George W. Bush decided to respond to totalitarian terrorist attacks with a return to basic principles. He could have chosen appeasement. He could have opted for mere rhetoric. He decided not to do so. He decided to oppose brutality with steadfast conviction. Now a wide majority of his people has backed this policy. . . .International Terrorism, Inc., miscalculated if they thought America could be bullied like Spain.
Many took for granted the fact that Mr. Bush would be defeated. They were wrong. The mistake committed by those who create caricatures is that they believe that normal people are going to substitute reality with caricature. The American people have decided that the best option is to offer a new mandate to Mr. Bush. . .
George W. Bush has not only had to face the enemies of democracy but also stand up to a front of rejection made up of various different groups, a veritable negative coalition whose only unifying principle was to ensure that he was defeated. Some observers believed that the majority would now pronounce itself to be against the decision to go to Afghanistan and Iraq in order to prevent the terrorist threat from rising. The temptation of comfort and convenience is a powerful one. Our democracies are not especially well prepared for the idea that they are under threat. They are not well prepared to combat an enemy that is as diffuse as it is daring and lethal.
Aristotle-to-Ricardo-to-Hayek turn the double play way better than Plato-to-Rousseau-to-Rawls
Thursday, November 04, 2004
Do What I Say, Not What We Did
Must-read article (subscription only) by Jose Maria Aznar--Spain's former Prime Minister overthrown by Al Qeada bombs--in today's WSJ:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
yea!!!! \m/
Post a Comment