September 11, 20039/14/01 In my view, Bush's9/14/01 In my view, Bush's Presidency effectively started on the 14th of September, 2001. I was living in NYC at the time just beginning to come to grips with what had occurred in lower Manhattan three days back. I was at my gym in Union Square working out--trying to resume some form of normal routine. Bush had just touched down at Ground Zero for his first visit to the site since the attacks. Gone were the lame MTV videos and moronic gossip programs I'd often spot people watching on the monitors above the exercise machines. All eyes were on the President. We all remember the moment when Bush, in an almost disapointingly routine fashion, began speaking to the firemen amidst the rubble of Ground Zero. Most audiences, even in times of crisis, listen dutifully to the Commander in Chief--even when they can't quite make out what a President is saying. But not this crowd. A fireman, with typical NYC insouciance and chutzpah, shouted to the President: "George, we can't hear you". The off the cuff words that Bush next uttered, indelibly encrusted in so many of our minds, signaled to me that we were moving on from a muddied pastiche of varied emotions--profound grief, incredulity, and rumblings for revenge. "I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon." Gosh, I thought, thank you Mr. President. I physically and mentally felt rejuvenated, back on even keel, more stolid. And then the firemen began to chant: "USA. USA. USA." And I thought--more than visiting the Pentagon, more than the ceremony at the National Cathedral the day before, Bush is getting it now. He realizes the massive scale of carnage at Ground Zero. The unadulterated barbarism of the perpetrators. The need for strong, focused, remedial action. The fact that the nation is at war--and for a long time. As a passionate fan of NYC, I think back to that moment. How NYC, its firemen in particular, helped Bush realize just how enormous the events of 9/11 were. Indeed, world-historical in scope. Immediately, Bush understood that we were now operating in an extra-judicial realm. The likely debates that would have occupied a Gore Administration--UN authority for punitive strikes? hale UBL to court? dare we enter Afghanistan?--were swept aside. But Bush went further. He understood then that the key was not merely rooting out terror groups but states that would harbor them. It was by no means sure that any President in power on 9/11 would have so instinctually and rapidly adopted a similar policy. Why did Bush get it? Because he innately understood the epoch-making nature of the event. He realized that terrorists would love nothing more than to devise ways to kill 30,000; 300,000; 3 million. Therefore, given the risks of WMD proliferation, states with track records of harboring or otherwise supporting terror activities needed to be put on warning that they would be considered enemies of the United States post 9/11. There was no other sane policy option to pursue if one takes seriously the duty of a government to protect its citizenry. Two years later, we see the limits of parts of Dubya's policy (or the manner by which it is sometimes implemented). We see how terror may have sometimes been defined too broadly, how a hyperpower (even one so wounded just two years back) is so easily widely feared, resented, often hated. We pause too and reflect on how defeating terror is not only a question of military prowess, intelligence cooperation, financial detective work--but also of conflict resolution, of addressing issues of national pride and struggle, of poverty and an enduring sense of injustice that afflicts too many around the globe (yes, even if Mohamed Atta was a son of the middle class and probably didn't really give two damns about the Palestinians). We will need to adjust, refine, occasionally temper our strategies. But the key reason Bush is still the man to beat in '04 is that, unlike many other prospective Presidents that could have been at the helm on 9/11, he understood immediately how the strategic world order had changed. Sure, he has overeached here and there (more on that another day). But his initial policy instincts, pressed on and emboldened by New York City's bravest on 9/14, were cogent and sound. In the naked face of cruel barbarism, Bush sought to protect the "better angels" of human nature during a great crisis. History will, at least, remember him kindly for that. UPDATE: This blog adds some relevant detail. Posted by Gregory at September 11, 2003 10:37 PMComments
Zithromax online antibiotic. Posted by: Zithromax Online at September 23, 2004 06:50 PM | Permalink to this commentInfo on Levaquin online. Posted by: Levaquin at October 13, 2004 03:11 AM | Permalink to this commentSeasonale online site. Posted by: Seasonale at October 14, 2004 10:02 PM | Permalink to this comment |
Reviews of Belgravia Dispatch
"Awake"
--New York Times
Recent Entries
The Coming Iraq Extravaganza on The Hill
Syria Hysteria, Postscript Random Musings....Put Up Over at BD The Problem With Fredos More Poor Policy: Special Designation of Revolutionary Guards Bush's Apocalyptic Rhetoric "We Can't Want It For Them More Then They Want It For Themselves" Syria Hysteria Maliki Emotes In-House News
Search
English Language Media
New York Times
Financial Times The Economist The Times The Spectator Daily Telegraph The New Yorker Washington Post New Criterion New Republic National Review The Atlantic Harpers The Week The Guardian Weekly Standard The Nation WSJ Opinion Matt Drudge Real Clear Politics
Foreign Affairs Commentariat
Non-English Language Press
The Blogs
Across the Aisle
America Abroad American Footprints The American Scene Armavirumque Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker-Posner Balloon Juice &C (TNR) Phil Carter Chequer-Board Steve Clemons Juan Cole The Corner Crooked Timber Cunning Realist Clive Davis Brad DeLong Democracy Arsensal Daniel Drezner Kevin Drum Glenn Greenwald Nikolas Gvosdev Huffington Post Innocents Abroad Mickey Kaus Mark Kleiman Josh Marshall Eric Martin Obsidian Wings Oxblog Foreign Policy's Passport The Plank Post Global Gideon Rachman Red State Romenesko Laura Rozen Andrew Sullivan James Taranto Katrina vanden Heuvel Volokh Conspiracy James Wolcott Matthew Yglesias
Columnists
Anne Applebaum
Tony Blankley David Broder David Brooks Roger Cohen Jackson Diehl Maureen Dowd Thomas Friedman Bob Herbert Fred Hiatt Jim Hoagland Richard Holbrooke David Ignatius Robert Kagan Michael Kinsley Charles Krauthammer Nicholas Kristof Paul Krugman Howard Kurtz Sebastian Mallaby Robert Novak The Reliable Source Frank Rich Mark Steyn John Tierney John Vinocur Washington Whispers George Will
Think Tanks
Law & Finance
Barron's
Bloomberg Bruce MacEwen Bull and Bear Wise CBS Marketwatch Contrary Investor Corporate Counsel Blog Corp Law Blog D.C. Toedt DealBreaker Deal Lawyers Blog Financial Sense Forbes Fortune Hussman Funds Gretchen Morgenson Floyd Norris Safe Haven SCOTUS Blog The Street 10b-5 Daily Yahoo Finance
Security
Books
The City
Curbed
Gawker Lockhart Steele NY Magazine Nick Denton NY Post NY Press New York Observer On The Inside Tribeca Trib Walk Through Village Voice
Archives
September 2007
August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
|||