Bush or Kerry? I'd say neither.
The US elections are upon us. Should I care? Maybe. Do I? No.
Perhaps if I approved of either candidate I would. But, when faced with the reality that either of these "deeply-flawed men" will become what is effectively the leader of the free world, it’s impossible for me to feel anything but regret, apprehension and a certain degree of apathy (yes, I know I’m contradicting myself somewhat).
I must admit that at the beginning of the race, I favoured Kerry. The problem is that I wasn’t as much for him as I was against Bush. From the few people I have asked, the general impression is that the word “Bush” is now synonymous with the word “idiot”. This, as far as I can remember, is a first for US presidents. It might be noted that “Clinton” was synonymous with “fornicator” but that was only to be expected.
But now, the problem is that Kerry, other than appearing at least twice as intelligent as Bush, is also coming across as twice as indecisive. Sure, Bush may have bungled the war in Iraq but at least he knows what he wants and that is to kill terrorists. Conversely, Kerry has claimed the war to be a mistake despite voting for it earlier. This surely shows that if Kerry were to take over, his commitment to the cause would be questionable.
This is exactly what America and the rest of the world don’t need. We need someone who’s going to go at it day after day, year after year, with relentless fervour no matter what the challenges.
George Bush showed the determination to do what he felt right and the courage to go it alone if that was what it took. The invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do, given the information and circumstances of the time. The decision to ignore the UN, while irreverent, was exactly the kick up the arse that that old man’s club needed.
This doesn’t mean that Bush is the right man for the job though. I don’t doubt that he has the drive. If nothing else, he has at least proved himself in that sense. But, and this is a big but, his ability has been seriously called into question. It’s true that Afghanistan has progressed since the invasion. The Taliban has gone and the country has just held its first democratic elections. Congratulations. But you’re only as good as your last achievement and the debacle in Iraq must surely speak badly of Bush. No one doubted that the US would drive Saddam Hussein from Baghdad. But Bush’s short-sightedness then became painfully apparent. By committing too few troops to maintain security and ensure a smooth (or at least smoother) transition, Bush has lost whatever kudos he may have gained previously. The atrocities at Abu Ghraib highlight the mentality that Bush has unwittingly instilled in his soldiers which some say reflects his own attitude towards Arabs. Bush certainly has done himself no favours with his rhetoric - the use of the word “crusade” being one example.
So, with that said, I’m glad the decision isn’t mine to make. (At least over here, the choice is clear. Not because I pledge allegiance to the powers-that-be but because the opposition is generally made up of comedians.) The choice Americans face is certainly one of the hardest ever and the pre-election polls show it. Bush or Kerry, the decision is fraught with danger either way. Thus, with regard to the next four years, all I can say is good luck.
Perhaps if I approved of either candidate I would. But, when faced with the reality that either of these "deeply-flawed men" will become what is effectively the leader of the free world, it’s impossible for me to feel anything but regret, apprehension and a certain degree of apathy (yes, I know I’m contradicting myself somewhat).
I must admit that at the beginning of the race, I favoured Kerry. The problem is that I wasn’t as much for him as I was against Bush. From the few people I have asked, the general impression is that the word “Bush” is now synonymous with the word “idiot”. This, as far as I can remember, is a first for US presidents. It might be noted that “Clinton” was synonymous with “fornicator” but that was only to be expected.
But now, the problem is that Kerry, other than appearing at least twice as intelligent as Bush, is also coming across as twice as indecisive. Sure, Bush may have bungled the war in Iraq but at least he knows what he wants and that is to kill terrorists. Conversely, Kerry has claimed the war to be a mistake despite voting for it earlier. This surely shows that if Kerry were to take over, his commitment to the cause would be questionable.
This is exactly what America and the rest of the world don’t need. We need someone who’s going to go at it day after day, year after year, with relentless fervour no matter what the challenges.
George Bush showed the determination to do what he felt right and the courage to go it alone if that was what it took. The invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do, given the information and circumstances of the time. The decision to ignore the UN, while irreverent, was exactly the kick up the arse that that old man’s club needed.
This doesn’t mean that Bush is the right man for the job though. I don’t doubt that he has the drive. If nothing else, he has at least proved himself in that sense. But, and this is a big but, his ability has been seriously called into question. It’s true that Afghanistan has progressed since the invasion. The Taliban has gone and the country has just held its first democratic elections. Congratulations. But you’re only as good as your last achievement and the debacle in Iraq must surely speak badly of Bush. No one doubted that the US would drive Saddam Hussein from Baghdad. But Bush’s short-sightedness then became painfully apparent. By committing too few troops to maintain security and ensure a smooth (or at least smoother) transition, Bush has lost whatever kudos he may have gained previously. The atrocities at Abu Ghraib highlight the mentality that Bush has unwittingly instilled in his soldiers which some say reflects his own attitude towards Arabs. Bush certainly has done himself no favours with his rhetoric - the use of the word “crusade” being one example.
So, with that said, I’m glad the decision isn’t mine to make. (At least over here, the choice is clear. Not because I pledge allegiance to the powers-that-be but because the opposition is generally made up of comedians.) The choice Americans face is certainly one of the hardest ever and the pre-election polls show it. Bush or Kerry, the decision is fraught with danger either way. Thus, with regard to the next four years, all I can say is good luck.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home