Monday, May 28, 2007
In Defence of Jimmy Carter
I posted this image from my coverage of an Obama meet up on Flickr. One viewer liked it enough t comment but saw it as a statement against the Democrats.
Hardly so, I replied, These folks are actually three Republicans who, out of digust for what has happened to their Party, are backing Mr. Obama. I related this and the correspondent, Anthony Lachica, replied that it was sad that the American people did not support the commitment of their leaders when times got tough. Mr. Lachica then extolled Lincoln and Roosevelt, presumably as avatars for Mr. Bush. By comparison, he dissed the leadership of Mr. Carter. Holding up the Carer presidency as an example of couwardice, I suppose, in comparison to George II's record of courage.
Here is my reply, with some edits for SJ.
Dear Mr. Anthony Lachica,
If you are saying what I think you are saying, we could not disagree more.
First, Mr. Carter. Here are some facts.
Mr. Carter succeeded an administration , the Nixon administration, that literally tried to overthrow our system of government. Jimmy brought with him a level of integrity and idealism that was unrivaled.
He also told us the truth about many things we should have listened to:
1, the coming fall of the Soviet Empire as a a result of inevitable economic forces. The rport by Carter's CIA was accurate to the year when the USSR fell!
2. the coming energy crisis and our need to research alternative fuels (a program dumped by his successor!).
Imagine where we could be now if Reagan had not dunped Carter's energy policies.
3. The need to redesign the American military to deal with insurgent nations rather than with the two big wars model. (Carter's increases in Defence spending were larger than Reagan's. Reagan blew dollars on sillinesses like Battleships (quietly retired by Bush) and star wars toys.
The delta force, the small carrier group ... the kind of Army that invaded Afghanistan were the product of the Carter years.
4. Preached the need for a multinational alliance rather than the US as world cop.
If Bush had not dumped the alliances built by his Dad we would have "won" in Iraq. The USoA ain't powerful enough to rule the Earth on our own. We need allies.
Reagan gets a lot of credit for replacing Mr. Carter's dour do-goodism with patriotism. Rightly so. One reaosn I support Obama is the belief that we need a charismatic leader now. BUT, when Ronnie became senile, the then Publicans had the smarts ot put Howard Baker in the White House as a caretaker.
Did Jimmy fail as suggested by this cartoon? Or was he exactly the kind of hero you write about? This is, after all a cartoon, the following image of Bush hobnobbing with Prince Bandar is real. (Bandar offered Guiliani millions of dollars in the name of blame for Israel for 9/11, Rudi refused.).
The right enjoys painting Mr. Carter as an appeaser. But was he? Or was the appeasement more a matter of the image he (failed) to project to an American public looking for a cowboy? Was Reagan an appeaser for sending Ollie North to Iran to deal for the hostages? Was Carter an appeaser for convincing the N. Koreans that it was in their interest to delay development of missiles and bombs? Who was the bigger fool? Time will tell about these too, but we don't have the need or the luxury of waiting in respect to the current President.
Mr. Carter certainly lacked the charisma to lead the Americans. On the other hand, he also had the integrity, unlike Msrs. North and Reagan, NOT to bargain with the Iranian Islamo fascists over the hostages (or did you think the freeing of the hostages was not a bribe to Reagan?). Do you doubt that we would be better off today if Jimmy had the leadership skills to redirect us on a path of energy independence or do you REALLY like the involvement of the Bush family with Saudi oil men? Which do you suppose would have been more in the USoA's interest? investing 10 billion a month in our schools and infrastructure or siphoning it into Iraq?
Back to the present, Mr. Carter has become a welcome voice for peace. He is not always correct. Obviously his choice of words in relationship to Palestinians living in Apartheid was a loaded gun. Even here, however, he showed amazing courage and fore sight. Carter's goal was to do for the Palestinians what they can not do for themselves .. show their pain! I am a Zionist, but Israel can not survive until the Palestinians solve their problem. I say "their" intentionally because it will take their leadership to seek peace. Jimmy was wrong not to point this out.
Back at the trio in the picture. They are still, IMHO, good Republicans. Like me they are very patriotic, frightened by Islamofascism , wanting their kids to live in peace and opposed to a classist society. They were Bushies, I was not. They believed in the Invasion of Iraq, so did I. They beleived in the need to balance Iran, I still do.
So, what is left of your (implicit) comparison of Bush to the courageous Presidents of the past? I believe that Bush and his then colleagues (most of whom have now fled the ship or been fired) believed in the invasion. Why have all of Bush's highest level confidants left? Because Bush is incompetent. That is the dire truth.
Let me tell you one last thing. I do not support a timetable. Why? Because the idea of this incompetent President with his utter lack of belief in the Constitution, leading a strategic retreat from the mess he created is simply beyond belief.
Should the moderates in the Congress unite and pass more restrictive war legislation, I am frightened that Bush will utterly mess up the retreat, endangering our men and women, abandoning the Kurds and other intra-Iraq allies, and leveling the playing field for the Islamofascistii not because Bush means badly but because, as Mr Carter said. Bush is the most incompetent leader the US has ever had.
Worst of all, an intransigent Bush, elected in the first place by a dubious decision of the Supreme Court, has shown that he all to willing to risk our Constitution in the pursuit of his goals. That attitude, combined with incompetence could have unimaginable consequences for my country.
If you want a huge scare in re our survival of the next 2 years, listen to this address by Joseph Cirincione, a respected non-proliferation expert. He has impressive things to say, even about Reagan's role in disarmament. But the comments on the retrograde and incompetent behavior of the current regime are scary. You might be interested that he endorses Republican AND Democratic leaders he fnds competent to succeed mr. Bush. Lets hope we survive Bush.
Tx for listening.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment