TO STEAL THEIR RESOURCES had nothing to do with it, right? It’s just OUR greed, right? You liberal guys can say all you want but this (the war on terror, our invasion of Iraq, our strong stance and willingness to follow through with force) is working. Sorry that you were wrong.

Maybe your Kool-Aid is sour grape flavor?

[quote]michaelv wrote:
The latest, greatest changes started because Arafat died. Pure and simple.[/quote]

No. the latest, greatest changes came about because of Freedom. In a 113 day span, over 100 million people, on two different continents got their first taste of self determination by being able to cast a vote that really mattered. That was something that had never happened.

We take it for granted that we can do and be anything we want. We are born free. We live free. We die free. Most of the folks in the Middle East have never been free for a single day in their lives. Freedom, liberty, self-determination - that’s some powerful stuff.

Arafat’s death was a good thing for peace, but not the only reason for this recent outbreak of freedom in the world. The biggest reason is that we are over there and giving them hope.

Good post RJ.

I think it’s funny that we are all agreeing that Arafat’s death was a positive step for peace when he won a Nobel Prize for Peace back in 1994. I like irony.

Lothario,

Did any of us seriously think that Arafat was a man of peace in 1994?

I thought it demeaned the award.

It will be interesting to see if any of the “Bush is Hitler” crowd, ever admits their error.

I’ll bet many of the moderate liberals will eventually state that they had their reservations, but the pro-active stance taken by GWB has borne fruit.

AlDurr, tme, POX, 100meters/lumpy? Not a chance.

We will have the satisfaction of watching the continued deterioration and marginalization of the liberal left.

JeffR

Calling Makkun!!!

Der Spiegel suggesting Bush may have been right?

No way!!!

What’s next from them? Saddam and Hitler actually shared many characteristics?

No way!!!

JeffR

P.S. My love for you continues unabated!!!

I think csmonitor has an excellent article on the subject

Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried.
-Winston Churchill

While breaking authoritarian regimes is a great thing in the long term, in the short term you might be frightened to learn who actually gets elected. The nazis won in open elections. Hopefully the extremists don’t also.

You guys really need to consider the fact that some people don’t want democracy, some people don’t like our way of life. I am a “bleeding heart liberal” (AKA man who thinks on his own). You need to read into things more. The attacks on Sept. 11th were a result of our foreign policy that supports Israel. Period. Arabs have been around for a long time, and they never hated us until we got involved in their affairs and handed Palestine to arrogant Zionists who thought they can simply take land back after an absence of over 1800 years.

You wanna talk about free elections? What about Sept.11 1973? Look up Allende in Chile. GO read about it. He was elected in free elections, but his social democrat viewpoints about nationalizing the copper industry in CHile would have hurt business interests in the US. Therefore, we staged a military coup during which Allende, symbolically, would not leave the Chilean white house (modeled after our own) as it was getting bombed by the Chilean air force. He was killed. The US then installed a facist puppet who murdered thousands of his own people. DONT TALK TO ME ABOUT FREE ELECTIONS. Its all about money, not Democracy. If Iraw grew carrots instead of oil, would we have invaded? Free elections in Afghanistan = the highest opium production in the history of that country. HAHA.

You know, Great Britain invaded Iraq way back when, amd history is repeating itself.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/iraq/britain_iraq_03.shtml

JeffR Darling,

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Calling Makkun!!!

Der Spiegel suggesting Bush may have been right?

No way!!![/quote]

Just shows how balanced the liberal press can be. No problem with that.

[quote]What’s next from them? Saddam and Hitler actually shared many characteristics?

No way!!![/quote]

Never … no wait - yes, they did: an ugly moustache. Case closed - you were right! Now I see the light… :wink:

[quote]JeffR

P.S. My love for you continues unabated!!![/quote]

Too bad you’re against gay marriage - we would be such a lovely couple. :wink:

Makkun

I hate Bush.

