George W. Bush and the Decline of America
Because I haven't written an overtly political post in a long time, I present a rather long and meandering post or rant: you decide.
I have to say that I am happy that I am not an American and that I am not paying taxes to the American Government. If I was, I'd be royally pissed that my taxes were being squandered on an illegal an unjustified war. The cost of the war escalates to perverse levels while 45 million Americans have no health insurance and while untold numbers of Americans live in third world conditions. Why not invest that money in education or health care or even alternate forms of energy?
Everybody knows that the quick 'victory' in Iraq was followed by what we can really only call a quagmire. This could count as one of the most grievous of tactical errors in American history. His war against terror and the personal war against Saddam Hussein has led to unspeakable collateral damage, car bombs, civilian deaths, dead invading troops, dead Iraqi troops, and the spread of terrorist cells into Iraq. Clearly, Bush is a liar and the real objective was not weapons of mass destruction, but oil.
Bush has entrenched his troops in the midst of the second largest oil reserve in the world. Even 75% of the readers of Time believed that the invasion of Iraq was for the purpose of securing an oil supply. This is a reserve that will be depleted, eventually. To me, it is no coincidence that the USA choose to act (in the name of its Christian god) in the middle east, where there happens to be oil, while conveniently ignoring catastrophic human rights abuses in other parts of the world, parts where there is little oil and little geo-political value to the USA. It is no coincidence that Bush used the term 'crusade' when he launched his terrorism counter-offensive.
Was the military action in Afghanistan more successful? The opium trade continues in Afghanistan despite the obscene war on drugs raging in the Americas. Regional war lords are again reclaiming power in the post-invasion Afghanistan. The most powerful army in the world let Osama bin Laden pass through its fingertips. Other than putting Osama on the run, I am not sure that much has been solved. Clearly, Bush was too eager to move on to target number 2.
I am annoyed that Bush's ultra conservative religious right views have meant that contraception information has, largely, been removed from US government websites. It is no secret that he opposed to women's right to choose. When will the people of the United States elect a woman? (and I don't mean some Margaret Thatcher clone.).
I am happy that I live in Canada, one of the countries that stayed out of the war, although it should not be forgotten that Canada increased its troop compliment in Afghanistan, allowing US forces to join the invasion of Iraq. Only the NDP commented on that, largely to deaf ears. The Conservative Party leader, the ridiculous Stephen Harper, was eager to join the Bush & Blair show and send our troops on an illegal campaign in the middle east.
Under Bush, the United States government has lost credibility. At least, in the past, I felt that there was some reason to believe that the USA was acting in a humanitarian way, even when if it pursued its own interests. Maybe I was blind. With Bush, it is all so black and white and I find that very scary.
Technorati Tags: George W. Bush, Iraq, politics
42 comments:
It's reasons like this that my two best friends are moving to Vancouver.
I'm also glad you live in Canada. I fail to see how doing what we said we'd do has caused the United States to lose credibility under President Bush. Your idiotic ideas are laughable. America is still the greatest country on the face of the earth.
And it's comments like the previous one that prove your point.
Luckily not all of us are self-centered arrogants. I worry a lot about my country too. But its ideals are the reasons why I blog to fight back.
I am going to say that I am sorry Bish won. I voted for Kerry, but too many peopel were affraind of the gays and we ended up with Bush. I have been against the war form before it started. I think it has only made things worse. Iraq is now the breeding ground for terrorists. And not only is it ociating tons of money it is costing many lives. I support those who risk their lives in the war and my heart goes out to the families that have lots a loved one or have had a loved one injured.
Gee, this is good so far. It's fascinating to be appreciated and excoriated at the same time.
Excoriated? Isn't that what happens to a baby’s butt when they have severe diaper rash?
I agree, our government has much to answer for and this "we are the greatest the country on the face of the earth" attitude, coupled with their extreme shortsightedness even after they sent their young into this war in Iraq and now with the appointment of Bolton to the UN is just more evidence of their extreme arrogance and disregard for the rest the world. It's the me me me white house baby.
That not withstanding the dems have been very weak and ineffectual as well.
