As the bush presidency ends, one of his attempts to rescue his legacy has been the claim that he kept America safe. I've seen several articles and network news discussions about this and they all seem to break down, like almost everything else in US politics, by party affiliation with Republicans thinking he did a good job as there have been no attacks on US soil since 9-11. The Democrat’s response is "So what! How can you say he kept us safe when the largest terror attack on US soil happened under his watch, where the hell was he prior to 9/11". Both groups slant the discussion to support their side.
A couple of "Bush Kept us safe" links
http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/16/farewell_to_the_man_in_the_arenahttp://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/16/geroge_bushs_straight_talkA “where the hell was he before 9/11 link.” Actually I think this link is pretty biased in that it leaves out a lot of data. Read the comments to get a more balanced view.
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/01/the_bush_record.phpHere's my take...
Both sides are wrong. They are looking at the issue of "safe" from their own very small, politically convenient view. Both sides fail to see the big issue of why the safety of US citizens is threatened at all. Why aren't we safe? Why do we need to be protected at this level? Why would "Islamic Extremists" hate us so much that they want to fly planes into the World Trade Center killing themselves and thousands of innocent civilians?
President Bush, his staff, the neo-cons, US politicians of both parties, US religious leaders and big media preach that 9-11 happened because the Islamic extremists hate the freedoms we enjoy in this country. That they are a small group of violent extremists that will stop at nothing to destroy the US. The embassy bombings, World Trade Center bombing and 9-11 were all because "They hate our freedoms".
I don’t buy this crap. They're willing to kill thousands, blow themselves up, and live in the mountains of Pakistan like cave men because they hate our freedom? Hate our way of life? I think a majority of the US believe this view but it is just plain wrong.
The Islamic extremists hate us because they believe, that for the last 50 years we, THE US, (the civilized, morally right people?) have worked with and allowed Israel to steal Arab land, and kill and oppress their people. They have seen Israel use American planes, bombs and guns to kill their family members, use US built bulldozers to crush their homes to make way for Israeli settlements, use US power to block UN actions that could put a stop to the Israeli aggression. They have watched this happen for years and it has them pissed-off. They don't hate our freedoms! They hate us for killing their people and taking away the freedoms of those we haven't killed, their right to live in peace on the land of their families without walls, checkpoints, blockades, and military raids.
They are pissed but they lack the military resources to fight back in a normally accepted military fashion so they fight with whatever they have, people who are willing to strap on a bomb, hijack a plane, or build a home-made rocket, even throw rocks at Israeli soldiers. We then label them “terrorists” and send more guns and bombs fight terrorism which just adds to the cycle of violence and breeds more “Islamic militants”.
This is the reason they “hate us” and with this out in the open we can look at Bush's record.
So did Bush keep us safe?
I believe the 9-11 attack happened because of previous US policy and can’t really be blamed on Bush exclusively. Was it Bush's fault? Not really, but he did have a chance to change the policy that is responsible for the hate. On taking power he could have said "I believe that blind US support of Israel has increased instability in the region and as of today we will end all military support of Israel and all other countries in the region and will act as an even-player in the region." Or he could have said, "We’re going to take care of our own house, you in the Middle East are on your own. There'll be no aid to anyone. Work it out on your own the best that you can". Had he done this the 9-11 attacks may have been prevented. Now I know it may not have stopped the attack but we cannot know that. We do know that he didn't change the policy but actually moved it even more toward the Israeli side and the attack happened.
He could have made the situation better but he chose not to. So in that regard, he is responsible for the 9-11 attacks and failed to protect the US.
Has Bush kept us safe?
Well, there were no more attacks on US citizens but I doubt we're really safer now than we were before his presidency. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with our support of the Israeli occupation and current war on Gaza has created another generation (or two) of Islamic extremists that will be willing to do anything to hit back at the "great Satan". So, I’d call him a failure here too.
So really there’s little doubt that Bush failed to keep America safe, but I don’t think we can really blame it on him personally. It is the US as a whole that really must take responsibility. There is no US politician today that would have made the change in the US middle-east policy that is needed. So even if John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan or even Barack Obama had been president, 9-11, or something similar, would have happened.
We will not be safe until we are at peace with the Islamic and Arabic peoples and we will NOT be until we are seen as legitimate, fair, honest participants in the middle-east politics.
We are all responsible.
Copyright (c) 2009 cc
