Bush’s take on the ‘current crisis’

July 31, 2006

The president gave a brief summary of his thoughts on the ongoing crisis in the Middle East during a speech at the Port of Miami today. I’ve been mulling over what he might have been trying to say, but it’s not altogether clear.

“The current crisis is part of a larger struggle between the forces of freedom and the forces of terror in the Middle East. For decades, the status quo in the Middle East permitted tyranny and terror to thrive. And as we saw on September the 11th, the status quo in the Middle East led to death and destruction in the United States, and it had to change. So America is opposing the forces of terror and promoting the cause of democracy across the broader Middle East.

“This task is long, it is difficult work, but it is necessary work. When democracy spreads in the Middle East the people of that troubled region will have a better future. The terrorists will lose their safe havens and their recruits, and the United States of America will be more secure. The hard work of helping people realize the benefits of liberty is laying the foundation of peace for generations to come.”

The context suggests Bush was referring to Lebanon and Israel — when Bush talks about “crises” in the Middle East, it’s worth clarifying — and not the war in Iraq. That’s not helpful, however, in understanding what the president meant.

The crisis in Lebanon has very little to do with “promoting the cause of democracy across the broader Middle East.” Lebanon is a democracy. Hezbollah was able to acquire power in the country through democratic means (i.e., people voted for them).

Just to be clear, this isn’t a defense for Hezbollah; it’s just an observation about Bush’s view of the region, which seems almost ridiculously one-dimensional. Asked to explain American efforts against al-Qaeda, Bush says it’s important to spread democracy in the Middle East. Asked to explain the difficulties in waging war in Iraq, Bush says it’s important to spread democracy in the Middle East. Asked for his insights into the conflict between Israel and Lebanon, Bush says it’s important to spread democracy in the Middle East. Asked about Hamas’ control of the Palestinian territories, Bush says it’s important to spread democracy in the Middle East.

He does realize that these are entirely different situations, doesn’t he?

Newsweek’s Michael Hirsh had an interesting piece a couple of days ago suggesting that Bush is wrong to lump every Islamic group in the region together, regardless of circumstances.

Back in January 2004, the unit I was with [in Iraq] jokingly called their raids “Jerry Springers.” Why? Because the intelligence was often based on unreliable sources who had agendas of their own. “Lots of times it turns out to be some guy who wants us to arrest another guy who’s interested in the same girl,” one soldier told me.

The Bush administration has fought the “war on terror” as a series of Jerry Springers, one lunatic leap of logic after another based on unreliable sources, linking up enemies that had little to do with each other. The White House’s failure to understand counterinsurgency in Iraq is, writ large, its failure to understand the radical Muslim enemy as a whole. The president has used Al Qaeda to gin up the threat from Iraq, just as he is now conflating Hizbullah and Hamas with Al Qaeda as “terrorists” of the same ilk. Actually these groups had little connection to one another — or at least they didn’t until America decided to make itself their common enemy. Al Qaeda was always, in truth, the only “terrorist group of global reach” in the world — which is how Bush accurately defined things back in that long-ago fall of 2001. Both Hizbullah and Hamas had publicly disavowed any interest in backing Osama bin Laden’s goals. Al Qaeda was Sunni, Hizbullah is Shiite. Even within the Muslim world these groups had scant support, although Hamas and Hizbullah had a lot more than Al Qaeda did because they were providing social services in Lebanon and Gaza.

I’d like to think Bush appreciates these important differences, but comments like the ones today in Miami, which I believe were pre-prepared and not off-the-cuff, suggest otherwise.

His speeches are designed to implant certain code words within the cerebral cortex of his listeners to make them docile and easy to manipulate:

“…crisis…freedom…terror…Middle East…September 11th…death…destruction…necessary…democracy…secure…”

The Pavlovian response vectors of his staunchest support base soak these in like Palmolive dishwashing liquid, and are satisfied that no other input is required. Beer is consumed, followed by sleep.

