GWB vs BHO

Submitted by Yale (United States), May 29, 2014 at 12:43

The failures are of very different kinds: Bush sought success, but didn't pay close enough attention to get there. Obama sought failure and will probably succeed in getting there. No-one wants to be the last casualty of a failure, which is why getting out now makes sense, even though it will be bad for the world. Bush ran the wars according to management school doctrine: put in the minimum resources necessary to make a satisfactory outcome likely, but no more. The other issue with Bush is that he lacked the intellectual curiosity to master the details necessary to make the wars successful. Obama has actually been seeking to ensure failure, as long as he could blame Bush. By doing so, he has undermined US credibility around the world and is thus responsible for the growing roster of crises from Syria to Crimea and Ukraine to China's land grabs. There is one other consideration: Having the example of Obama basically throwing their sacrifices down the toilet, will Americans ever be willing to follow their leaders into a military campaign knowing full well that a successor might decide to change policy?

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".