This is about using force and force alone as US foreign policy. It does not have as its central component an attempt to help produce democracy. Fear us, it says. That, I'm afraid, is all.
Nope, it says nothing about "force alone". Force is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition. However, since it's the force that has been sadly lacking lately, we are now concentrating on the force. It's called, reestablishing our deterrent. When the force has been demonstrated, then we will have to use other tools to send the message that cooperation is more profitable than emnity.
The Bush folk and their supporters see the Iraqi attack as a way to reconfigure foreign policy not simply from the previous ten years but from much further back. Not even the Reagan people trumpeted a doctrine of preemptive attacks.
Yes, you have that straight. Have you read Tom Friedman, writing well to the left of Bush or Reagan? Even he will tell you, the nature of the threat has changed in a globalized world.
Thus the change in our response. Even so, we have no guarantee of safety, just a reasonable prediction that we will be safer if the Arab world perceives us as strong than if they perceive us as weak. The Arab world does have a track record in this regard; they respect force and despise weakness.
We can't solve the problems of the Arab world; that, they have to do for themselves. But toppling a tyrant like Saddam Hussein, that is doable, and from the point of view of US interests, necessary. |