Strangely, more and more people are displaying resistance to the constant thrum of vacuous nonsense spewing from the President’s mouth. Karl Rove has promised to innoculate these deviants so that they will not interfere with the smooth functioning of the November elections.

  • And, of course, Bush has to throw in a 9/11 reference. Eveen though that day has no connection whatsoever to what’s going on in Lebanon and Palestine, it just wouldn’t be Bush if he left it out.

    “For decades, the status quo in the Middle East permitted tyranny and terror to thrive”

    You mean like Saudi Arabia and Egypt?

  • Hezbollah was able to acquire power in the country through democratic means (i.e., people voted for them).

    I think that’s way over-simplifying things. Yes, Hezbollah has had some limited political success in a country where political spoils are portioned out by religious and ethnic group, but I would say it’s “power” was acquired not politically, but militarily – by filling the vaccuum left by the Israelis. The fact that Hezobollah military presence is entrenched in the South because the central government doesn’t have the political or military might to dislodge them is a more accurate description than a benign “they achieved power through democratic means in a democratic country”-type description. I submit that they have some political power because they have military power – not the other way around.

  • Can we survive this president? I am going to be holding my breath until Jan 21, 2009. He is so dumb he is dangerous. Question to Ralph Nader: you stated that there was no differrence between the two candidates and the two parties in Y2K. Now what do you think?

  • I submit that they have some political power because they have military power – not the other way around.

    That’s a perfectly fair point, DDD. I was absolutely simplifying things. My point wasn’t necessarily about Hezbollah’s legitimacy so much as it was a response to Bush’s foreign-policy goal of democracy in Lebanon.

  • You are over analyzing this. Let me break it down for you.

    Bush is pro-democracy.
    Bush is the “decider” (he decides).
    His decisions set policy.
    His policy and position (whatever he decides it is) is therefore pro-democracy.

    This works with nearly every policy. Try it yourself. Just replace pro-democracy with pro-life, or pre-marriage, or pro-business, or pro-worker.

    The action is in no way related to the position.

  • For more on Lebanon’s peculiar version of democracy, and Hezbullah’s role in that country, see Matthew Yglesias’ piece at http://www.prospect.org/weblog/. Certainly they have political power because they have military power, but they are also the chosen political representative of a substantial portion of the Shi’ite population in Lebanon. It’s a complicated situation, but one thing seems clear: “more democracy” is not going to make things any better.
    That seems to be true of many countries in the Middle East (does anyone — besides Bushies — believe that a popularly elected government in Egypt, Syria or Saudi Arabia will be more friendly to Israel and the U.S. than the current regimes? Or what about Iraq, Iran, and Palestine — which already have democratically elected (at least to some extent) governments, and look how well that’s turned out?

  • I’ve long since totally given up on Bush as being anything other than a malign force. Nothing he thinks, says or does will be of benefit to me, my family, my children’s future, or indeed to the country’s future as a whole. Nor does he intend it to be.

    It’s pointless to hope that Bush has any understanding of anything, as this assumes he would be willing to use that understanding in a positive way. He wouldn’t. He uses all his assets in a ruthless quest to maximize his own power, and he uses that power to enrich the ultra-wealthy cronies who put him in office.

    Given all this the man’s stupidity is his greatest gift to us. His stupidity contributes to the colossal failure of his administration, and is dragging down the entire movement which put him in place. The one thing scarier than an idiotic Bush would be a smart one, who would be even more difficult to eventually dislodge.

  • leaving aside from how Hezbollah achieved power, their popularity has grown, in no small part, in response to Bush and the neocon’s mid-east policies. These same policies have given Hamas elected control in Palestine, and dealt a setback to moderates in Iran.

    I want to bang my head against a wall every time Bush mentions ‘spreading democracy.’ Most of the problems we face in the mid-east are with democracies. The popular opinion which necessarily underpins all democracies is decidedly against us and heading south.
    Bush has shown us to be unprepared militarily, and staggeringly incompetent diplomatically. He’s made us irrelevant, as he’s shown us to possess neither carrot, nor stick.
    The best thing Bush could do for the mid east is to hide out in Texas with his tape his mouth taped shut.