I'll take you over Bush any day. I always feel I have to make declarations of "I didn't vote for him!" to my non-US friends.
(Btw, your tally box is over your sidebar. Is that intentional, or a code blip?)
Code blip, I'm afraid, and I'm too lazy to try and fix it :-)
good lord, Fish...how'd you ever pick up an xtreme right wing commenter?
Good question. They just appear out of thin air it seems.
Thanks for this great post, ZF. It's heartfelt and well said. We can't say it or hear it enough.
Re Mr. Anchovy's Q: Those wingnuts must cruise around the blogosphere looking for non-goose-stepping folks to flame. I mean, how do they all find me?? :-)
Edgar: I'm glad to hear that. I'm an American bound for Toronto.
Your idiotic ideas are laughable.
Mm-hm, and that's why the entire world minus 51% (tops) of the American voting public agree with him.
I agree that Afghanistan was not an ilegal acton.
Wow, my first tag.
Bring TOny Blair down too!! He is the devil!
Good one. I agree with the comments, especially that the war was over oil and not human rights, as you so eloquently put they have ignored everywhere else.
They should have done a proper job in Afganistan first, set up a proper government, secure the country, set up democratice institutions like welfare, job development and courts. They could have even captured that tall Arab guy they were after. Instead they create a whole new problem. I wonder if the average Iraqi is more happy now then he was years ago?
I do feel badly for Americans; many of them feel just as strongly as we do on the subject, and it's not fair that they do not feel represented in their own country. On that page, let us remember that the same could happen here should Mr. Harper ever get elected. Even though we do have problems with our own government, I think we have watched the problems grow in the U.S. and that has hopefully made us smarter as voters.
I also find it ironic that anyone would wage war in the name of oil, which as you said, is a non-renewable resource anyway. Money better spent would be in the line of new sources of energy - but I suppose spending tax dollars on that does not make for fear mongering or great headlines. Bush wants to be remembered for "something" even if that something turns out to be really evil.
I am proud as a Canadian that we resisted joining into this atrocity, and I can only hope that all of this unnecessarily bloodshed will end soon.
Why would we find alternative energy when we have an oil-man as president? We wouldn't want to cut into the family profits, would we?
what a great time for me to click over. I love reading POVs on our embarrassing little mess from outsiders.
The cost of NOT going to war?
Untold amount of American lives.
Wow! It's rare that a post willl leave speechless, but when I read a post as idiotic and generally ignorant as yours I can not help but comment. You have the luxury of living in Canada, and enjoying your freedoms because you live under a defense umbrella provided by the American taxpapers. You say that the war was for oil? First of all how does this make any sense, since we already enjoy some of the lowest oil prices in the world, and war would only threaten the stability of these prices? Secondly, if it was for oil, so what? Is oil not worth fighting for? Perhaps you'll think oil is insignificant as you shiver to death this coming winter if oil were not available. Or maybe the oil that was used to harvest the food you eat, or to deliver that food to the super market wasn't really necessary. I'm sure President Bush invented this need just so he could opress the good people of Iraq. Canada no longer has a military that is capable of providing significant assitance in Iraq or Afghanistan. It is the blood of Americans such as myself that keeps you safe at night. Yes Americans live without health insurance. When did this become any business of yours? What do you care what we do with our tax dollars? America is a country where everyone is provided freedom of opportunity. If you really want health insurance, you go get a job and you pay for it. We don't need everyhing handed to use by Big Brother Government. In the United States we're actually capable of taking care of ourselves. Perhaps you could be honest with yourself. You don't hate Bush because of the war. You hate the war because of Bush.
What kind of crap is that? ZF, you're very kind to leave that nonesense intact. Doesn't Art realize millions of Americans hate this useless war, too?
The cost of NOT going to war?
Untold amount of American lives.
Well said. Untold Iraqi lives, too. Untold limbs, eyes, brains, homes, families.
reojames: I am fairly sure that more Americans have died *because* of the war (I am thinking of troops in Iraq). Iraq was in no position to attack the USA and there was little or no Al Qaeda activity there. We also now know that there were no weapons of mass destruction. How did going to war against Iraq save any American lives?
