Wednesday, September 25, 2024

Take a peek behind the curtain and test drive the NEW StateNews.com today!

Rumsfeld speech offensive, inaccurate

On Aug. 29, Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld addressed the American Legion at the 88th Annual American Legion National Convention in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Throughout the speech, Rumsfeld compared the time leading up to the war on terror to the time between World War I and World War II, saying, "It was a time when a certain amount of cynicism and moral confusion set in among Western democracies. When those who warned about a coming crisis, the rise of fascism and Nazism, they were ridiculed or ignored. Indeed, in the decades before World War II, a great many argued that the fascist threat was exaggerated or that it was someone else's problem."

Needless to say, his comments have evoked controversy among critics of the Iraq war, critics who Rumsfeld compared to those who tried to appease the Nazis before World War II.

Rumsfeld's latest remarks are the most recent made in a long string, not only by Rumsfeld, but also by the entire Bush administration.

And what do you know? It's an election year, and the Republicans are facing tough competition from the Democrats and an American public that seems to want a change. A recent poll by CNN showed that 84 percent of respondents were unhappy with congressional action in 2006, while 55 percent said they were unhappy with President Bush's performance.

And with statistics like these, why shouldn't the Republican Party worry?

Why shouldn't they start spewing nonsense, throwing around the magic words?

You do know which words I'm talking about, right?

The words the Bush administration uses every time something starts to go wrong. The words they are using to make everyone forget about the wiretapping scandals, the hurricanes and the struggling economy.

You know. Sept. 11? War on terror? How about homeland security?

Every time the administration gets into trouble, that's all they have to say. Sept. 11. Homeland security. War on terror. And suddenly, the focus shifts. Is this an administration that, instead of owning up to and trying to amend political missteps, tries to scare the public into submission? This sure appears to be the case.

For example, take Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's address at the American Legion National Convention, given just hours after Rumsfeld's speech.

"Because we've gone on the offensive, America is safer, but we are not yet safe. We know that every day, each and every day, violent extremists are plotting new ways to do us harm.

We know for now and many years to come, America and our allies will be engaged in a long war," she said.

Also that day, Vice President Dick Cheney added his own terrifying commentary, saying, "This is not an enemy that can be ignored, or negotiated with, or appeased. And every retreat by civilized nations is an invitation to further violence against us. Men who despise freedom will attack freedom in any part of the world."

It only seems fitting they would try to use the magic-word strategy to attempt to hold seats in an election likely to be dominated by Democratic victories, in an effort to distract voters from real issues — like the inability of a Republican-dominated Congress to be productive and attentive.

"Today — another enemy, a different kind of enemy — has made it clear its intentions with attacks in places like New York and Washington, D.C., Bali, London, Madrid, Moscow and so many other places. But some seem not to have learned history's lesson," Rumsfeld said.

Which history is Rumsfeld talking about? Surely he can't be referring to World War II as he alludes. If this were anything like World War II, al-Qaida would have already been defeated within four years as the Nazis were by the U.S., and international terrorist plots would be nonexistent. Our troops would not still be fighting and dying in a country where they aren't always welcome.

Perhaps instead of looking at military history, Rumsfeld and the Bush administration should take a minute to look at U.S. voting history. They would realize that historically, the executive party loses votes in the election after a poor presidential performance.

Perhaps they already have. Why else would they be dropping the magic words so frequently?

Kristyn Peterson, State News staff writer, can be reached at peter560@msu.edu.

Discussion

Share and discuss “Rumsfeld speech offensive, inaccurate” on social media.