All of you probably know by now (if you watched Garrett and my debate) that I won’t shy away from a fight except maybe the one that (Sierra and William are about to throw down on…I’m staying well away from that) so there’s no way I could let Garrett get away with his “Putin for Bush!” post.
But before I get to the bulk of Garrett’s post, let’s get a couple things straight. Of course Putin is supporting Bush. In exchange for Putin not raising hell about National Missile Defense system or any of the other huge mistakes the Bushies have made, they’ve given Putin a free hand to do anything he pleases, from consolidating his own power and setting democracy even further behind in Russia (read more here and here ), to doing whatever he pleases in the war in Chechnya (how’s that going, by the way?
Chechnya is like Iraq, except it’s been going on longer, bloodier, and deadlier, while Russians are beginning to second-guess the strategy.
But on to the meat of Garrett’s very interesting question: who would Bin Laden prefer?
There’s no question it’s Bush.
If you’re looking to build a terrorist network, who better than a President who said we’re going “on a crusade” to help you recruit Muslims?
Who better than a President who, when he had the opportunity to tighten the noose, allowed Bin Laden to escape into the mountains of Tora Bora?
Who better than a President who actually thought Iraq is and was a center of terror, when terrorists weren’t even in the country until after we invaded, smashed up the infrastructure, and replaced it with US forces?
Don’t believe me? Musab al-Zarqawi (the main terrorist now in Iraq) is from Jordan, not Iraq…but he wasn’t there before we invaded. Saddam certainly was a bad guy…but not by al-Qaida standards.
Who better than a President who is in bed with the Saudis, Bin Laden’s second (or biggest, at some times) enemy? Seen any action by the U.S. on the land that supplied 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th? Nope. Not so much as a complaint…even down to the price of oil.
Who better than a President who says there is no deficit, and who instead pours money into his own mistake in Iraq and to drug companies and the rich at home?
Who better than a man who can’t, for the life of him, correctly pronounce “nuclear” or “mullahs”?
Bin Laden knows.
With Bush as President, Bin Laden’s recruiting stays high. Bush will continue make the wrong choices in the war on terror, keeping the heat off Bin Laden. The longer Bush is in office, the weaker our finances get, the more Bin Laden gets mileage from his strikes because we’re too poor and have our military stretched too thin to respond.
Which brings me, as much as I am loathe to give any credit to conspiracy theorists (even while holding my X-Files coffee mug), to the Bushies use of terror alerts. Haven’t seen John Ashcroft much lately, have we? Or Tom Ridge? Condi’s out campaigning when she should be back in Washington doing her job …
With the election slowly slipping away ( check these electoral college websites as Kerry increases his lead over Garrett’s protestations), Rove & Co. have only one option left…they have to play the terror card.
By scaring the tar out of people in cities, the Bushies could depress turnout just enough to swing some key states their way. Don’t think Rove won’t do it. It’s his M.O….do anything to win…or more precisely, charge your opponent with doing exactly what you’re doing so people miss it.
And whaddya know, that’s exactly what the Republicans are charging Kerry with right now. Forgive me for being cynical…I’ve been through four years of this. Here’s hoping the next twelve days won’t be more of the same.
Respond
Back to top