It is important to recall after Mr Bush finished second to Senator Gore in the 2,000 presidential election, he was nevertheless inaugurated in January 2001. The constitution has this thing about not allowing direct election of the president. The defender of the free world does not even directly elect the president. But to return to the main point.
Mr Bush on February 26, 2001 unleashed a savage, bombing campaign at sites and probably civilian targets near Baghdad in the ruthlessly enforced â€œno fly zone.â€ So he began his first term, along with his British puppets, with a barbaric and murderous raid on Iraq. When tried for war crimes, this immoral demonstration of American military madness should be on the docket of indictments.
I believe this was to send a message to Iraq that Mr Bush, as his predecessor, would be virile enough to continue the Crusade against Islam and Iraqi children with sanctions and continued strategic bombing. This was many months prior to the September 11 aeroplane attacks on the United States and, perhaps not coincidentally, aroused considerable anger in the Arab world. Usama (a variant spelling of Osama) bin Laden described this apparently unprovoked February raid as â€œthe policy of oppression and hostility, and to show that the blood of Muslims has no value.â€ (December 26, 2001)
One should note that actions do have consequences and that September 11 was not merely the beginning of a conflict but seen by some as a continuation of a conflict already in play. Americans must know that its wars do have consequences and that it canâ€™t always control the place and planning of military activities by their adversaries. Why we wage war, and canâ€™t live on the planet with other peoples is as aspect of American culture that academia must face and try to answer?
Days after Mr Bushâ€™s first presidential electoral victory over the confused Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, he ordered a massive invasion and destruction of Falluja. An earlier post indicated that American W.M.D. were used in this city-busting tactic.
I believe this act was planned before the election but postponed because the â€œWar Presidentâ€ was concerned if it went badly, fewer Americans would vote for him and he would lose the grandeur of the White House and the royal trappings of office. So war planning is intimately related to the political perceptions of the Commander in Chief.