No, Bush was not committed to war avoidance and to the scaling down of American military commitments abroad until 11th September 2001. No one like that ever had Dick Cheney on his ticket, or ever nominated Donald Rumsfeld as Defense Secretary, or ever gave jobs to Scooter Libby and Paul Wolfowitz, among a host of others.
And with Robert Kagan directing John McCain, don't be fooled a second time. The best thing that could happen to conservatives (and everyone else, for that matter) would be if, in 2012 or 2016, the Republicans had to field a candidate who was specifically able to out-do Obama or his legatee on war avoidance and on the scaling down of American military commitments abroad.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Go, Obama!
ReplyDeleteAnd I voted for Buchanan all three times he ran.
Bush ran as an anti-war candidate in 2000. Just go back and re-read the stump speeches.
ReplyDeleteRumsfeld was an anti-military clod, deeply popular with the media but deeply unpopular with Army. That Bush had to wait until the Republicans had been wiped out before he dropped him is one of the most telling things against him.
The real story of the new century though is that after a brief show of strength under the Clintons the Democrat Party has lapsed back into being an anti-military electoral basket-case.
Which is about to win the Presidency and keep control of both Houses of Congress.
ReplyDeleteBush had Cheney on his ticket. Case closed.
Rumsfeld, like Cheney, is a signatory to the PNAC. Case closed.
And there is no need to revisit here my views on the Clintons, mercifully now a spent force.