Pierre Lellouche with yet another analysis of transatlantic relations, he notes:
I can remember U.S. presidents who were derided for being ignorant (Reagan), incompetent (Carter), or bumbling (Ford). But never have I such a rejection, bordering on hatred, as I see today for Bush.
He dislikes the anti-Bush line, but would like to see something more constructive:
Anti-Americanism and European weakness are the two sides of a coin. It is time both sides try to find the path towards constructive dialogue, without which neither will be able to face up to the dangerous world of the 21st century.
Once more we have a writer confusing anti-Bush feelings with anti-Americanism.
What was wrong with Jimmy Carter? He is one of the few ex-presidents to have contributed to peace and understanding in the world today.
Contrary to current mythology regarding Reagan, taxes rose less under Clinton and growth was higher under Clinton.
I’d prefer to see a womanising president rather than one who wanted to fight wars.
Anyone remember Grenada, the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan or Iran-Contra?
The world is too nasty a place for such a well-meaning Christian as Jimmy Carter. He’s better employed in charity work than in government because he can’t distinguish between the two.
What was wrong with him? Just that he’s was an incompetent President, which is why he lost office. The Nobel committee’s subsequent efforts to reverse that result don’t impress me. Gasoline queues anyone? Hostage crisis? Visible timidity and indecision from the President? Confident Soviet imperialism? I don’t think there’s any reason now to say that the voters were wrong in 1980.
Read your history, from Thucydides onwards, and you’ll see why I think more international law will come out of a US marine’s bayonet than the UN can ever deliver.
The American foreign policy establishment, both Democrat and Republican, is largely of one mind. The Dems like Joe Biden want to add a thicker velvet glove, but the iron fist isn’t going way.
Perhaps if Bill Clinton had either an ounce of decisiveness or an iota of moral authority from the beginning, he wouldn’t have sent out such a strong message that America will be weak and cowardly when attacked, which just invited an escalating series of attacks.
The North Korean nuclear deal in the ‘nineties was one joint triumph from these guys. If Tokyo gets nuked, it will be largely down to Bill and Jimmy and their naive belief in Kim Jong-Il.
Gavin,
Can I recommend the work of Robert Kaplan to you? His Atlantic Monthly archive is online at
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/kaplan/kapbio.htm
Regards,
Peter
Peter, Ive been a subscriber to the Atlantic for nigh on 3 years. 🙂 I am aware of Kaplan.