Skip to main content

History Will Show That George W Bush Was Right

There was an article in yesterday's NZ Herald (pageA18, although I can't seem to find it on the Herald site) reprinted from the Telegraph by historian Andrew Roberts who says that years from now, once all the kneejerk media reaction has died down, George W Bush will be remembered as a good president.

History, by looking at the key facts rather than being distracted by the loud ambient noise of the 24-hour news cycle, will probably hand down a far more positive judgment on Mr Bush's presidency than the immediate, knee-jerk loathing of the American and European elites.


The whole article is worth reading, but some things that stood out to me about Iraq;

The next factor that will be seen in its proper historical context in years to come will be the true reasons for invading Afghanistan in October 2001 and Iraq in April 2003. The conspiracy theories believed by many (generally, but not always) stupid people – that it was "all about oil", or the securing of contracts for the US-based Halliburton corporation, etc – will slip into the obscurity from which they should never have emerged had it not been for comedian-filmmakers such as Michael Moore.

Instead, the obvious fact that there was a good case for invading Iraq based on 14 spurned UN resolutions, massive human rights abuses and unfinished business following the interrupted invasion of 1991 will be recalled.

Similarly, the cold light of history will absolve Bush of the worst conspiracy-theory accusation: that he knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. History will show that, in common with the rest of his administration, the British Government, Saddam's own generals, the French, Chinese, Israeli and Russian intelligence agencies, and of course SIS and the CIA, everyone assumed that a murderous dictator does not voluntarily destroy the WMD arsenal he has used against his own people. And if he does, he does not then expel the UN weapons inspectorate looking for proof of it, as he did in 1998 and again in 2001.

Mr Bush assumed that the Coalition forces would find mass graves, torture chambers, evidence for the gross abuse of the UN's food-for-oil programme, but also WMDs. He was right about each but the last, and history will place him in the mainstream of Western, Eastern and Arab thinking on the matter.

And -

Mistakes are made in every war, but when virtually the entire military, diplomatic and political establishment in the West opposed it, Bush insisted on the surge in Iraq that has been seen to have brought the war around, and set Iraq on the right path. Today its GDP is 30 per cent higher than under Saddam, and it is free of a brutal dictator and his rapist sons.

The number of American troops killed during the eight years of the War against Terror has been fewer than those slain capturing two islands in the Second World War, and in Britain we have lost fewer soldiers than on a normal weekend on the Western Front. As for civilians, there have been fewer Iraqis killed since the invasion than in 20 conflicts since the Second World War.

Iraq has been a victory for the US-led coalition, a fact that the Bush-haters will have to deal with when perspective finally – perhaps years from now – lends objectivity to this fine man's record.

Now, regarding Hurricane Katrina - one of the people in the comments to the link I gave above has posted a useful link to Popular Mechanics magazine, who spent "more than four months interviewing officials, scientists, first responders and victims." They debunk a lot of the myths surround Katrina, such as the slow response by the Govt.

GOVERNMENT RESPONDED RAPIDLY

MYTH: "The aftermath of Katrina will go down as one of the worst abandonments of Americans on American soil ever in U.S. history."--Aaron Broussard, president, Jefferson Parish, La., Meet the Press, NBC, Sept. 4, 2005

REALITY: Bumbling by top disaster-management officials fueled a perception of general inaction, one that was compounded by impassioned news anchors. In fact, the response to Hurricane Katrina was by far the largest--and fastest-rescue effort in U.S. history, with nearly 100,000 emergency personnel arriving on the scene within three days of the storm's landfall.

Dozens of National Guard and Coast Guard helicopters flew rescue operations that first day--some just 2 hours after Katrina hit the coast. Hoistless Army helicopters improvised rescues, carefully hovering on rooftops to pick up survivors. On the ground, "guardsmen had to chop their way through, moving trees and recreating roadways," says Jack Harrison of the National Guard. By the end of the week, 50,000 National Guard troops in the Gulf Coast region had saved 17,000 people; 4000 Coast Guard personnel saved more than 33,000.

These units had help from local, state and national responders, including five helicopters from the Navy ship Bataan and choppers from the Air Force and police. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries dispatched 250 agents in boats. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), state police and sheriffs' departments launched rescue flotillas. By Wednesday morning, volunteers and national teams joined the effort, including eight units from California's Swift Water Rescue. By Sept. 8, the waterborne operation had rescued 20,000.

While the press focused on FEMA's shortcomings, this broad array of local, state and national responders pulled off an extraordinary success--especially given the huge area devastated by the storm. Computer simulations of a Katrina-strength hurricane had estimated a worst-case-scenario death toll of more than 60,000 people in Louisiana. The actual number was 1077 in that state.






Related Link:

Comments

  1. "than the immediate, knee-jerk loathing of the American and European elites."
    - surely he does´t think that view is limited to that group?

    Actually I was watching a commentator on CNN and he said that if in 30-40 years Iraq is a thriving, peaceful democracy, and there are no more significant terrorist attacks on US soil then Bush´s legacy will probably be seen in a positive light. In the meantime he will be seen on the same rung as Herbert Hoover (pres when civil war started) and James Buchanan (pres when Great Depression started).

    So there is some hope for him at least.

    ReplyDelete
  2. if in 30-40 years Iraq is a thriving, peaceful democracy, and there are no more significant terrorist attacks on US soil then Bush´s legacy will probably be seen in a positive light.

    Geez Wayne. Nothing like raising the bar.

    Could we perhaps suggest that unless Obama can broker a 30 year peace treaty with Israel and Palestine, he will go down in history as a failed President?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think I quoted him right, I did have to go off memory.

    However if currently you´re not so hot, then for history´s perception to turn 180 degrees, then that ain´t going to happen in the first 10-20 years. So I think he meant more in the sense of "at that time", when the history books are ready to be written.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I read in the magazine Foreign Policy that Bush is being talked about NOW, for his excellent work in Africa.

    Good post Fletch; people are viewing things with such a narrow and myopic lens. Obama's the Messiah and he hasn't even been inducted yet!

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Obama's the Messiah and he hasn't even been inducted yet!"

    Or indicted.

    JC

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.