Congrats to President Bush for being my choice of Man of the Year for 2003.
I'm not going to touch domestic politics because that isn't where my attention's at. Everything's foreign to me.
Seeing that the 2004 Presidental Election will be decided mainly by one thing: National Security, it's an obvious choice to focus on that. Furthermore, with the frontrunner in the Democratic Party also focusing on foreign policy, the topic is all the more important. So, let's see what Bush has done this year that makes him deserving of this title.
Needless to say September 11 has been the driving force behind the Bush Administration's foreign policy. Not wanting a repeat of such a catastrophic attack on American soil again, this Administration has pulled no punches in dealing with nexus behind the attacks on Washington D.C. and New York City. Not only are American soldiers in Afghanistan in hot pursuit of Al Qaeda ("The Base"), but we also have supporting soldiers in many Central Asian countries and the Phillipines, also in hot pursuit of wanted terrorists. Furthermore, the United States is moving her forces closer to the global "hot spots" by relocating her European command to the fringes of that continent. They serve a double duty of defending Europe should a theatre arise or being better prepared for action should Middle Eastern flames need to be doused. With the Europeans merrily bickering over the details of a nascent supranational superpower, the United States can afford to re-align her forces where they are deemed necessary.
In the Islamic world, Al Qaeda is busy spreading pro-American sentiments. It was not too long ago that many in that region were sympathizers of The Base. In fact, the sympathy also came in the form of nominal "understanding" by heads of Muslim countries (via treatment of known terrorists with kid gloves) of The Base's actions. When The Base showed its gratitude by blowing up many soft targets from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia to Turkey, killing hundreds of muslims, it lost its sympathizers. Today, many Muslims abhor The Base and its message of death and destruction. Like the rest of the world, they understand Al Qaeda's terror makes no distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim. The leaders in these same countries are also heeding Washington's call for a more vigilant war against terror.
The Iraqi campaign, though protested by many men, was long overdue. Hussein, an unstable and ruthless dictator, had defied the international order for far too long. Hussein's Iraq was in violation of many international directives and a major threat to regional security. Add to that his explicit support for terror and the fallout of 9/11, it was clear that Iraq had to be dealt with. The fallout was massive:
Not only was Hussein taken from power, but it sent a clear message that President Bush meant what he said and was true to his word. Believing he would be next, North Korea's Kim Jung Il went into hiding for 40 days between February and March of 2003.
Libya, seeing what trouble WMDs does for unwanted strongmen, decided to come clean and repent. With luck and perseverence, Libya will eventually enter the family of nations.
The European Union is putting more pressure on Iran to come clean about its WMDs.
Syria is isolated more than ever, surrounded by America and her allies in the North, East, and South.
The Sudanese government, under American aegis, has reached an agreement with the Southern rebels to bring peace to that stricken country.
By the end of 2004, Iraq and the Sudan should be taken of the List of Countries that Sponsor Terror, leaving five.
With a determined mind, a firm hand, and American interests at heart, President Bush has shaken global security to it foundation, re-aligned forces to respond to threats more quickly, changed regimes that needed new management, and dealt harshly with capricious "allies". I couldn't ask for a better leader.
As the 2004 elections get closer, it will be more a global event than anything else. The world will be watching to see if Americans prefer a straight-talking, confident President or an anti-warrior Clintonian challenger who runs away from problems, is afraid to make tough decisions, always willing to appease our wayward "allies" and enemies, and willing to let the terror nexus regroup without laying a finger on them.
The world will see where America stands in terms of her obligations to global security. Will she be a benevolent but firm cop or a soft and weak one who runs away at every opportunity?
I'm not going to touch domestic politics because that isn't where my attention's at. Everything's foreign to me.
Seeing that the 2004 Presidental Election will be decided mainly by one thing: National Security, it's an obvious choice to focus on that. Furthermore, with the frontrunner in the Democratic Party also focusing on foreign policy, the topic is all the more important. So, let's see what Bush has done this year that makes him deserving of this title.
Needless to say September 11 has been the driving force behind the Bush Administration's foreign policy. Not wanting a repeat of such a catastrophic attack on American soil again, this Administration has pulled no punches in dealing with nexus behind the attacks on Washington D.C. and New York City. Not only are American soldiers in Afghanistan in hot pursuit of Al Qaeda ("The Base"), but we also have supporting soldiers in many Central Asian countries and the Phillipines, also in hot pursuit of wanted terrorists. Furthermore, the United States is moving her forces closer to the global "hot spots" by relocating her European command to the fringes of that continent. They serve a double duty of defending Europe should a theatre arise or being better prepared for action should Middle Eastern flames need to be doused. With the Europeans merrily bickering over the details of a nascent supranational superpower, the United States can afford to re-align her forces where they are deemed necessary.
In the Islamic world, Al Qaeda is busy spreading pro-American sentiments. It was not too long ago that many in that region were sympathizers of The Base. In fact, the sympathy also came in the form of nominal "understanding" by heads of Muslim countries (via treatment of known terrorists with kid gloves) of The Base's actions. When The Base showed its gratitude by blowing up many soft targets from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia to Turkey, killing hundreds of muslims, it lost its sympathizers. Today, many Muslims abhor The Base and its message of death and destruction. Like the rest of the world, they understand Al Qaeda's terror makes no distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim. The leaders in these same countries are also heeding Washington's call for a more vigilant war against terror.
The Iraqi campaign, though protested by many men, was long overdue. Hussein, an unstable and ruthless dictator, had defied the international order for far too long. Hussein's Iraq was in violation of many international directives and a major threat to regional security. Add to that his explicit support for terror and the fallout of 9/11, it was clear that Iraq had to be dealt with. The fallout was massive:
Not only was Hussein taken from power, but it sent a clear message that President Bush meant what he said and was true to his word. Believing he would be next, North Korea's Kim Jung Il went into hiding for 40 days between February and March of 2003.
Libya, seeing what trouble WMDs does for unwanted strongmen, decided to come clean and repent. With luck and perseverence, Libya will eventually enter the family of nations.
The European Union is putting more pressure on Iran to come clean about its WMDs.
Syria is isolated more than ever, surrounded by America and her allies in the North, East, and South.
The Sudanese government, under American aegis, has reached an agreement with the Southern rebels to bring peace to that stricken country.
By the end of 2004, Iraq and the Sudan should be taken of the List of Countries that Sponsor Terror, leaving five.
With a determined mind, a firm hand, and American interests at heart, President Bush has shaken global security to it foundation, re-aligned forces to respond to threats more quickly, changed regimes that needed new management, and dealt harshly with capricious "allies". I couldn't ask for a better leader.
As the 2004 elections get closer, it will be more a global event than anything else. The world will be watching to see if Americans prefer a straight-talking, confident President or an anti-warrior Clintonian challenger who runs away from problems, is afraid to make tough decisions, always willing to appease our wayward "allies" and enemies, and willing to let the terror nexus regroup without laying a finger on them.
The world will see where America stands in terms of her obligations to global security. Will she be a benevolent but firm cop or a soft and weak one who runs away at every opportunity?
Facebook
Twitter