Please to not pretend to lecture me on how many Americans have died in Iraq. I've seen too many good men buried, and I know what the price of war is. The United States has been at war with Iraq since January of 1991. We maintained a continuous prsensence in the Gulf region, and engaged in combat on a daily basis. One way or another that war was going to end. We chose to end it with a victory. Yes, I said victory. A victory for America, and a victory for the people of Iraq. The people of Iraq who were so desperate for freedom that they were willing to die simply to cast a vote. Do you really think that those people were better off under Saddam Hussein? Perhaps the Kurds were better off when they had chemical weapons falling on their heads. Yes, chemical weapons. The fact is not in dispute. How can you now say that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction when their leader openly used them, and failed to deny their existence. Even your own leader didn't deny their existence prior to the war. He simply disagreed on what the best way was to deal with the problem. Now you're going to re write history and paint Hussein's Iraq like some docile peace loving nation. By threatening oil Husseing threatened the West's very existence. Yes, oil is worth fighting for. Yes, it's worth dying for. These alternate energy sources are not yet here on a great scale. Without oil western society could not exist.
Art:
By the "defense umbrella provided by the American taxpapers" I assume you mean NORAD, which is also funded by Canadian taxpayers.
"I'm sure President Bush invented this need just so he could opress [sic] the good people of Iraq."
I didn't say anything about oppression. In fact, I think that Bush genuinely believes he can install some sort of democratic government in Iraq.
Your last two sentences: "You don't hate Bush because of the war. You hate the war because of Bush" make no sense to me. I am opposed to the war and I feel that Bush misled the world on the war aims and his rationale for invading.
"It is the blood of Americans such as myself that keeps you safe at night."
I think it has more to do with Canada having an inoffensive foreign policy and being a generally peace-loving nation.
As for the oil issue, I know that is controversial. It just seems that it's the only explanation left. You say: "if it was for oil, so what? Is oil not worth fighting for." In other words, lets just take what we want?
Art:
On the contrary, I do not believe that Hussein's Iraq was "like some docile peace loving nation." I do not dispute the chemical weapons usage. But, where are the WMD? Where is all the "stuff" that Colin Powell warned us about during his speech to the UN?
Your own prime minister believed that there were WMD's in Iraq prior to the invasion. In fact he supported the "threat of force" in order to compel Iraq to disarm. You don't have to take my word for it, just look here: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/mar2003/cana-m20.shtml
If we are to believe that Bush lied, then nearly every leader in the western world was in on the deception. I do not believe that the war was for oil. I think that's an excuse that the left uses to try to deligitamize the sacrifices being made over there. I was simply stating that if the war was for oil, then it would not be too terrible of a thing. As for the defense umbrella, I was not simply referring to NORAD. There is also NATO, where other nations have assumed the Canadian responsibility in Europe. The US Navy keeps the seal lanes open in the Atlantic. You also have US airpower moving Canadian troops to whatever peacekeeping mission they wish to engage in. That is of course when they do engage in a peacekeeping mission which does not happened nearly as often as it used to. I have served with the brave men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces. They seem to understand that sacrifices are necessary to secure freedom. I take offense to the insinuation that the military members who are serving Iraq are somehow criminals. Even if we concede that there were no WMD's in Iraq, can we not simply say that it was a mistake, but that the insurgency can not be allowed to win? Bush did what he thought was right with the information he had available at the time. We can not ask for more from any of our leaders.
Hi Zydeco,
I found your blog through L-girl. Excellent post.
I am annoyed that Bush's ultra conservative religious right views have meant...
I'm beyond annoyed. I'm disgusted and ashamed. And yes, Bush has made us lose credibility throughout the world. Perhaps the wingers should look to news sources besides Fox and townhall.com.
ZF,
I think Dubya is either a raving idiot or an evil man (can't quite decide, but leaning toward the evil man explanation), however, I am glad I'm an American. To me, Dubya is the one who is behaving in an un-American way.
I am amazed at the idiots who post comments that hint that Iraq was about ready to attack us. Where did they come up with that brilliant thought? Oh, that's right, Dubya told them that.
