Skip to comments.Bush (II): Embrace change over 'so-called stability' in Arab Spring
Posted on 05/16/2012 7:37:59 AM PDT by C19fan
A stone's throw away from the White House, former President George W. Bush said today the world is in an "extraordinary" time for freedom and that the changes of the Arab Spring should be embraced despite the uncertain future that comes with them. Bush said those who say the dangers of democratic change are too great and that America should be in favor of stability over change are unrealistic. "In the long run, this foreign-policy approach is not realistic," Bush argued, "It is not realistic to presume that so-called stability enhances our national security. Nor is it within the power of America to indefinitely preserve the old order, which is inherently unstable."
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
From the article, it doesn’t look like he said anything controversial.
More “Islam is peace” crap.
I wonder what Bush’s favorite philosopher (Jesus Christ) thinks about the Arab Spring.
I make up my own mind President Bush... and I have learned to ignore your more progressive opinions.
Same with the Al Quida backed "new" government taking form in Libya.
Those types of embrace lead to a knives in the back.
Now, in Iran, when those people tried to throw off the Mullahs and really wanted a secular, free society, we should have helped...but those are the ones Obama let die in the streets.
Bottom line is that you support those who are friendly disposed towards your interests and ideals...and you end up fighting the ones who are radically opposed to them.
If a group of people, or a whole nation chooses terrorism...sort of like the German people backed Hitler...you end up fighting the people and reacking havoc and destruction on them until they have had enough and sue for surrender...like the Germans did, and ultimatly like the Imperial Japanese did. They've been "good" Germans and Japanese ever since.
This course of "embracing" such enemies will only lead to more Americans death.
A reminder that, while a far better leader than the current slug in the White House, W was no great shakes either.
I'm sure he knows of Jesus the Christ as a philosopher.
I'm sure he does not know Jesus the Christ. shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
I'm sure he knows of Jesus the Christ as a philosopher.
The basic principle is that every nation should be the judge of its own internal affairs. Different peoples have different priorities, and it is not appropriate for one nation to seek to impose its social values on another. (See Jefferson's Memo to President Washington (1793), for a discussion of the basic principles involved Jefferson Memo.)
To also address the contemporary situation, where Bush continues to talk about "freedom." Just what does he suggest, if one looks, for example at Egypt? The Coptic Christians appear to be genetically closer to the ancient Egyptians than the rest of the population. Surely they deserve some consideration in a discussion of "freedom." Are they freer in terms of anything meaningful in the "new Egypt," than under the former dictator, where their Faith was at least somewhat tolerated?
"The Bush foreign policy," was often more analogous to the 'bull in a china shop,' than the reasoned Washington/Jefferson foreign policy that made Americans the most beloved people on earth in the 19th Century.
But let me be clear. Everything that was wrong with Bush II's policy was taken almost directly from the Dean Rusk (JFK & LBJ's Secretary of State) foreign policy in the 1960s. Millions of third world peoples actually died as a result of that. Rusk was trying to outdo the Communists in spreading revolution, with the above mentioned consequences.
I checked out the link. What is interesting I went to Colonial Williamsburg for the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Williamsburg festivities and it included a re-enactor playing General Washington reciting his Farewell Address. Impressive the guy was able to recite the Address perfectly despite what to us illiterate moderners is archaic language.
I am sure that that the Orthodox Christians of Iraq, the Coptic Christians of Egypt and Nestorian Christians of Syria are all truly excited by the prospect of “Arab Spring” and “Freedom.”
No wonder we suffered so much and accomplished so little in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of course, the parts quoted in my juxtaposition of Bush II's Second Inaugural Address, with Washington's foreign policy concepts, does not include Washington's remarks on other aspects of his political & social perspective.
Will Israel have to take matters unilaterally into its own hands just to survive?
I was mentioning that to my family driving back home about how school kids were required to memorize the Address and the Gettysburg address. By the time I went into public school in the 1970s that was long dead. Very interesting how lots of the spectators were nodding their heads in agreement to Washington’s statements. The only thing I had trouble swallowing was his call for politicians to be above “factions” . I thought that was unrealistic given human nature and history.
The Muslim Brotherhood was the breeding ground for Al Qaeda. Apparently W. has forgotten 9/11. More’s the shame
Is it possible/probably that Obama is going through back door to help the Muslim Brotherhood in acquiring more territory.
I heard a couple of Muslim Brotherhood visited the White Hut recently.
W had me scratching my head when he appointed back stabbers Powell & Rice and now he speaks of the Arab spring. Oy vay!
Almost no Freepers grasp the reality of Islam and the difficult path from the past through today to the future. Also not even considered is the overriding force of education and money or perhaps rather, business.
The forces of business, the monied interests, control and will continue to control over the fanatic fundamentalists. There will be turmoil, but the masses live in cities and foremost in their desires is a better life that comes with cars and cell phones and refrigerators and such.
The deaths of old men will allow the younger and educated to take control and develop the change. It has happened in Indonesia and Malaysia and is well on the way on the Arabian peninsula.
W knows what he is talking about. There was no Wilsonian folly
While I had many disagreements with him as a President (big spender, not true conservative), I respect him a whole lot more than his successor. I believe that he loves America, and though wrong on many issues, did what he thought was best for America. That being said, I wish that he would not try to insert himself into policy discussions. He is reviled by the left and has little credibility with the right. Just play golf, hang out with Laura and Mom and Dad, and enjoy life!
"W," as you call him, lacks Wilson's erudite rationalizations for the abandonment of our traditional foreign policy, but he hardly knows what he is talking about.
His Second Inaugural Address was devoted to his exposition of his foreign policy, and should be studied as an exercise in confusion. Again, see George Washington vs. George W. Bush.
As for your analysis of the progression in certain countries, others could point to the reverse path in such countries as Iran, Egypt--and even Iraq. The bottom line is that whatever course is in store for any people, it must be charted by that people. This does not mean by a mob with in a particular nation. The idea is for them to develop a natural leadership--one attuned to their culture, values, etc.. But again, that is something that must be resolved within that nation. It only makes enemies when we pretend that we know what is best for an other people. (And just look at the mess that Clinton made just South in Haiti, by returning power to the mob in the name of "Democracy," something our Founders tried specifically to avoid.)
The French helped us win our independence; but they certainly did not try--nor would we have accepted such an effort--to direct development of our future institutions.
And that a message will go out swiftly to the enemies of Israel and the US that a new Sheriff is in town and that Iran has a very short time to comply or face crippling sanctions followed shortly buy criplpling military action. That funding and support to the Muslim Brotherehood will be cut off completely. That any help to the Al Quida led rebels in Libya will aslo be cut off, and that the US Military will once again get the R&D funds and the equipment it needs.
We need to fire a full broadside across Russia's bow while we're at it and double down on our missile defense sites in Eastern Europ and the protection and security for them.