George Bush Claims He "Kept Us Safe. "Really? Did History Begin on January 20, 2001?

George Bush pretty much knows that his tenure has been a foreign policy disaster. (What's more, he cares deeply about that conclusion despite his protestations to the contrary, the subject of a future article). One piece of evidence for that is the scanty list of so-called achievements Bush is claiming.

The latest violence in Gaza is a tragic, but fitting, bookend to Bush's failure to make any progress on the Israeli-Palestinian question. During the last 8 years, there have been plenty of opportunities to do so. Bush did not just miss those opportunities, he often acted specifically to prevent them from occurring.

In his "exit interviews" Bush (and Laura) have repeatedly asserted that his major achievement is that "he kept us safe" after 9/11. Implicitly, then, he bears no responsibility whatsoever for 9/11. So there!

It is a clever rhetorical ploy. Unfortunately for Bush, facts--those pesky inconveniences-- once again get in the way.

As the Bush/Cheney campaign reminded us over-and-over in 2004, the first "al-Qaeda attack" on the homeland occurred in February 1993, the truck-bombing of the World Trade Center. Their point was to accuse John Kerry of not increasing our defenses adequately, and thus John Kerry was responsible for 9/11. Bill Clinton, in office for less than one month at the time of the bombing, when al-Qaeda was hardly known even to Bush Sr's intelligence agency, was cast by Republicans as the main culprit.

But, as many of their phony campaign tactics, this claim now returns to haunt them. If '93 were, indeed, the first al-Qaeda attack on US territory, and if Bill Clinton's crew caught the Millennium Bomber in 2000 (i.e., al-Qaeda had not been shy of its intentions to attack the US just 20 months before 9/11), then why is it that George Bush gets away with the notion that 9/11 doesn't count and thus "he kept us safe"? Bush refused to heed the warnings of George Tenet (lights blinking red), Cofer Black (who sought an emergency meeting with Rice), Richard Clarke and others. He never even convened a meeting of the Principals involved in anti-terrorism. And, by the way, 9/11 was 8 months, not just one month, into Bush's Presidency.

Moreover, Bush did not even need secret briefings to know what was going on. Tom Friedman, on June 26, 2001, wrote a column in the New York Times, using the technique of making up a "speech" by, you guessed it, Osama bin Laden, mocking Bush for removing investigators from Yemen and removing the fleet from Bahrain just because of "chatter" picked up by intelligence, and castigating the Bush Administration for focusing on Star Wars and ignoring al-Qaeda. This was 10 weeks before 9/11. But, then again, George Bush does not read newspapers.

Nor, it must be added, did George Bush "keep us safe" by beefing up our border security (it was, we were told, "too expensive" to inspect containers for radiation; after all, the tax cuts for the wealthiest were more important), or by compelling chemical plant security, or by firing Don Rumsfeld to show the world how seriously he took Abu Gharib that served as a recruiting tactic for terrorists, or by reacting to Katrina in a timely fashion or even providing a competent Director of FEMA after 9/11.

George Bush did not "keep us safe" by refusing to take up Iran's offer to improve relations (after Iran helped us in Afghanistan against the Taliban); by inhibiting Israel from fully engaging Syria in peace talks; by exhausting our military with the unprovoked attack and occupation of Iraq; by shifting our attention away from al-Qaeda to Iraq; by not sending in Army Rangers when they had bin-Laden cornered at Tora Bora; by weakening the US economy even before the financial meltdown; by reducing the status of the US all over the world.

No, George Bush, you did not "keep us safe" before 9/11 or after 9/11. You ignored repeated, intense, passionate warnings before 9/11, all of which had a predicate in prior history. Even a mere columnist, without access to the intelligence briefings, understood what was happening. You pursued Star Wars at the expense of terrorism. You pursued Iraq at the expense of bin Laden and Afghanistan. Until the Democrats took Congress in 2006, you failed to enact the 9/11-Commission recommendations. Despite days of warnings, you failed to take pre-emptive action for Katrina. You failed to install competent leadership at FEMA. You incited more terrorism against the US by failing to fire Rumsfeld for Abu Gharib. You failed to send reinforcements when we had bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora.

Bill Clinton kept us safe from additional al-Qaeda attacks on the US homeland for 95 months. He did not shred the Constitution to do it. Would Bush et al. credit Clinton for protecting the country because of that record? And, when Clinton struck al-Qaeda, all the Republicans could do was claim it was a "diversion" from what was, for them, the critical issue of the time: whether Clinton diddled Monica.

Yes, George Bush, you can claim credit for fighting AIDS in Africa. That was a fine achievement. A bit thin for 8 years @$400,000 per year, but an important achievement nonetheless.

And, why, George Bush, do you not claim credit for your only major foreign policy success, the voluntary nuclear disarming of Libya? Yes, you compromised to get that result, allowing Qaddafi not to turn over high government officials involved in the PanAm 103 bombing. It would have been preferable to bring them to justice, but far better not to have a Qaddafi with nuclear weapons.

As for the rest of your tenure, to quote Sarah Palin, "thanks, but no thanks."

