Dubyah On Foreign Policy

Dubyah on foreign policy.

(See here) a Washington Post article that pretty well discusses the situation regarding possible first strike use of nuclear weapons and the Iranian nuclear weapons development issue.

I wish this was as simple as "Dubyah is just rattling his saber". I could write a wonderful piece just on that. Something that sticks to condemning Dubyah for having to resort to saber rattling in his foreign policy. But remember, Dubyah is the guy who led America, along with a few reluctant allies, into invading Iraq. My fear is that what is being discussed is not just bluster.

Quoting from the article:
Bush views Tehran as a serious menace that must be dealt with before his
presidency ends, aides said, and the White House, in its new National
Security Strategy, last month labeled Iran the most serious challenge to the
United States posed by any country.

So how is Dubyah going to deal with the "problem" of Iran so that the "problem" is solved before he leaves office? If all the options, all the solutions, are being looked at through that narrow prism (before he leaves office), we are in for a world of excrement.

Dubyah hasn't learned his lesson from leading us into the mess he has got us into in Iraq. That he thinks the military option is the trump card that will win the day, at least under current circumstances, is proof this man lacks any of the vision necessary to solve this problem. Evidently within the Bush administration there is nothing that even remotely resembles wisdom. Even a blind man who walks into a wall and bloodies his nose learns to be more careful.

Dubyah repeatedly appeals to the American public to follow him because of his "sober" leadership. Well I am saying I would rather have a drunk wise man sitting in the Oval Office than a sober idiot.

Come on Dubyah. How come every time you want to do something, the only solution you can come up with is actual use of military force or the threatened use of military force?

Learn from history man. How did we win the Cold War? Who is going to side with Iran if they understand the cost of siding with Iran (and North Korea) is to be on the wrong side of a new Cold War? It should not be that hard to get the Free World to sign up. Russia and China might be a little more difficult, however if they are made to understand that, yes, the stakes are that high, we should be able to win their support.

Iran can up the stakes of the "cold war" into an actual hot one. However force Iran to make the first move.

Come on Dubyah, show some wisdom. Maybe if we get Dubyah to crack open a beer every now and them we can get him to "change his evil ways". Somebody give that man a beer. Maybe we can get some wisdom out of him. We've tried "sober leadership" and that ain't working.

Perhaps we can get Dubyah's attention by putting some demands on him. Dubyah, if you are going to resort to open warfare against Iran, the only way you are going to be able to pull this off is with a resumption of the draft. In order to win broad support for the draft, you are going to have to convince your daughters (your twins) to serve in the military and to serve in actual harms way.

I wish I could say we had nothing to worry about people, but remember, Dubyah is the one that led us into the mess in Iraq. We as a nation should be learning a lesson in Iraq. The guy we put into the Oval Office should have learned a lesson as well. Did he learn ANYTHING? I do not think he has. I doubt he has learned ONE DAMN THING.

Somebody give Dubyah a beer, we've got to try something.


Blogger Michael said...

A very Australian sentiment - "someone give that man a beer". It could be the slogan for a new anti-Bush campaign.

I think that there is little reason to not believe that a military strategy has be studied in terms of Iran. That is just prudence, I suppose.

However, the intensity of the "sabre rattling" from the US Administration is rather disconcerting, as is the apparent lack of interest in seeking dialogue with Iran and the other international partners.

I'm surprised that so few news media have pointed out the hypocrisy of potentially using tactical nuclear weapons (in the form of bunker busters) to prevent nuclear proliferation. US development of tactical nuclear weapons was widely criticised as against the spirit of the NNPT (if not the letter) and would likely spur the proliferation of nukes in other countries.

I find it almost incredible that Bush would consider using nukes as a "viable option", even against the (vastly) better judgement of his Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Michael Tam
vitualis' Medical Rants

4/10/2006 11:12:00 PM  
Blogger Little David said...

In the Washington Post there appears an article where Dubyah tries to backpedal on this issue. At first I was going to comment on it here, but I have so much to say about it that I am going to write a new article off it.

4/11/2006 08:52:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home