Will Democrats redefine America?
I finally watched John Kerry's convention speech today, very well written and enthusiastically presented. After more than 3 years of watching and hearing Bush and Rumsfeld, it was quite a refreshing change to see more trustable and honest figures speaking on the American politics. Kerry's speech was important for he officially announced his nomination for presidency, but the speeches of ex-presidents Jimmy Carter and clever Oxford-educated Bill Clinton were richer and more significant in content.
The election propaganda set aside, these speeches were signs of a new hope. It seemed to me that America is re-discovering itself, the first step of which is to understand and analyse the mistakes of the past and learn from them; as Carter said "a virtually unbroken series of mistakes and miscalculations in the past 34 months...". This change is significant because a realistic and reasonable America would have a great positive influence on the rest of the world.
The whole world knew that the leadership in Iraq was evil and particularly we Iranians had suffered the most, but the way the current US administration approached the war with that axis of evil label and so on caused the majority of people to turn their back and not support it:
Carter: "in the world at large we cannot lead if our leaders mislead... You can't be a war president one day and claim to be a peace president the next, depending on the latest political polls".
It is also encouraging to see America becoming more realistic and redefining its role in today's world, one that is totally different from what it was just 15 years ago. The current US government acted as if they were the only 'super-power' left in the world who could do anything anywhere; a false image they probably inherited from the administration of George Bush Sr. who was in the White House just after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The fact is we're living in a new era, one that Clinton refers to as "a time of unprecedented change".
America has to deal with its problems and the rest of the world in a different way. The US has no choice but to closely co-operate with others especially with its long time allies in Europe and far east. Just two decades ago we had a bipolar world divided between the two super-powers of the time. Now in this multi-polar world, however, America is increasingly dependent on the other poles such as the EU and Japan for her industrial needs and advanced technology, and her economy suffers from a huge "400 plus billion dollar deficit" as mentioned by Clinton. Therefore strong relations with allies are more significant than ever for the States, not only politically but also economically.
Now what did the Bush admin do to that vital relationship? After the events of 9/11, almost the whole world sympathised with America, and the US government had a perfect chance to strengthen ties and build new alliances, but instead the way they approached the war against terrorism isolated them even from their true long term allies. For example, no country in the world sympathised with the US more than France in the days following 9/11, but in less than a year France ferociously left the American camp together with many other countries. Carter put it this way:
"...9/11 brought us an unprecedented level of co-operation and understanding around the world. But a virtually unbroken series of mistakes and miscalculations, unilateral acts and demands isolated the United States from the very nations we need to join us in combating terrorism."
"The United States has alienated its allies, dismayed its friends, and inadvertently gratified its enemies by proclaiming a confused and disturbing strategy"
Clinton also stressed out this point:
"After 9/11, The president had a great opportunity to unite the world in common cause against terror.
Instead, he and his congressional allies made a very different choice: to use the moment of unity to walk away from our allies, not only in attacking Iraq before the weapons inspectors finished their jobs, but in withdrawing American support for the Climate Change Treaty, the International Court for war criminals, the ABM treaty, and even the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty."
It is true, the only way to support peace and battle terrorism and (for our cause) tyranny is to make worldwide alliance against them. I hope soon America joins the rest of the world in this effort.
Very nice article to read, cheers. I think that the Bush administration's strategy towards Iran is the best I have seen for many years compared to other US administrations and other governments. Bush is the only President that has openly claimed its support to Iranians during demonstrations.
Anyways, what I care about is our interest.
(at July 31, 2004 11:43 AM)
Bush's open support not only did no help to the uprising of students in Iran, but it acted as a thrust reverse and gave even more excuse to the government to suppress the students. I call it "doositeh khaleh-kherseh"! Even if it was with good intentions, it ended up totally useless and caused more harm :(
(at July 31, 2004 12:01 PM)
I just finished watching all the election films, thanks for the recommendation for without it I would have not watched them online, the US election hype wave is not that strong here.
Bush's support for Iranian student unrest was just a naive action which only had a negative result. It was neither backed by any practical support nor even political pressure on the government. very similar to what Bush's father did to the Shia uprising in Iraq. he encouraged the Shia uprising against Saddam in south of Iraq and then left them alone to be massacred by Saddam's army. Lack of a single positive action + bombardement of nonsense from Los Angeles based Iranian opposition groups just worked against students.
