The problems with Bush's approach

Submitted by Geep (United States), Oct 31, 2004 at 10:50

Dr Pipes, I respectfully disagree with some of your points. Bush's stance has consistently been that America is safer because of the war in Iraq. Is this really based on reality? I don't think so. If Bin Laden were to run for President of the Middle East today in a democratically held election wouldn't he have a greater chance of winning than if the US had not invaded Iraq?

As Thomas Friedman said in his article, we just cannot fight a billion people and Mr Bush's policies have only led to more angry Muslims looking to kill Americans in the middle-east. It is not enough to disarm somebody; it is more important to defuse his anger. The goal should not just be a democracy but a democracy where there is no danger of Bin Laden getting elected if he ran for President.

Currently this is not so and judging from what Cheney said ("Iraq is a smashing success"), it does not appear that this administration understands this and that is why we need a fresh start.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".