the most famous words of his presidency so far

G

Guest

Guest
WASHINGTON (Tribune Media Services) -- They are the most famous words of his presidency so far.

In his January 29 State of the Union speech, identifying Iran, Iraq and North Korea as the U.S. military's next targets in the war against terrorism, President Bush said: "States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world."

"Axis of evil." You must admit, it's a good line. But it's not original. Bush stole it out of the last book he read: "Foreign Policy for Dummies."

Not for the first time, Bush was trying to wrap himself in the mantle of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who linked Germany, Italy and Japan as the enemy Axis during World War II. But Bush's misuse of the "A" word had just the opposite effect. It didn't identify him with FDR. It showed what a rank amateur in foreign policy he still is.

For starters, there was a real connection between Germany, Italy and Japan. They were active partners in the war against the Allies. There is no connection between Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Iran and Iraq are sworn enemies. And North Korea has close ties with nobody. In fact, the only possible reason Bush added North Korea to the list — instead of, say, Syria or Yemen or Somalia — was to show he isn't just going after Muslim countries.

Bush's comic attempt to link Iran, Iraq and North Korea makes no sense. Their only connection is: Bush doesn't like them. But are they even our enemies?

Over the last couple of years, Iran and North Korea have taken serious steps toward improving relations with the United States. At the prodding of the Clinton administration, North Korea agreed to stop the production of nuclear weapons, suspended nuclear testing and promised to undertake historic talks about unification with South Korea. And what thanks does North Korea get from President Bush? A kick in the groin.

Same with Iran. Mohammad Khatami, Iran's new, moderate president -- who has openly espoused restoration of normal relations with the United States -- was one of the first Muslim leaders to condemn the September 11 attacks and the brand of Islam that inspired them. "Terrorism is doomed," he told the world, "and the international community should stem it and take effective measures in a bid to eradicate it."

And, in the months after September 11, few countries offered as much support. Iran supported the U.S. and the Northern Alliance's efforts to overthrow the Taliban. It joined international talks, led by the U.S., to shape a new government. It agreed to rescue and return American fliers downed on Iranian soil. It even allowed American relief food to be unloaded in an Iranian port on the Persian Gulf. And for this, our message is: "Thank you very much. You're evil."

Iraq, of course, is a different story. No thaw in relations there. But no threat to the U.S., either. And that's the point. As dangerous as Saddam Hussein may be, Iraq poses no security threat to the United States or its neighbors today. True, Iraq refuses to readmit UN weapons inspectors. But Bush never mentioned resumption of inspections until after September 11. Their absence is hardly sufficient reason, now, for declaring war on Iraq.

One other connection missing in Bush's newfangled foreign policy: any connection to what the war on terror is, supposedly, all about. Let's not forget that the war on terror began in response to the attacks of 9/11. It was aimed at capturing Osama bin Laden, destroying his al Qaeda network and punishing those countries that support or harbor them.

If those are still the goals of our war on terror -- and when did they change? -- Iran, Iraq and North Korea don't even qualify. They have given no financial support to bin Laden. They harbor no nests of al Qaeda members. They don't subscribe to bin Laden's extremist form of Islam. They are not model governments, but that doesn't mean we have any justification to invade them.

Following the September 11 attacks, the word among our European allies was: "Americans used to believe the world belonged to them; now, they know they belong to the world."

Unfortunately, George Bush has already unlearned that important lesson. He thinks the world belongs to him -- and he has the right to declare war, anytime, on anybody he wants. All he has to do is call them evil.
 
Unregistered said:
WASHINGTON (Tribune Media Services) -- They are the most famous words of his presidency so far.

In his January 29 State of the Union speech, identifying Iran, Iraq and North Korea as the U.S. military's next targets in the war against terrorism, President Bush said: "States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world."

"Axis of evil." You must admit, it's a good line. But it's not original. Bush stole it out of the last book he read: "Foreign Policy for Dummies."

Not for the first time, Bush was trying to wrap himself in the mantle of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who linked Germany, Italy and Japan as the enemy Axis during World War II. But Bush's misuse of the "A" word had just the opposite effect. It didn't identify him with FDR. It showed what a rank amateur in foreign policy he still is.

