1
   

Bush's Thousand Days

 
 
au1929
 
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 08:23 am
Bush's Thousand Days





By Arthur Schlesinger Jr.
Monday, April 24, 2006; Page A17



The Hundred Days is indelibly associated with Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the Thousand Days with John F. Kennedy. But as of this week, a thousand days remain of President Bush's last term -- days filled with ominous preparations for and dark rumors of a preventive war against Iran.

The issue of preventive war as a presidential prerogative is hardly new. In February 1848 Rep. Abraham Lincoln explained his opposition to the Mexican War: "Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure [emphasis added]. . . . If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us'; but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'
This is precisely how George W. Bush sees his presidential prerogative: Be silent; I see it, if you don't . However, both Presidents Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower, veterans of the First World War, explicitly ruled out preventive war against Joseph Stalin's attempt to dominate Europe. And in the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962, President Kennedy, himself a hero of the Second World War, rejected the recommendations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for a preventive strike against the Soviet Union in Cuba.

It was lucky that JFK was determined to get the missiles out peacefully, because only decades later did we discover that the Soviet forces in Cuba had tactical nuclear weapons and orders to use them to repel a U.S. invasion. This would have meant a nuclear exchange. Instead, JFK used his own thousand days to give the American University speech, a powerful plea to Americans as well as to Russians to reexamine "our own attitude -- as individuals and as a nation -- for our attitude is as essential as theirs." This was followed by the limited test ban treaty. It was compatible with the George Kennan formula -- containment plus deterrence -- that worked effectively to avoid a nuclear clash.

The Cuban missile crisis was not only the most dangerous moment of the Cold War. It was the most dangerous moment in all human history. Never before had two contending powers possessed between them the technical capacity to destroy the planet. Had there been exponents of preventive war in the White House, there probably would have been nuclear war. It is certain that nuclear weapons will be used again. Henry Adams, the most brilliant of American historians, wrote during our Civil War, "Some day science shall have the existence of mankind in its power, and the human race shall commit suicide by blowing up the world."

But our Cold War presidents kept to the Kennan formula of containment plus deterrence, and we won the Cold War without escalating it into a nuclear war. Enter George W. Bush as the great exponent of preventive war. In 2003, owing to the collapse of the Democratic opposition, Bush shifted the base of American foreign policy from containment-deterrence to presidential preventive war: Be silent; I see it, if you don't. Observers describe Bush as "messianic" in his conviction that he is fulfilling the divine purpose. But, as Lincoln observed in his second inaugural address, "The Almighty has His own purposes."

There stretch ahead for Bush a thousand days of his own. He might use them to start the third Bush war: the Afghan war (justified), the Iraq war (based on fantasy, deception and self-deception), the Iran war (also fantasy, deception and self-deception). There is no more dangerous thing for a democracy than a foreign policy based on presidential preventive war.

Maybe President Bush, who seems a humane man, might be moved by daily sorrows of death and destruction to forgo solo preventive war and return to cooperation with other countries in the interest of collective security. Abraham Lincoln would rejoice.

The writer, a historian, served as an adviser to President John F. Kennedy.


Consider Bush's most recent declaration.

" I am the decider "

If Bush had been president during the cold war would there have been, in your opinion, a nuclear holocaust?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 534 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 06:20 am
Against the Soviets, who for all their flaws were not madmen, and pursued a generally risk averse policy, deterrence was the only viable response. Against a minor evil dictator, developing WMD and annexing his neighbors, upon the failure of our 12 years of attempts at diplomacy, invasion was the best option. Had Hussein already acquired nuclear weapons, instead of being in the process of acquiring them, Bush undoubtedly would have considered invasion impossible, as with North Korea.
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 06:54 am
Re: Bush's Thousand Days
au1929 wrote:


Consider Bush's most recent declaration.

" I am the decider "



Would you have preferred him to have said "duh, gosh, hey I ain't got no darn idear what I ought should be maybe doin' " Question

As to nuclear holocaust, if Bush really wanted to go that far I am more than sure he could. The fact that he has not should make quite clear to you that during the Cold War years, he most likely would not have gone that route. All you are doing is looking to wake up your little liberal pals around here so you can get yet another "Let's Bash Bush" thread under your suspenders straps.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 06:58 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
Against the Soviets, who for all their flaws were not madmen, and pursued a generally risk averse policy, deterrence was the only viable response. Against a minor evil dictator, developing WMD and annexing his neighbors, upon the failure of our 12 years of attempts at diplomacy, invasion was the best option. Had Hussein already acquired nuclear weapons, instead of being in the process of acquiring them, Bush undoubtedly would have considered invasion impossible, as with North Korea.


Must be that 10% rule again Brandon.....

Can't invade if its 50% or more....
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 07:03 am
Sturgis..

Perhaps if he had said it in an intelligent fashion, such as....

"I am the one that makes the decisions."

"I am the decision maker"


Bush is in charge, that means he does make the decisions but it also means he is responsible when the decisions are poorly thought out. Who is holding Bush responsible for Iraq, FEMA etc?

Bush is the "decider" but not the one accountable seems to be the mantra of the right.
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 07:13 am
parados wrote:
Sturgis..

Perhaps if he had said it in an intelligent fashion, such as....

"I am the one that makes the decisions."

"I am the decision maker"


Bush is in charge, that means he does make the decisions but it also means he is responsible when the decisions are poorly thought out. Who is holding Bush responsible for Iraq, FEMA etc?

Bush is the "decider" but not the one accountable seems to be the mantra of the right.


So now you want to dictate as to the manner in which he speaks and the words he chooses to use?

As to the FEMA matter and Iraq Bush has spoken to both those issues several times over. Sorry if you have been too wrapped up in the sorry state of the Democrats in recent years to have noticed. President Bush has taken, does take and undoubtedly will continue to take and shoulder responsibility for things which have happened during his watch. You would also be advised to go back in time and realize that Bill Clinton knew about the things which would one day bring catastrophe to New Orleans and did nothing about it. When it came to the initial charges that Iraq had WMDs take a look at the roster of the Democrats who supported Bush and believed that these things existed. Faulty intelligence? Yes, but keep in mind that many of those WMD reports originated during days of Democratic rule. You will notice that I say this, at no point in time will you find President Bush saying this and yet still you say he blames others. You really need to have a good look at yourself.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 07:20 am
Back to Cuba, I think Bush, Clinton and Reagan would have initiated tactical strikes. I think Bush Sr, Carter and Nixon would have been in Kennedy's mold. Reagan may have invaded, but I don't think the others would have.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 07:39 am
Is it only one thousand days?

Really?

It seems much, much longer than that to me.

Sad
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 07:39 am
Sturgis..
So you support a bipartisan commission then to examine those things, Iraq intelligence, FEMA response etc?

or not?

Responsibility means you are willing to look at the way a decision was made and see why it went badly.

No.. lets see what you think true responsibility is..
Quote:
You would also be advised to go back in time and realize that Bill Clinton knew about the things which would one day bring catastrophe to New Orleans and did nothing about it.
How nice of you to live up to my expectations there Sturgis. .Yeah. Bush is the decider but its Clinton's fault. By the way, Clinton had nothing to do with the poor response by FEMA during Katrina. FEMA had done projections based on just such levy failures. They failed to implement the plan.

Quote:
You will notice that I say this, at no point in time will you find President Bush saying this and yet still you say he blames others. You really need to have a good look at yourself.
Where the hell did you get this from? The one that needs to look at themself is you Sturgis. You bring up Clinton when talking about Bush's responsibility and then accuse me of statements I never made.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush's Thousand Days
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 02:33:17