But nonetheless I’m as excited and as hopeful as anybody else that Iraqi’s are feeling the beauty of democracy. And I’ll give kudo’s to Bush for his current handling of Syria. But while you guys love to forget, for bush to be right, he’d have to go into a time machine to change the rationale for going to war. The reasons have evolved over time, but initially these reasons involved, WMD and ties to Al queda.

example: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on ABC?s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, ?We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.?

and this: Powell talking to U.N. ?My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.?

That’s the one that had me going, because Powell you trust.

But Republican language has a way of evolving and it’s media machine is so effective. Well polled language delivered to every pundit and pol on the right has a way of convincing people.
(check Luntz’s reports to repubs. to get an idea how these talking points develop) here’s a rare moment of reality from Luntz (pollster and framer for the right)

“Invading Iraq protected us from nothing. Invading Iraq made us more susceptible to Iraq-sponsored terrorism, not less. We were winning the War On Terror, but the decision to invade Iraq distracted us from that goal, and now we are in danger of losing the War On Terror. We have fallen seriously behind, and it is vitally important to our nation’s security to start implementing policies that will reduce the threat of global terrorism.”

and this:

What Matters Most

   1. "9/11 changed everything" is the context by which everything follows. No speech about homeland security or Iraq should being without a reference to 9/11.
   2. The principles of "prevention and protection" still have universal support and should be addressed prior to talking about Iraq.
   3. "Prevention at home can require aggressive action abroad" is the best way to link a principle the public supports with the policies of the Administration. "It is better to fight the War on Terror on the streets of Baghdad than on the streets of New York or Washington."
   4. "Terrorism has no boundaries, and neither should efforts to prevent it." Talk about how terrorism has taken the lives of the British, the Spanish, Italians, Germans, Israelis, innocents from all across the globe. Remind listeners that this is truly an international challenge. "Americans are not the only target."
   5. "The world is a better place without Saddam Hussein." Enough said.

link to memo:

Sound familiar…This is the kool-aid you guys drink from politicians and pundits that have little to no respect for your intellect. Anyway now the keyword is democracy, because suprise democracy is something Americans like. The problem is the people in these potential democracies HATE US, specifically our policies toward them, so them voting for a leader to represent their hate for us, well that’s not such a great thing. Just think about how many would vote for Osama or similar if they had a chance. Then what would do?

So is Bush right? No. Is the right ever right? not really (but they don’t care see utter disregard for voters in above memo). Is democracy good? yes democracy is good.(Of course I’m sure you guys were booing when Bush said no nation building in 2000 right?)

http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/./1/.1110327520531.bert-sadam.jpg

JeffR,

[quote]makkun wrote:

What’s next from them? Saddam and Hitler actually shared many characteristics?

No way!!!

Never … no wait - yes, they did: an ugly moustache. Case closed - you were right! Now I see the light… ;-)[/quote]

You made me think - and I did some research and found a shocking truth. They even new the same people!

http://www.bertisevil.tv/pages/bert003.htm
http://www.bertisevil.tv/pages/bert063.htm

Now I am really worried!

Makkun

PS: Sorry for the highjack, just couldn’t resist. :wink:

http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/./1/.1110327610289.bert4.gif

And here’s the final proof:

I am worried!

Makkun

PPS: Highjack finally over.

Jeesh why is it that you ultra conservative, I love Bush types can’t make your point without name calling?

I’m neither party–I think the party system is what fucks up the process. I just vote for solid people not parties.

But if I don’t think Bush is solid or that a republican based policy is best that makes you a posie sniffing pansy?
Pretty tough words on the computer. This is exactly the kind of division that the party system creates. Aren’t we all Americans after all?

As far as the strength through force comment. Are you currently serving or have you? Ever been to these places or in a war zone for that matter? I have, let me tell you it is a lot easier to formulate the opinions that you have without ever spending any time over there. If you had you might have some serious questions about what the end result of all this is and maybe you might question if this is really a “success” for Bush or America for that matter. It is a success in some regards. We have definitely bolstered the ranks of several terrorist organizations!