Well you wouldn't expect much positive action to support good will and deed in Iran, from a president who has ruined everything regarding his own country and national security. Would you?
(at July 31, 2004 03:51 PM)
There is so much wrong in the above post I dont know where to begin:
1)things like praising Carter: Carter said "a virtually unbroken series of mistakes and miscalculations in the past 34 months...".
Jimmy Carter himself is a man who made more mistakes and was the WORST US President in my lifetime. He lost several countries to communism or revolution (Iran), and in fact I am sure had Carter been stronger in 1979 we would not have had 20 years of anti-American terrorism.
Carter taught the terrorists that America was weak and not willing to protect its own. We have had to change that perception at a heavy price.
Carter was too friendly to Castro and our enemies yet not friendly to allies.
Carter left huge messes for Reagan, but Reagan managed to persevere and win the Cold War in 9 years.
Carter's last folly was to be fooled by North Korea. Now, aftre Carter "helped" make an agreement that North Korea was breaking from day one, we find a huge mess.
No US President has done more damage to American than Carter. He speaks soft words that fools find comforting, but his actions encourage the world's troublemakers.
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
(at August 12, 2004 12:29 AM)
"After 9/11, The president had a great opportunity to unite the world in common cause against terror. Instead, he and his congressional allies made a very different choice: to use the moment of unity to walk away from our allies, "
Clinton is wrong 100%. This is a lie.
We didnt walk away from allies. "Allies" specifically France, walked away from the U.S. on certain issues, like Iraq. that is all.
Bush has worked with many allies on fighting terrorism.
We now know that France lied to Colin Powell and US administration about Iraq. They promised support to US but lied and publicly stabbed the US in the back in January 03. (See Woodward's book). Moreover, we know now that Saddam's $10 billion in oil-for-corruption was supporting Russian and French companies, as well as politicians in many countries. There were reasons USA was opposed in the effort to depose Saddam, and those reasons were corruption and venality. In addition, France has worried about USA "hyperpower" for some time.
The 31 nation coalition in Iraq is not small. Nor is the coalition in Afghanistan. It is simply a myth that Bush administration, which has sumitted 5 UN resolutions on Iraq and gotten unanimous votes for them in 2003 and 2004, is not working with other countries.
Liberating Iraq:
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
(at August 12, 2004 12:36 AM)
"For example, no country in the world sympathised with the US more than France in the days following 9/11, but in less than a year France ferociously left the American camp "
This is a nice story, but it is false.
France had been anti-American during the Clinton years, although Clinton won't admit it.
De Villepan spoke darkly of American "hyperpower" in 1998!
France and the world's emotional sympathy to the USA rubbed off after only a month or two, and then France was back to its usual self.
the dissident Frogman (pro-US Frenchman) has dissected this issue quite well:
http://www.thedissidentfrogman.com/dacha/index.html
You can find anti-American "Le Monde" articles in late 2001, just months after 9/11. What did we do to offend the world? Call Bin Laden an "evil-doer"? Attack the taliban?
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
(at August 12, 2004 12:44 AM)
Clinton sez: " ... but in withdrawing American support for the Climate Change Treaty, "
THIS IS ANOTHER CRUEL JOKE AND LIE FROM CLINTON. Clinton had the treaty on his desk FOR TWO YEARS and didnt send it to the Senate, from 1998 to 2001. HE NEVER INTENDED TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT. HE NEVER SUBMITTED IT FOR A VOTE. NEVER.
All Bush did was make public THAT SAME INTENTION as Clinton and Bush is attacked.
To hear the liar Bill Clinton make the same attack, for doing what CLINTON HIMSELF DID, is a travesty!
BTW, do you know why Clinton wuld never send Kyoto to the Senate? Because it would never pass. Senators voted 98-2 against the limits that Kyoto would impose. So the treaty was "dead on arrival" even before Bush became President!!! Nothing Bush could have done would have made that "turkey" pass. Nothing! USA doesnt want it, because it deliberately set targets that punish US more than any other country (gee, thanks EU!)
Blaming Bush for this is like blaming Poland for starting World War II!!
Comments