Aug
16
Bush And His Wars
Filed Under American Politics
During the last five years of Bush’s Presidency, the overwhelming rhetoric from the left was focused on George Bush’s wars. No other Bush policy (aside from possibly Guantanamo and torture) excited the left quite as much as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (particularly Iraq, though even after the surge stabilised the situation there).
But under Barack Obama, not a lot has changed. Whilst American troops have withdrawn from Iraqi cities (a Bush administration agreement) and a timeline has been set for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops (similar to George Bush’s timeline), the war in Afghanistan has been escalated as have drone attacks on the Taliban in Pakistan.
But strangely, these are no longer serious issues for the left. A straw poll was conducted at Netroots Nation, an annual conference for liberal bloggers. The wars have fallen right down the liberal blogging agenda:
Now, with Obama in the White House, all that has changed. Greenberg presented respondents with a list of policy priorities and asked, “Please indicate which two you think progressive activists should be focusing their attention and efforts on the most.” The winner was passing comprehensive health care reform, with 60 percent, and number two was passing “green energy policies that address environmental concerns,” with 22 percent. Tied for eighth place, named by just eight percent of respondents, was “working to end our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Not only are the bloggers no longer concerned about the wars, they are no longer interested in doing anything about them:
Then Greenberg asked which one of those issues “do you, personally, spend the most time advancing currently?” The winner was health care reform, with 23 percent, and second place was “working to elect progressive candidates in the 2010 elections,” with 16 percent. In 11th place — at the very bottom of the list — was “working to end our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.” Just one percent of Netroots Nations attendees listed that as their most important personal priority.
So in the space of a few months and a new President, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have gone from the single most important reason for opposing Bush to a relative afterthought. Why is that? It’s because it was never about the wars, it was always about Bush. The left used the wars as a weapon with which to bash Bush, now he’s no longer there to bash, their righteous indignation has become more nuanced.
And now they are criticising Republicans and conservatives for opposing Obama regardless of policy. Interesting how that works.
Comments
16 Responses to “Bush And His Wars”
Leave a Reply
C. Cabbie,
Along with the wars…the poor and the street people seem to have disappeared too.
When a newly elected Republican is in the White House, within weeks, the Democrats drag out the poor street people as testament to how ‘mean’ Republicans are…kind of like the recent planted statement from that young teen about all of the ‘mean’ signs the Town Hallers were carrying.
Liberals…pah! They are such two-faced creatures….to cerebral for their own good.
But, fellow bloggers, isn’t it amazing that essentially nothing much has changed on the foreign policy scene since Obama came to power (’cos he actually doesnt pull the strings) but loads has started to shift domestically as the ’string-pullers’ behind the scenes make their boldest move for socialism yet. This is their moment, their ‘holy grail’ has arrived…all the right factors are in place to turn America socialist…low esteen for Bush/GOP/home and country and high esteem for a black messiah who is ‘not one of us’…wow, I will be amazed if the USA survives such powerful forces.
Since Obama is continuing with Bush’s foreign policy, including the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban, I guess you boys’ll be backing him all the way.
Mr Cabbie,
Yes you are correct, but read the New Statesman of 30 July with the cover story of Obama’s Empire, complete with a Imperial Roman outfitted Obama. With, as I have referred to in an earlier post concerning imperial overreach, an interesting map showing the placement and number of US bases.
“…The global reach of the US military today is unprecedented and unparalleled. Officially, more than 190,000 troops and 115,000 civilian employees are massed in approximately 900 military facilities in 46 countries and territories (the unofficial figure is far greater). The US military owns or rents 795,000 acres of land, with 26,000 buildings and structures, valued at $146bn The bases bristle with an inventory of weapons whose worth is measured in the trillions and whose killing power could wipe out all life on earth several times over.”
The above is an excerpt from the article by Catherine Lutz who is a professor at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University and editor of “The Bases of Empire: the Global Struggle against US Military Posts”
Thoughreally it is somewhat inaccurate to call it this Obama’s Empire. Obama assumed the imperial purple just some months ago. But the Empirt has been evolving, growing, metastasizing into everything for decades.
see also
Chalmers Johnson, “Three Good Reasons To Liquidate Our Empire. And Ten Steps to Take to Do So,”
http://dprogram.net/2009/07/30/three-good-reasons-to-liquidate-our-empire-and-ten-steps-to-take-to-do-so/
But War is soooo good for business! And all those Congressional Districts DEMer or GOPer!
Hayward Off topic but I wondered where you stood on the great Oz Camel cull debate.
Gonna be great fun at The Oval this week
THX1138,
I am for the Camel cull.
Though of course they have not devastated the Wide Brown Land to the extent of the hard hoofed, sheep cattle and goats.
But they are a huge problem in the Centre impacting greatly on native flora and fauna.
Camel meat is OK makes a good curry, some what similar to goat.
Yes it is good to see the cricket on a more level playing field again, to use the correct term!I can remember as a kid some great matches, then along came the Windies with teams of 5/6 great batsmen and 5/6 great bowlers, mostly very, very fast.
I had an Uncle who used to treat me to a day or two at a Test at the Oval. We were also Surrey and Fulham supporters!
5 days spent watching the grass grow while waiting for the rain
Hayward
I don’t see the problem with this. These bases are beneficial to the countries that they are in. They get protection and a boost to their economies, and I also suspect that these are voluntary agreements.
Ronnie
Actually I think Obama has been surprisingly good on these military matters and has not been disastrous on foreign policy, with some qualifications.
You’ll be pleased to know that I’ve also started the process of rethinking nation building. Early days, but you never know.
Cabbie.
You mean you may not think that nations can be built even though it has proved such a successful process through the years?
Ronnie
Was that you being facetious, or am I missing something? Explain please.
Ronnie,
Well that is one way to look at it.
I was being facetious.
We’ve discussed this before, elsewhere but I still can’t think of one instance where ignoring a country’s culture while trying to impose a new political and economic structure actually succeeded in any sustainable way. Probably because it’s simply not possible.
Ronnie
You may be right, like I said, I’m re-evaluating as we speak.
Cabbie.
…and that is one of the reasons I have so much respect for you.
Thanks Hayward I knew you would make a sensible point. I read that the cull was causing quite a controversy down under.
Enjoy your camel curry.