From the Corner on National Review:
There’s analysis in today’s Washington Post entitled, “Bush's 'Axis of Evil' Comes Back to Haunt United States.” Some critics argue that Bush’s language was unhelpful and that his diplomacy and rhetoric antagonized key allies. Others say the war in Iraq distracted. Let’s be fair: To condemn the Axis of Evil speech is to condemn Bush for prescience. He didn’t create the Axis of Evil; rather, he voiced the problem. And if that shocked European diplomats, well too bad. If it’s a choice between national security and enabling European diplomats to remain secure in their illusions, I’d hope both Republicans and Democrats would favor the former. Clinton administration attempts to engage the Taliban and the North Korean regime were folly. Any attempt to do likewise with Iran would be equally inane. Certain regimes cannot be appeased. Dialogue is no panacea.Emphasis is mine, as it usually is
OK, first, Rubin is dead on in his analysis of all the Monday morning quarterbacking. Why is it that all of Bill Clinton's pronouncements against Iraq are not seen as unhelpful to the process that followed? Bubba was just stating what could happen, as President Bush stated in his speech. He voiced the problem. He was out there, sounding the alarm, trying to get us to realize what was going on. However, because it would again appear that Bubba was not focused enough on foreign policy, the Dems and Leftists would rather fracture a nation in a time of war and conflict rather than simply admit the mistakes and move on and work to fight our enemies and solve the problems. Instead, they bog us down with debates of who did what to who when, who really knew what, what was she wearing, were the stains taken out....ooops, sorry, got Clinton's question to ask Monica cribsheet mixed with the issues sheet.
Look, Ronald Reagan dropped the ball in not dealing with Iran, Libya, et.al. more forcefully. I acknowledge that. However, one could make the argument that he was more focused on ending the more imminent threat of Soviet hegemony and such. But, I do acknowledge that he did not do enough. Why can't the Clintonites simply do the same, and then we can say, yep, we screwed up. We didn't do enough, but by God we need to go and get together and get something done now. WE need to show a united front to Kim and Imadegenerate in Iran and such and get things rolling. Nope, instead, they want to play who made who?
The last few lines of Rubin's comments are just as meaningful. We have seen the wrongs of appeasement in WWII. We have seen how just letting other people have their own way, to not, I guess, as Katie Couric said, be the boss of them, or as Diane Sawyer idiotically said we don't have the right to, to tell people to behave; we have seen how disastrous that was. And we are seeing it again. Appeasing the Taliban, appeasing North Korea and China were mistakes by the Clinton Administration. OK, fair enough, Bush has made a few, so did Reagan. However, let's get past that and decide how to move forward, and more talk and rewarding bad behavior is simply not the way to do it.