As you indicated in your post, yes, it would be better to spend our money on education or health care or even alternate forms of energy. Lots of Americans would prefer this, but we have been lied to so much for so long that many Americans truly believe that some Muslim boogie man is about ready to attack their hometowns. Very sad.
Don't know Liz but I like her!.
I'm proud to be an American. Bush didn't win the first time, and I for one will never let people forget that he will always be the president with an * next to his name "appointed by the Supreme Court." Now he appointed a Supreme Court Justice. There's symmetry in that somewhere.
I'm not sure what this war is about, and nobody's ever been able to explain it to me.
Oil, itself is not a horrible thing, and we have it here. But...
Bush won because he and the right wing played on peoples fears; only the people who have the most right to be scared in the USA, the people of Manhattan, overwhelmingly didn't vote for him.
Was thinking about that all day and wanted to do a post on it, but wanted to keep it light. However..
Well said Fish but don't be too happy you are not an American, neither am I. Guess what, to pay for the huge amount of money spent, Bush has to artificially speculate for oil prices to rise to an all time high so that he gets more dollars for the oil he gets from Iraq. We are now paying for the high gas prices. It will go above US$80 a barrel during winter, just watch. Now the whole world is paying for that war.
Art,
I do NOT believe that any member of any military serving Iraq are criminals.
Lots of people believed that there were WMD in Iraq prior to the war, but you may remember that Bush did not permit the inspectors from finishing their jobs. You say: "can we not simply say that it was a mistake..."
Had the inspectors been allowed to finish the work, Bush's justification for war would have disappeared. No WMD, no war. He had to pre empt them.
Canada participates in NATO and pays for it. The United Staes, by contrast, still owes the UN millions in dues.
Wonderful post, ZF! I agree with the other commenter about enjoying the POV's of outsiders on this mess.
I also agree with Miss Meliss... I find myself making that same declaration, "I didn't vote for him..." But the reality is, we're stuck with him.
I nearly shuddered a while back as there was some talk of changing the Constitutional term limitations--they were trying to extend the presidential term limitations back to the pre-FDR era limits.
I find it interesting that a man who puts himself out there as a "man of God," a "Christian," who by (his) definition is pro-life, would put so many US service-people (as well as citizens) in harm's way, unnecessarily, all for this vanity project, which is nothing more than a personal vendetta from his father's administration. We can't harvest stem cells from aborted fetuses, but somehow it's acceptable to go to a foreign land and kill people all for the "perception" that our government is doing "something" about that pesky Al Queida/terrorism thing. I am sure I speak for others when I say that our government doesn't represent who "I" am... and I am sure there are others who feel the same. And fancy that, isn't that a nuanced part of what the American Revolution was about? Taxation without REPRESENTATION? Pro-life my ass. Like the other commenter said, there are folks living in POVERTY here, yet we are spending BILLIONS on nothing more than a killing machine.
ZF,
A quick look at your own government's webpage shows that Canada has a total of 220 servicemembers deployed in support of UN peacekeeping operations. Don't just take my word for it though, go here: http://www.forces.gc.ca/admpol/eng/defence/peace_supops_e.htm
Canada largely pays its UN dues through PKO. This arrangement worked well, when large numbers of Canadians served overseas. 220 is not a large number. This is out of a grand total of 66,936 troops deployed around the globe and places Canada at 31 on the list of contributing nations. Canada does have 950 troops deployed in Afghanistan and for that we are grateful, however this is a NATO and not a UN operation. Same goes for the Balkans, where the US presently maintains a reinforced brigade. As for US troops as criminals, no you did not directly say that. I took exception to certain incendiary comments posted on this blog that spoke of atrocities, and and illegal war, then the insinuation is that those who participate in such a war are doing so illegally. The precedent is clear from the Nuremberg trials, that one has a duty to resist illegal or immoral orders. Is this what you're advocating? The terrorists in Iraq, or the rest of the world were not created by the actions of the United States. If we pulled our troops out tomorrow, they would still attack. Canada has not been spared because it is a peace loving nation as you say, but rather because at this point in the game it is simply irrelevant on the world stage. If the United States and Britain stop resisting, then get ready for attacks on Montreal or Toronto.
