From Deseret News archives:

History likely to recognize Bush's internal fortitude

Published: Sunday, Sept. 21, 2008 12:08 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
WASHINGTON — For the last 150 years, most American war presidents — most notably Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt — have entered (or re-entered) office knowing war was looming. Not so George Bush. Not so the war on terror. The 9/11 attacks literally came out of the blue.

Indeed, the three presidential campaigns between the fall of the Berlin Wall and 9/11 were the most devoid of foreign policy debate of any in the 20th century. The commander-in-chief question that dominates our campaigns today was almost nowhere in evidence during our '90s holiday from history.

When I asked President Bush during an interview Monday to reflect on this oddity, he cast himself back to early 2001, recalling what he expected his presidency would be about: education reform, tax cuts and military transformation from a Cold War structure to a more mobile force adapted to smaller-scale 21st-century conflict.

But a wartime president he became. And that is how history will both remember and judge him.

Getting a jump on history, many books have already judged him. The latest by Bob Woodward describes the commander in chief as unusually aloof and detached. A more favorably inclined biographer might have called it equanimity.

Story continues below
In the hour I spent with the president (devoted mostly to foreign policy), that equanimity was everywhere in evidence — not the resignation of a man in the twilight of his presidency but a sense of calm and confidence in eventual historical vindication.

It is precisely that quality that allowed him to order the surge in Iraq in the face of intense opposition from the political establishment (of both parties), the foreign policy establishment (led by the feckless Iraq Study Group), the military establishment (as chronicled by Woodward) and public opinion itself. The surge then effected the most dramatic change in the fortunes of an American war since the summer of 1864.

That kind of resolve requires internal fortitude. Some have argued that too much reliance on this internal compass is what got us into Iraq in the first place. But Bush was hardly alone in that decision. He had a majority of public opinion, the commentariat and Congress with him. In addition, history has not yet rendered its verdict on the Iraq war. We can say that it turned out to be longer and more costly than expected, surely.

But the question remains as to whether the now-likely outcome — transforming a virulently aggressive enemy state in the heart of the Middle East into a strategic ally in the war on terror — was worth it. I suspect the ultimate answer will be far more favorable than it is today.

Recent comments

If Bush had cared about the security of the USA he would secure our...

iconoclast | Sept. 25, 2008 at 8:52 a.m.

Fact: Muslim terrorists promise many things. Your point in that our...

Hypocrisy | Sept. 22, 2008 at 8:12 a.m.

To Hypocrisy @ 10:18

Fact: Muslim terrorists have promised many...

wrz | Sept. 22, 2008 at 12:24 a.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

Nick is an amazing kid. I go to school with him. This game shows that Lehi we...

I think that Salt Lake City would be a great place to hold the 2012 RNC. Salt...

Pitta doesn't win award

Hernandez is much better than Pitta. Pitta was lucky to be nominated with the...

I think that's just plain "TORRIBLE"!

Holy Cow! Just how good is this kid?! That's impressive. Not only does he tie...

Barkley says Boozer is big problem

Boozer is bad medicine for the Jazz. He refuses to take hits and defend,...

Springville comes back against AF

Who has beaten your #1 & #2 state ranked teams? Oh...and your #10 team,...

Good job Titans another win.

Sorry..."Classless Ute". Max Hall is hilarious.

Good concert tonight. Not great. Natalie Cole was as good as I expected...I...

Advertisements