  • Oh, to have a functioning press again. One that would ask, what about the Palestinians electing Hamas?
    I guess that if there was any firepower in Bush’s head, it might explode if questions like these were posed. But we know that at most he would get a nosebleed.
    I am reminded that a single solution goes a long way for this guy. For instance, we have a budget surplus, the solution – tax cuts, but when we have a deficit, we need tax cuts. Economy slowing? We need tax cuts. And on and on it goes.
    Leo Strauss would be proud.

  • My most sincere apologies in advance, CB, for the articulated post….

    ***The current crisis is part of a larger struggle between the forces of freedom and the forces of terror in the Middle East.***
    “The dummy in the White House” (which, by the way, is my 8-year-old son’s “pet name” for…well, the dummy in the White House.)

    Will these incredibly-dense morons ever get it through their thick little craniums that this is a struggle between two disparate groups, each with a legitimate, historical claim on the same piece of real estate?

    ***For decades, the status quo in the Middle East permitted tyranny and terror to thrive.***

    There’s that dummy again. The tyranny and terror is attributable to the gun-to-your-head tactics employed some six decades ago by a group of individuals who decided to use paramilitary force to take land, and force the residents of that land to become second-class citizens. It’s the classic “rob-me-at-gunpoint/I’ll-take-it-back-at-gunpoint” maneuver.

    ***And as we saw on September the 11th, the status quo in the Middle East led to death and destruction in the United States***

    Hey—I can sleep soundly tonight, knowing that the dummy just gave OPEC a really good reason to not only raise prices—but to pretty much turn off the spigot. I’d really feel good about selling my oil to some jerk with a demonstrable IQ somewhere south of ZERO who just blamed every member of my family for a handful of wingnuts that I never heard of—wouldn’t you?

    ***So America is opposing the forces of terror and promoting the cause of democracy across the broader Middle East.***

    Maybe we should start promoting the cause of democracy here at home first. Let’s start by not trying to ram BushCheneyism ( a quasihybrid blend of Fascism, Stalinism, a wooden nickel, and the lost episodes of the Howdy Doody Show) down the entire planet’s collective throats.

    ***When democracy spreads in the Middle East the people of that troubled region will have a better future.***

    Massive unemployment, 3 hours per day of electricity, and an army of occupation in your grandmother’s vegetable patch. That’s “democracy?” Here’s an idea: We’ll lay off 98% of everyone inside the Beltway, take away their air conditioners, televisions, cell phones, lobbyist websites, and expensive restaurants, and transplant several divisions of the North Korean Army to the Mall, Arlington, and K Street. We could give it a really swell name. Democracy, perhaps?

    ***The terrorists will lose their safe havens and their recruits, and the United States of America will be more secure.***

    The “terrorists” will gain 2 safe-havens for each one destroyed under the boot of BushCheneyism, their ranks will swell faster than a sprained ankle, and the US will become “target number one” for a whole lot of really angry people.

    ***The hard work of helping people realize the benefits of liberty is laying the foundation of peace for generations to come.***

    So, our government is making war on a sovereign people in order to give them the very thing that our government is trying so hard to take away from us? Repeat after me, boys and girls:

    2 + 2 = 5…………2 + 2 = 5…………2 + 2 = 5….

  • Democracies do not grow terrorists or make war on their neighbors. This central premise of Bush’s argument has been allowed to pass close scrutiny by the press. Isn’t it time for a real analysis of just what the potential of “democracy” holds for the middle east? Isn’t it time for an analysis of what base is needed before democracy really has a chance to take root? Isn’t it time for an analysis for the blowback that will take place if chaos replaces tyrannical regimes instead of hoped for democracies. If Iraq and Lebanon are the models, why would any other countries be in the line for democracy?

