In A Word - Crises. America faces not one but many crises. Is there a way out or are we in trouble?
Gerald Eisman
July 09, 2006
knee-jerk Crisis - A crucial or decisive point or situation; a turning point. An unstable condition, as in political, social, or economic affairs, involving an impending abrupt or decisive change.
Thanks to the clear, thoughtful leadership exhibited by America's commander-in-chief and his administration, the nation finds itself in crisis. You won't hear this admission from those in power, but for a person who thinks with his mind and sees and hears with his senses, the evidence is like crystal.
Taken from the top, the countdown reads like a bad dime store novel. There is eroding security and a step-up in destructive activity from the Taliban in Afghanistan and loss of trust in its president, Hamid Karzai, deteriorating security in Somalia, and an undeclared civil war in Iraq coupled with swiftly slumping backing of the president Jalal Talabani. Add to that, riotous confusion and havoc in the middle east and the nation has its hands full of problems in that area of the world.
Now, add to that problem the launching of missiles into the sea of Japan by the maverick regime of North Korea and the defiant continuance of enriching uranium by the Iranians. Both acts represent the thumbing of those country's noses at the entire world and you have a second front of difficulties. In addition, our relations with Russia are eroding faster than the melting of the glaciers.
On the domestic front, the growth of the economy, though steady, is slowing and of no help whatsoever to the individual citizen. His money isn't going far enough so the average household requires two members of a family to work to cover the indebtedness incurred. In many cases, three family members must work to maintain the status quo. Food prices are increasing faster than purchasing power, gas prices have surged upward and inflation, always a worry, is rearing its ugly head.
What a wonderful state of the nation we face at this moment.
Richard N. Haass, a former senior Bush administration official said this; "I am hard pressed to think of any other moment in modern times where there have been so many challenges facing this country. The danger is that Mr. Bush will hand over a White House to a successor that will face a far messier world, with far fewer resources left to cope with it."
In their usual knee-jerk reaction, administration officials branded this thinking pessimistic rather than factual or realistic. National Security advisor, Stephen J Hadley commented that that type of criticism is misplaced, adding that victory in Iraq is crucial to success in fighting terrorists and creating a new democracy that could serve as a beacon to other Middle Eastern countries. In his remarks, Hadley stated the 'stakes' are high but the administration feels the rewards are proportionate to the effort while failure would present sobering gravity.
The list of difficulties faced by the administration is huge, and, adding to the woes, our neighbor to the south faces a presently uncertain future based on a presidential election that is too close to really call with accuracy and, the price of oil has reached a record high.
American foreign policy is currently in the middle of a dilemma. Both conservative realists like Haass and liberal internationalists like Madeleine Albright, former secretary of state are speaking out against the current administration trends. According to Albright, we are not as much unilateral as we are uni-dimensional. It seems we haven't been paying attention to the details, she said. As an example, she pointed out the troubles that have sprung up in Afghanistan noting how little attention we have paid to it.
William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and a leading conservative commentator had this to say about the situation. "North Korea is firing missiles. Iran is going nuclear. Somalia is controlled by radical Islamists. Iraq isn't getting better, and Afghanistan is getting worse. I give the president a lot of credit for hanging tough on Iraq. But I am worried that it has made them too passive in confronting the other threats."
Both Republicans and Democrats feel the nation is capable of dealing with multiple crises, but the real question is, how well. Former national security advisor to president Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brezezinski said this: "It's like a juggler. You have to keep the balls going. Any one of them that is out of trajectory threatens all the others."
America is in the throes of crisis. It isn't the individual woes that are causing the disunity and confusion, but the cumulative effect of all combined. It is time for Mr. Bush to take stock of his direction and activity and bring his view of the world back into planetary focus. This is no longer the time to be an 1860's western cowboy who shoots from the hip with his six-shooter to obtain justice and right wrongs. This is the 21st century and cooler headed diplomacy and intelligent discourse will win the day and dissipate the crises.
Thanks to the clear, thoughtful leadership exhibited by America's commander-in-chief and his administration, the nation finds itself in crisis. You won't hear this admission from those in power, but for a person who thinks with his mind and sees and hears with his senses, the evidence is like crystal.
Taken from the top, the countdown reads like a bad dime store novel. There is eroding security and a step-up in destructive activity from the Taliban in Afghanistan and loss of trust in its president, Hamid Karzai, deteriorating security in Somalia, and an undeclared civil war in Iraq coupled with swiftly slumping backing of the president Jalal Talabani. Add to that, riotous confusion and havoc in the middle east and the nation has its hands full of problems in that area of the world.
Now, add to that problem the launching of missiles into the sea of Japan by the maverick regime of North Korea and the defiant continuance of enriching uranium by the Iranians. Both acts represent the thumbing of those country's noses at the entire world and you have a second front of difficulties. In addition, our relations with Russia are eroding faster than the melting of the glaciers.
On the domestic front, the growth of the economy, though steady, is slowing and of no help whatsoever to the individual citizen. His money isn't going far enough so the average household requires two members of a family to work to cover the indebtedness incurred. In many cases, three family members must work to maintain the status quo. Food prices are increasing faster than purchasing power, gas prices have surged upward and inflation, always a worry, is rearing its ugly head.
What a wonderful state of the nation we face at this moment.
Richard N. Haass, a former senior Bush administration official said this; "I am hard pressed to think of any other moment in modern times where there have been so many challenges facing this country. The danger is that Mr. Bush will hand over a White House to a successor that will face a far messier world, with far fewer resources left to cope with it."
In their usual knee-jerk reaction, administration officials branded this thinking pessimistic rather than factual or realistic. National Security advisor, Stephen J Hadley commented that that type of criticism is misplaced, adding that victory in Iraq is crucial to success in fighting terrorists and creating a new democracy that could serve as a beacon to other Middle Eastern countries. In his remarks, Hadley stated the 'stakes' are high but the administration feels the rewards are proportionate to the effort while failure would present sobering gravity.
The list of difficulties faced by the administration is huge, and, adding to the woes, our neighbor to the south faces a presently uncertain future based on a presidential election that is too close to really call with accuracy and, the price of oil has reached a record high.
American foreign policy is currently in the middle of a dilemma. Both conservative realists like Haass and liberal internationalists like Madeleine Albright, former secretary of state are speaking out against the current administration trends. According to Albright, we are not as much unilateral as we are uni-dimensional. It seems we haven't been paying attention to the details, she said. As an example, she pointed out the troubles that have sprung up in Afghanistan noting how little attention we have paid to it.
William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and a leading conservative commentator had this to say about the situation. "North Korea is firing missiles. Iran is going nuclear. Somalia is controlled by radical Islamists. Iraq isn't getting better, and Afghanistan is getting worse. I give the president a lot of credit for hanging tough on Iraq. But I am worried that it has made them too passive in confronting the other threats."
Both Republicans and Democrats feel the nation is capable of dealing with multiple crises, but the real question is, how well. Former national security advisor to president Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brezezinski said this: "It's like a juggler. You have to keep the balls going. Any one of them that is out of trajectory threatens all the others."
America is in the throes of crisis. It isn't the individual woes that are causing the disunity and confusion, but the cumulative effect of all combined. It is time for Mr. Bush to take stock of his direction and activity and bring his view of the world back into planetary focus. This is no longer the time to be an 1860's western cowboy who shoots from the hip with his six-shooter to obtain justice and right wrongs. This is the 21st century and cooler headed diplomacy and intelligent discourse will win the day and dissipate the crises.
Print
Email