The role of Canada as a peacekeeper is well beyond the scope of my original post. Canada does have a long history of peacekeeping; the United States actively avoided it for years. Canada has a small military and a small population. I can't disagree with you.
..."that one has a duty to resist illegal or immoral orders. Is this what you're advocating?"
I never said anything even remotely close to that. As far as I know, the only illegal acts happaned at Abu Graib.
"If we pulled our troops out tomorrow, they would still attack."
But the terrorists the US & the Coalition of the Willing went after are not the ones responsible for 9/11.
"If the United States and Britain stop resisting, then get ready for attacks on Montreal or Toronto."
It seems to me that there is a correlation between involvment in the war in Iraq and subsequent terrorist attacks. That's why Spain withdrew its troops after 3/11. It may explain why an Iraqi terrorist cell took responsibility for the attacks in London.
I am certain that Canada would have been a bigger target if we had sent troops to Iraq.
Art, you are absolutely right that Canada has not been pulling its weight in UN peacekeeping operations for quite some time now. The current Liberal government likes to talk about peacekeeping, since it is a politically-correct role for Canadian troops, but reality falls far short of rhetoric. Our Afghanistan committment has stretched our ground forces to the point that we simply can't sustain any UN mission beyond a symbolic level. We need not only more defense spending, but also a change in the national attitude toward the military.
Canada sounds better and better everyday.
Bush didn't win the first time, and I for one will never let people forget that he will always be the president with an * next to his name "appointed by the Supreme Court."
Yeah! Right on, Pia!
And he probably didn't win the second time either. There is a mountain of evidence to bring the legitimacy of the 2004 election in question.
Seizethenite: That's what I said, every day, until I decided to make it real. See my blog if you're interested.
Here's Canada in a nutshell: fewer Arts, more Zydeco Fish. :)
People involved in this discussion might want to read this.
Art:
I understand your frustration, particularly being a member (or former member) of the military, with reading criticism of our country. It can be a tough pill to swallow.
I can trace my family's roots back to the 1600s in the U.S. I've got relatives buried from Yorktown to Gettysburg to France to Iwo Jima. I'm extremely proud to call myself an American citizen and of our contributions to the world. We have given the world the likes of William Faulkner, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Luther King, Caesar Chavez, Chief Joseph, Walt Whitman, and Elvis Aron Presley.
But I don't think I've ever stooped so low as to play "my pecker is bigger than yours" in response to a group of people sincerely concerned about how U.S. foreign policy and how it affects the world. It is this very rhetoric pushed by the Bush administration that has pissed off the rest of the world. A hearty debate is one thing; to call someone "idiotic and generally ignorant" as a response to a well-intended response is both jingoistic and rude.
Why choose to pick a fight with Canadians over opinions over our actions. The latest polling data I've seen shows more than half of Americans believe more than half of the U.S. is starting to raise similar questions about the Iraq War.
Jasoba Fett,
I'm all for lively debate. What I'm against is incendiary, false rhetoric that gives ammunition to those people who seek to kill Americans, and destroy our way of life. Accusations were made on this forum with no facts to back them up. When such accusations only weaken the security of your nation, and get your neighbors killed, then yes those statements are stupid and ignorant. I said nothing about the writer of the statements, only the statements themselves. My only comments in reference to Canada were made to illustrate the point that Canada depends on the United States for a large portion of its defense. One can not say that they support those who risk their lives, while at the same time saying that they are involved in an illegal action, and imply that they are the problem. The presumption on this forum seems to be that Bush is evil because he is geared towards unilateralism, and does only what is in the best interest of the United States without regard to the rest of the world. My question is this, What country doesn't have this policy? By their very nature nation-states are compelled to place their interests and the interests of their citizens ahead of the interests of foreign citizens.
G, your comment hits the nail on the head. And Zydeco - one helluva post. As an American, I find myself increasingly having to say "please don't judge all Americans by the idiots in power and their enablers." Not that you're doing any such thing of course.
Peace.
Great post.
Post a Comment