    Ironically, the country of Iran was probably our best bet for promoting a successful democratic government, but Bush shit the nest by invading Iraq.

  • Leo Strauss would be proud. — BuzzMon

    The Neo-Cons are the new Third Reich. Every time the Israelis destroys the infrastructure in Lebanon, images of old WWII newsreels of screaming Stukas bombing Poland come to mind. The “oppressed” have become the “oppressors.”

  • The post of

    jimBob @ 5
    and
    Curmudgeon @ 1

    are absolutely terrifying enunciations of some very deep truths.

    I suggest you skip those posts if you want to sleep well tonight.

    That’s because it is one thing to know that things are fucked up…

    It is quite another thing to know that the fucking up is by dint of malicious focused effort .

    If that knowledge doesn’t give you nightmares… nothing will.

  • Mea culpa:

    That’s jimBob @ 9…

    Which is not to say…

    that MNProgressive @ 5 isn’t on to the Orwellian game of “newspeak” going on so gleefully here…

  • The first hint of Dubya’s “understanding” of the enemy was immediately after 9/11, when he began referred to the perpetrators as “evildoers.” It struck me as odd because it was an empty term — it was a moralistic assessment, but said nothing about who they were, where they were from, what motivated them, nothing. “They hate us for our freedom,” is equally uninsightful, so general that it conveys nothing. So lumping all terrorists together without distinction isn’t a surprise.

    Either he really thinks in these terms, or he’s hiding more sinister motives and ambitions. Either way, we’re in a world of trouble that cannot be dealt with effectively unless we understand the exact nature of the situation and the players.

  • Even with the tight message control and lapdog press, Bush routinely humiliates himself in way that’s beyond ideology or politics. The wreckage of his administration is monumental and will be a warning for future citizens, but one of the primary historic embarrassments Americans will have to deal with is how this idiot manchild was enabled, stroked, fluffed, and emboldened to think he was actually capable of making decisions at a presidential scale.

    As Hightower said, “He was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.”

  • Bush is intentionally de-stabilizing the world for a long term greater good. i cannot fathom what his rationale is but the man is not stupid. Maybe it’s to initiate a collapse of society many times over to eradicate many peoples of this earth. hmmm i wonder what he plans to do about china??? may history condemn him and his administration for all eternity.

  • I’m so glad that we have President Bush to explain to me how all those years when, say, Kissinger was inventing shuttle diplomacy, and Carter was almost winning a Nobel Prize and all, that they were actually working to support tyranny and terror. Otherwise I might be fooled by my memory of them working to preserve peace and create an environment where people could begin to worry about their governmental system, because, like, they weren’t busy shooting at each other and invading each other.

    It’s SO nice to have a government that believes in democracy now.

    Does he friggin think he INVENTED the idea of democracy? Like he’s the first American president who’s tried to work for freedom and democracy? It’s worse than what Hightower said: he was born on third base and thinks he hit a grand slam.

    Moron.

  • He uses “September elleventh” now about the same as a teenage girl says “you know”….in wih as much meaning as well.

    That bastard ought not utter the words “fight for freedom” until he stops actually combatting it in the US.

  • George W. Bush is doing a nice imitation of Woodrow Wilson without the intellectual baggage. Who needs intellect when you have all that
    charisma and unblinkered certainty? Unfortunately, he is not making the world safe for democracy. In fact he isn’t making the world safe at all.
    Mark my words. This is August l914 all over again. We are standing on the edge of the abyss and the future will curse us for letting it happen.
    Except this time we have nuclear weapons and delivery systems undreamt
    of in bygone days. The fuse has been lit in Lebanon and it is slowly
    winding its way to Damascus and Teheran. It is just a matter of time now.
    I am afraid our leaders are too stupid, blind, and pathetic to stop it.
    In fact, they seem to anticipate it with great delight and glee.
    We are headed toward our own destruction at light speed and there
    is no way of stopping it now. It’s only a question of how much damage is going to be caused not whether it will be caused. And where it will end no one knows.
    And, in the immortal words of General Buck Turgidson “You better say
    your prayers, sug.”
    It almost makes you want the Kaiser back.