For starters, there was a real connection between Germany, Italy and Japan. They were active partners in the war against the Allies. There is no connection between Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Iran and Iraq are sworn enemies. And North Korea has close ties with nobody. In fact, the only possible reason Bush added North Korea to the list — instead of, say, Syria or Yemen or Somalia — was to show he isn't just going after Muslim countries.

Bush's comic attempt to link Iran, Iraq and North Korea makes no sense. Their only connection is: Bush doesn't like them. But are they even our enemies?

Over the last couple of years, Iran and North Korea have taken serious steps toward improving relations with the United States. At the prodding of the Clinton administration, North Korea agreed to stop the production of nuclear weapons, suspended nuclear testing and promised to undertake historic talks about unification with South Korea. And what thanks does North Korea get from President Bush? A kick in the groin.

Same with Iran. Mohammad Khatami, Iran's new, moderate president -- who has openly espoused restoration of normal relations with the United States -- was one of the first Muslim leaders to condemn the September 11 attacks and the brand of Islam that inspired them. "Terrorism is doomed," he told the world, "and the international community should stem it and take effective measures in a bid to eradicate it."

And, in the months after September 11, few countries offered as much support. Iran supported the U.S. and the Northern Alliance's efforts to overthrow the Taliban. It joined international talks, led by the U.S., to shape a new government. It agreed to rescue and return American fliers downed on Iranian soil. It even allowed American relief food to be unloaded in an Iranian port on the Persian Gulf. And for this, our message is: "Thank you very much. You're evil."

Iraq, of course, is a different story. No thaw in relations there. But no threat to the U.S., either. And that's the point. As dangerous as Saddam Hussein may be, Iraq poses no security threat to the United States or its neighbors today. True, Iraq refuses to readmit UN weapons inspectors. But Bush never mentioned resumption of inspections until after September 11. Their absence is hardly sufficient reason, now, for declaring war on Iraq.

One other connection missing in Bush's newfangled foreign policy: any connection to what the war on terror is, supposedly, all about. Let's not forget that the war on terror began in response to the attacks of 9/11. It was aimed at capturing Osama bin Laden, destroying his al Qaeda network and punishing those countries that support or harbor them.

If those are still the goals of our war on terror -- and when did they change? -- Iran, Iraq and North Korea don't even qualify. They have given no financial support to bin Laden. They harbor no nests of al Qaeda members. They don't subscribe to bin Laden's extremist form of Islam. They are not model governments, but that doesn't mean we have any justification to invade them.

Following the September 11 attacks, the word among our European allies was: "Americans used to believe the world belonged to them; now, they know they belong to the world."

Unfortunately, George Bush has already unlearned that important lesson. He thinks the world belongs to him -- and he has the right to declare war, anytime, on anybody he wants. All he has to do is call them evil.

Well said.

Truely scare, and scary but true.
 
Excellent...

Why don't you register. Or I'll be forced to call you Reggie...

:)
 
You're being dopey. I hate that.

First of all, Bush has script writers who are very smart and policy advisors who are very smart. The phrase of "Axis of Evil" was coldly and deliberately chosen for a reason. It's rhetoric at its most saber-rattling, and it makes cleart, with no doubt in the tiniest thrid world hovel, that the U.S. intends to not negotiate with terrotists or pussy around waiting for some dictator with delusion of destiny to put together enough plutonium to melt Cleveland. the phrase was used to save American lives by convincing all the opposing forces in the named regimes to start something fucking now -- before America steps in. It's actually quite brilliant.

And it's working. Opposition forces started re-organizing the day after the State of Union. Japan is talking to Iraq's moderates. An engine of change has already started, without one fucking shot being fired. Byt he time one fucking shot IS fired, we will be in a much better position. And American lives will be spared. And the world will be safer.

George Bush isn't the brightest kid in the class. But give me a freakin break with this stuff. The "Axis of Evil" comment, as jingonistic and inspid as it is, was brilliant.
 
Dixon Carter Lee said:
The "Axis of Evil" comment, as jingonistic and inspid as it is, was brilliant.

It made him look like an uninformed clown.

He was already a laughing stock throughout the world, now people think he's flipped his lid completely.

Unregistered's remarks, good and to the point as they are, are not his alone. They are the sentiments of a growing number of people and world politicians.

ppman
 
p_p_man said:
He was already a laughing stock throughout the world, now people think he's flipped his lid completely.

