For your background reading…
Obama hit’s the roof!
“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack,” Obama said in a statement his aides distributed. “George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.
Thinks President Bush’s comments are directed at him, which of course Press Secretary Dana Perino denies!
In turn, White House press secretary Dana Perino denied that the Knesset remark was aimed at Obama. In fact, the language is fairly typical for Bush speeches, and Gordon Johndroe, a national security spokesman for the president, said Bush was referring to “a wide range of people who have talked to or suggested we talk to Hamas, Hezbollah or their state sponsors” over a long period of time.
Yet, Senator Obama (as told in the Washington Post Blog) is now confused at everyone’s attitude and doesn’t understand why the President does not want him to meet folks like Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinawhatshisname…
Obama then draws comparison to President Kennedy meeting with Khrushchev and President Nixon meeting with Mao Zedong.
Well, interesting point. And one to think through. Not sure where I stand on this.
Filed under: Democrats, Foreign Policy, Global Affairs, Global Threats, History, Politics
Hitler told Germans that Poland was a threat to Germany in 1939 and it was necessary to invade Poland.
Bush told Americans that Iraq was a threat to the USA in 2003 and we needed to invade Iraq.
I admit that GW Bush was not as bad as Hitler but they both lied. Hitler started a mess in Europe. GW Bush started a mess in the Mideast
Hmmm, thank for the comments “gasdocpol”, but I think you’ve oversimplified the issues here.
Are you really saying that President George Bush is so powerful that he could make up this fabrication and the entire Congress would buy it? And the entire Congress was too stupid to check the veracity of his statements?
No, G it’s all a bit more complicated than that…
Great post. I will read your posts frequently. Added you to the RSS reader.
Big BIG difference between sitting Presidents meeting with the heads of state of other legitimate countries (even the communist block) and terrorists (Let’s not forget who the leader of Iran is).
Stew, but for arguments sake, is not Iran a legitimate country? Didn’t Kruschev even say that he would “crush” us, not too disimilar to Ahmedin’s comments about Israel?
Ham,
The problem I have with “appeasement” is that it requires a nation-state to sacrifice it’s principles to the aggressor. It’s pretty clear that Chamberlain’s foreign policy in the years preceding WWII allowed Hitler to gain power in Europe. With regard to Nixon’s visit to China in ‘72, I wonder what the world would be like today had the U.S. not sought normalized relations with the P.R.C. Our policy with China since Nixon’s visit and the granting of “Most Favored Nation” status in ‘79 has been one of appeasement (we didn’t even lift the MFN status after the Tiananmen Square protest in ‘89). The result? China continues to violate the basic human rights of its population, they also own the majority of U.S. debt and their economy grows stronger as ours struggles.
Anyway, that’s my 2ยข.
- JOS
JOS – Also consider that Kennedy’s visit was viewed by Kruschev as “weakness” and facilitated the “Missiles of October”.
Personally, I think that the prez’s comments were somewhat directed to Obama. I didn’t mind it though. Obama walks around as though he can say anything and not be called to task for it while he gets offended by everything every person says whether directed at him or not. A bit hypocritical.
As to appeasement, just the word itself is offensive to me. And it does seem a sign of weakness to me.
Annie
HYam, GW Bush did not make up the fabrication. It was the Neoconservatives of PNAC who used GW Bush as their front.
The members of the Project For a New American Century (PNAC) had their agenda prepared and published before they propped up an uninformed, inexperienced, failed businessman named George W. Bush as their poster candidate.
He had great appeal among the good ole boys and the bible thumpers who were not very likely to vote for the scowling man behind the curtain, Dick Cheney.
George W. Bush had not been sitting around for the previous 10 years thinking about foreign policy. Rather, he was being coached on foreign policy by handlers who had to teach him that Africa was a continent and not a country.
The stated aims of PNAC can be followed from their war plans to their hopes of global military superiority. George W. Bush was not a factor when PNAC was writing its openly published policies. But once the 2000 election was secured, PNAC members became and remain the mainstay of the Bush administration, holding virtually every major position relating to foreign policy.
GW Bush has been a front, a figurehead and a puppet for the Neocons.
GASDOCPOL, you’ve found our secret. It’s all part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Now that we have your IP address, watch out for the black helicopters, they’re watching you. Our hyper-effective government cannot afford you to share our secret. If you get a unknown phone call in the next 24 hours, be afraid, be very afraid.
Ham
Google PNAC Read their own words. NOT my words.
Do you agree with its mission?