According to Karl Rove, the Republican strategy for reelection should focus on national security. While that is all fine and good, aside from posturing, has there been any real improvement in national security? The Bush administration continuously points to the fact that there have been no other terror attacks since 2001. But it is unclear if this can be credited to our Intelligence agencies, which we have discovered are not really intelligent, or to the fact that terror organizations were simply busy elsewhere (e.g., Spain and London). In which case all we have succeeded in doing is making the US safer at the expense of our Allies (if they still call themselves that).
Recordings from this week alone, already prove that that Osama bin Laden is still alive. Osama, the mastermind behind 9/11 and, aside from Pearl Harbor, one of the greatest breeches in American security, has alluded the world's only super power for over 5 years now. Bush promised not to rest unless he was captured dead or alive. Yet pictures of him clearing brush from his ranch suggest that Bush has "flip-flopped" on the issue. In his own words, "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." - March 2002. Now how can we trust the Republicans with security when their leader makes such statements?
Under the watch of Bush and the Republicans, we seem no closer to breaking down Al Qaeda's extensive terror network. Nor have there been any meaningful convictions of Al Qaeda operatives. Instead, to show progress, the US government has been relegated to shuffling suspects between military and civilian courts, incarcerating individuals with little to know evidence in Guantanamo, and sending suspects in secret to countries known to practice torture. In fact, the attorney general seems closer to indicting members of "terrorist" environmental organizations who cut power lines and start fires than to convicting suspected bombers.
Under the Republican administration, there has been a significant increase in global nuclear capabilities. Aside from their questionable attempts to address the Iraq situation, the outcome of which may lead to even greater problems, the other two members of the axis-of-evil have been left to their own devices. North Korea (e.g., Kim Jong Il) remains aloof to the disapprobation of the world and the suffering of his people. Safe in the knowledge that the US is spread far too then between Iraq and Afghanistan, that China and Russia refuse to lift a finger against them, and that they have nuclear weapons. Likewise, Iran with the assistance of Russia, has been able to develop nuclear capabilities for questionable purposes (either the destruction of Israel or the energy, the true purpose remains a mystery). So do I feel safer? Not really, in fact, the catastrophic scenario described in
On the Beach seems far more likely now than it did during the Cold War.
So Mr. Rove, if you want to make the next election on national security, as your fearless leader once said, I say "bring it on". You surely cannot win this election on facts, though I suppose that hasn't stopped you before.