Hmmmm... if that's true, then that makes at least two Presidents in a row that have been international laughing stocks.
 
It doesn't look as if you're winning anything yet...

Quote from today's London Times:

"Mr Bush has sharply toned down the menace of his rhetoric towards Kim Jong Il’s regime. One practical reason is that military conflict with North Korea is hardly an option because it would guarantee the destruction of large parts of Seoul."

Suddenly his eyes were opened...

It worries me that he didn't realise this before, doesn't it worry you?

ppman
 
He toned down his rhetoric because he's in Korea and Japan at the moment. His eyes haven't been "opened" you dopety-dope.

Christ. I hate armchair quarterbacks.
 
Dixon Carter Lee said:
First of all, Bush has script writers who are very smart and policy advisors who are very smart. The phrase of "Axis of Evil" was coldly and deliberately chosen for a reason. It's rhetoric at its most saber-rattling, and it makes cleart, with no doubt in the tiniest thrid world hovel, that the U.S. intends to not negotiate with terrotists or pussy around waiting for some dictator with delusion of destiny to put together enough plutonium to melt Cleveland. the phrase was used to save American lives by convincing all the opposing forces in the named regimes to start something fucking now -- before America steps in. It's actually quite brilliant.

Actually, Bush has been writing his own stuff lately.
 
I doubt he came up with "Axis of Evil". It's a very deliberate kind of Arab saber-rattling. It was purposeful, and very military sounding. I'm sure he loved it when he heard it, thinking it sounded all neat-o and junk, but I doubt he came up with it. It takes a brilliant man to come up with something so juvenile, so laughable -- so fucking effective.
 
Dixon Carter Lee said:
He toned down his rhetoric because he's in Korea and Japan at the moment. His eyes haven't been "opened" you dopety-dope.

Christ. I hate armchair quarterbacks.

So he's a coward as well!

Talks tough when he's thousands of miles away, but collapses completely when he's in amongst it...


:p
 
Is that what it's all about? Looking "Cool" to the world? Fine, you look cool. We'll make sure no one kills you.
 
When she was interviewed during the Republican National Convention, former governor of Texas, Ann Richards (who G.W. trounced in the governor's race) was asked what the Democrats need to know about G.W. Bush.

Her answer was: (paraphrase) "He's a hell of a lot smarter than he appears. He loves it when people underestimate his intelligence. He didn't go to Andover Academy in Mass, graduate from Yale (with honors) and earn an MBA from Harvard School of Business by being dumb. Never underestimate G.W. or you will surely loose to him."

Ma Richards learned her lesson well, I'm sure Al Gore did also. I think there are several people around the world who just haven't learned that lesson... YET.

As I've mentioned on this board before, I've had the chance to sit down and talk with G.W., several times, before he entered national politics. He is a warm, friendly, and extremely quick witted and intelligent man. He listens carefully and replies directly to you with more thought and sincerity than almost anyone I have ever met.

I am arrogantly unimpressed with the intelligence of most people, but G.W. is definately impressive. Whether you agree with his politics or not, underestimating his intelligence is a mistake.
 
I think Bush is intelligent. I just don't think he's bright enough to come up with national health care or undertand the complexities of economic stimulation. But, you know what? He doesn't have to be. You surround yourself with good people and follow your convictions. Al Gore is undeniably smarter, and may very have surrounded himself with smarter people. But George W. is doing alright (if you forget about that idiotic "Give everyone $300" thing).
 
RawHumor said:


Hmmmm... if that's true, then that makes at least two Presidents in a row that have been international laughing stocks.

Sorry dopey but the only one made to be an international laughing stock during Clinton's years was you and your frothing at the mouth clinton hating ilk.
 
Texan said:
When she was interviewed during the Republican National Convention, former governor of Texas, Ann Richards (who G.W. trounced in the governor's race) was asked what the Democrats need to know about G.W. Bush.

Her answer was: (paraphrase) "He's a hell of a lot smarter than he appears. He loves it when people underestimate his intelligence."

I think I recall similar words from Lee Atwater... "let them think you're nothing but a dumb good ole boy..." ;)

Time will tell if 'axis of evil' was brilliant or flawed. Or is it a diversion from the real problem in the world today, Israel.
 
Back
Top