Why Obama Should Thank Bush

Published in Oriental Morning News
(China) on 07 Novemeber 2008
by Ding Gang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Yaqing Wen. Edited by .

<Edited by Louis Standish </p>

Bush’s War on Terror constructed a platform from where Obama could speak up and stand out against his opponents. Obama’s win confirmed the failure of Bush’s government, but it also confirmed the basic strategic goals of that administration.

Behind the dazzling light of the prospect of Obama's term, the political achievements of Bush’s government have lost their luster, and all that’s left is the dark side, like the economic recession, the financial crisis, the war where America is currently trapped, the ugly image of the U.S. in the world, etc. Americans seem to have forgotten something.

One of the most important reasons that McCain lost is because of the financial crisis. Because of his relationship with Bush, McCain was blamed for the crisis. The economy was the weakness of the Bush government and for McCain’s campaign. After the financial crisis, McCain was even more stuck between a rock and a hard place.

But McCain also had strong points; first is anti-terrorism, also a strong point for Bush. The War on Terror was the biggest political achievement of Bush’s term. The fact that the U.S. has not been attacked the last few years is all due to the anti-terrorism strategies of the Bush administration. Even though this war came at a great cost to the U.S., denounced by the world and causing the decline of America’s image, Americans have lived safe and secure these past few years.

Because the U.S. was so safe, terrorism no longer was an issue people worried about. Especially with the economy teetering precariously on the brink of recession, Americans clutched their wallets and forgot about from where their national security came.

According to CNN, the issue that was on everyone’s mind during this election was the economy according to 60% of voters. These people mostly voted for Obama. Only 9% thought that terrorism was still an important issue, and these people mostly voted for McCain.

Compared with the 2004 election, 19% of voters thought terrorism was an issue, and these people mostly voted for Bush.

Therefore, the biggest fear of the Obama campaign was another 9/11. If another terror attack were to happen, people would blame the Bush government for inadequate preparation, but more likely they would doubt if Obama would respond as vehemently as Bush did to terrorism. People would look to McCain for his experience as a war hero.

Since the election went on without any disturbances, the Obama campaign had nothing to worry about. An American voter wrote on the internet, “Why doesn’t Bin Laden strike during election time? Maybe he endorses Obama and not McCain?”

If Bin Laden were to really launch another attack on the U.S., it would not be so easy this time, because of three reasons:

Firstly, the U.S. military has long destroyed the old base of the terrorists, attacked until Bin Laden had nowhere to run. Other than relieving their more urgent worries, terrorists have long lived on dwindled resources.

Secondly, the U.S. greatly increased its national security, constructed an enormous, complicated, complete, and detailed security system. Safety procedures like fingerprinting, taking off one’s shoes, etc. hardly gave terrorists a chance.

Thirdly, though the U.S. has had a considerable number of disputes with other countries, especially its allies, overall its relationships are fairly healthy. Or, at least its allies supported the U.S.’s counter terror efforts financially.

These three reasons were also the three most important goals of the Bush era. Some may say that after the devastation of the financial crisis, the Bush term has not had any political achievements. Yet, Bush’s original goal was not a strong economy, not a positive image for the U.S., but to fight a war on terror. If a government realized its most important goal, is that then not political achievement?

Of course, not every strategy can be perfect. Unfortunately, one of the side effects included the financial crisis. If Wall Street didn’t have so many companies creating so many bubbles, then where there would not be such an endless flow of money to America. It is from this money that the U.S. maintained so many years of prosperity, from this money that the U.S. funded wars and maintained seven years of safety and security.

Yes, Bush’s failure provided Obama the chance to be elected, but more importantly, Bush’s War on Terror gave voters a chance to elect him. If not, they might be hiding who knows where afraid of another attack by Bin Laden, instead of outside cheering for Obama. They would choose someone just like Bush, a cowboy who rules with an iron fist.


???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????????????????????????60%????????????????????????????????9%?????????????????????????????????

????2004??????19%???????????????????????????????????????

?????????????????????????“9·11”?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????·?????????????????????????????????????????????

???·??????????????????????????????????????????????????

?????????????????????????????·???????????????????????????????

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“????”??????????????????????·???

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????7??????

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????·????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Topics

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Related Articles

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands

Zimbabwe: What the West Doesn’t Understand about China’s Growing Military Might