Al Re..."If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us," he said in the second presidential debate against Al Gore in 2000. "If we're a humble nation but strong, they'll welcome us."
The US generally has conducted a humble but strong military campaign against Iraq. I think there is no doubt our casualties would be lower, but Iraq civilian casualties far higher if the US waged all out war. Just because a some people use the word arrogant, doesn't necessarily mean it is true.
That was a promise to check hubris at the door, an effort to guard against the temptation to believe that because he had such awesome power at his fingertips, he could and should use it to achieve grandiose objectives.
And many nations mistook that to mean weak. France thought that statement meant we would back down, at the mearest mention of the word arrogant. France was just as arrogant, if one wishes to use that word, treating other members of the EU. And now France is begging to be included in the reconstruction.
In any case, the people who stand behind the swagger of this presidency were hired long before 9/11.
You will note that Gw and his advisors, didn't start to assert US power until after 9/11, when it became obvious that the challenge must be met. Would you prefer a president who is too afraid to use military power to defend us, a military with no swagger. I think not. Look at the type of war Saddam is waging, using civilians as shields. Is that what you are talking about, when you talk humble. I am sorry to disagree, but I will take our style and swagger over Saddams anyday. |