  • Words I never expect to hear from GW and Rice:
    “It is time to sit down and talk with the Iranians and Syrians.” What is with this idea that we give them all these ultimatums before we will even talk with them? We have only one means of communication — military might. Our threat of military reprisal is our only means of “control”. Seems like we would have learned the lesson well on just how effective that “control” is. The military is good at only one thing — fighting all wars (short of nuclear). But as a political tool and as a tool for counterinsurgency warfare, it just sucks.

    I am really afraid the next step in this proxy war is to start the bombing of Iran. One of our justifications will be to stop the slaughter of innocents and enable the establishment of democracies in Lebanon and Palestine which are being undermined by terrorists supported by Iran. If one of those missiles from Lebanon would kill as many children in Israel as the Israeli bomb did at Qana, you can bet there would be Israeli fighter jets attacking Iran within a couple of hours. How soon would the US be drawn into it?

    This really is a more explosive situation than most people realize.

  • This Administration and its neocon apologists live in a world of dualities. Democracy v. Terrorism, Christianity v. Islam, right v. wrong, us v. them. . . . The realities on the ground are not so simply put, yet pandering to the simplicity of such dualities works for these powermongers as they destablize an entire region of the world. Our national leadership is walking down the wrong path today, and we should expect things to get worse before they have a chance to get better. -Kevo

  • Regardless of which side you are support in the confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, this article may be of interest. Shrub is not capable of any leadership as he is once again demonstrating. The article gives the impression the US is siding with the rest of the world against Israel and it explains why UN intervention is unwanted.

    our world: as Ahmadinejad watches

  • Good blog. Talking about truth and eye opening facts are here. When neither side is merciful about children and innocent civilian’s deaths I am sure it represents a two sided sword. In other words many monkeys holding nuclear bombs in their hands. They will throw them unpredictably. Simply put, world is not safe. If we can talk about these great leaders for a minute, what they have acheived is forcing wars by quelling guilt of killing innocent people and spreading fear of terrorism to defend their actions, their long speeches and one dimensional representation of the warfare. Someone said in this blog when will the so called world leaders do sitting and talking like gentlemen. Agreed that talking once or twice will not bring a peaceful settlement or democracy in the middle east. By talking a number of times, yes, there is definitely chance. Ofcourse the great cause is establishing democracy by peaceful means, not by killing and using power and provoking and making enemies exponentially every day. Making enemies is easy but making friends is a very difficult task for anybody.

  • Democracy by force hints of Dictitorial actions, Bush has decided for himself and the rest of the world that everyone should dress the same.Where were the wepons of “Mass Destruction” and did we exercise our redemption for the attacks on New York? Has Bin Laden been captured or killed and how does this all equate to al Quieda?How exactly does United States “Occupation” of Iraq Free the World? These are all comments as opposed to questions, answers are easy. There never was any reason to invade Iraq, if all the truth sayers think Saddam was such an evil man and killed Kurdish people, how does all the violence in the Middle East now measure to Saddam?For all the death under the feet of one dictator to another, only this one has managed to inflict far more death. Make no mistake he will go down in history as one of the Worst Presidents, but he could care less. It so much makes the United States look like an Imperialist Nation.

  • Good comment. “how does all the violence in the Middle East now measure to Saddam?For all the death under the feet of one dictator to another, only this one has managed to inflict far more death”. As an answer to a question about how many civilians (Iraqi people) died he answered 30000 or so. That makes 34500 or so including the soldiers killed in Iraq. That makes him much bigger competitor in the race. I think these actions will only lead to more destruction and killings, hatred, amongst people of different religions. The powerful bombs being dropped in the region will cause unexplained deceases down the line and natural imbalance. Way to go Mr. President!

    • Comments are closed.