Comments

[Nova16]

He protects us from an attack that is never going to happen. 9/11 should have never happened except for the criminal negligence of the Bush administration. Repeated, specific warnings were ignored while he took one of his numeorus vacations. Anyway, the damage done by the attack was so terrible that another attack isn't necessary. Our economy is in shambles, we are fighting an endless, phony war in Iraq, we are hated around the world, our country is sorely divided and constantly bickering, and our children and grandchildren face a dark, uncertain future as a result of this incompetent administration. I'd say the terrorists accomplished more than they ever hoped on 9/11 and their efforts have switched from the USA to other parts of the world.

[OverIt]

It's like a pharmaceutical company that claims their birth control product is great because you haven't been pregnant since the LAST BABY you had while on their pill.
.

[vernbvb]

Absolutely! It irks me every time i hear a pundit talking about how safe we have been since 9/11 as though prior history doesn't count. The pundits act like we have terrorists lurking around every corner and that without costly Homeland Security, we might have 9/11 type occurrences on a regular basis. I cannot believe the last eight propaganda ridden Bush years.

I am 60 years old andi am thankful that our government has been able to protect us as well as they have during my lifetime. I grew up in fear each time we had duck and cover drills, and Nikita Kruschev was my worst nightmare. Then came Viet Nam. I lost friends during the Nam war while others returned in various states. Some maimed for life physically or emotionally. Some who couldn't find jobs. Some are still poorly supported by the government. There was the Gulf War where our servicemen sacrificed much. The invasion of Iraq has killed many Iraq citizens and servicemen and civilians from all over the world. The Bush legacy should have spoken more to the needs of our servicemen and their families and funded more programs for them. I respect the men and women who put their lives on the line for us but I think that we have done them a disservice putting them in harm's way for personal and financial gain. The real Bush legacy should speak to this and to other incompetent decisions that were destructive politically and economically.

[StillAmused]

It hasn't occurred to Junior, the neocons and their low-information adherents that, having accomplished the desired result with ONE horrific, criminal attack on U.S. soil -- drawing Bush The Lesser and his neocon cheerleaders into their long-sought but doomed-to-fail adventure in Mesopotamia, pouring gasoline on anti-American sentiment in the region and fueling an infusion of foreign fighters -- the masterminds of the 9/11 atrocity didn't NEED to conduct another attack on U.S. soil! They GOT what they wanted, and Georgie GAVE it to them.

Bush and company saved al Qaeda the airfare, the logistics and the overhead. He sent the targets TO them, on THEIR turf, and gifted them a more sensationally effective recruitment tool than they could have ever hoped for.

Only children and right-wing knuckle-draggers see a correlation between Bush's ham-handed blunders in Iraq and Afghanistan and the absence of another large-scale domestic attack since 2001.

If you were al Qaeda, would YOU waste the effort?

... and, of course, Bush has done a bang-up job protecting the 4,000-plus U.S. KIA, the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed and the countless wounded and displaced.

Or is that what he means when he describes them as "liberated"?

[sheila]

PS. Bono did the AIDS in Africa thing, so i'm not willing to give that to "abstinence only" bush...

[oafishcad]

Bush may not have protected America, but he was a success. He destroyed most worker and environmental protections. He got America to invade Iraq. He transferred public wealth into the hands of the world's Financial aristocracy. He destroyed much of the middle class and crushed unions. He did things no other Republican had been able to do.

[schatsie]

That is correct, this Con Man was a F Genius who succeeded for his base, the 'Have Mores'....

[jerrypl]

Well said! Bush thinking he kept us safe, is like a pyromaniac burning down the house saying, "Well, I left the garage standing." Bush did not keep us safe. The nation is headed toward a horrible recession, if not a real depression. Military families have been torn apart by seeing their soldier sons and daughters killed for a lost cause. There will be no victory. Our economy cannot sustain this war. Bush cannot admit he is a fool, and has ruled as a boy president. He is leaving the nation in flames and in bankruptcy.

http://eye-on-washington.blogspot.com

[trollsbwild]

Spot on commentary. We suffered the worst attack on our soil since Pearl Harbor during W's reign. If only he had taken time to read the PDB of 8/5/01- "Bin Laden determined to attack US".
No amount of spin should be able to alter the facts. History will judge him accordingly.

[JGatsby]

Excellent article. One more point: Bill Clinton actually brought to justice the people who launched the first WTC attack. To date Bush has prosecuted NO ONE associated with them. Think about that. Is it really conceivable that they committed the attacks without help? Surely there must have been people in the US and elsewhere who provided money, housing, etc. Bush uses his "national security" rubric to keep it all secret and mask his monumental incompetence. I'm not a 9/11 conspiracy believer but I can understand why people do believe in it. The incompetence of this administration is so great its easy to believe that its purposeful.

[Articulator]

Over 40 thousand Americans have been killed or wounded in Iraq. To say America has not been attacked is to claim those lives as insignificant. Not to mention the 100's of thousands more will have difficulty for the rest of their lives on disability if these veterans follow the same path as Dessert Storm veterans.
Not to mention that the death of Yasser Arafat brought unprecedented opportunities to affect change in the middle east.
George did nothing other than demand that all parties give in 100% to all his demands before he would talk to them. That was the environment George grew up in, surrounded by the rich and powerful family and friends who controlled everything and would help him if he played ball with them. Trouble is, it left him totally unable and unprepared to deal with those who werent wanting to come crawling to him for favors. Halliburton was the intentional, in your face, "if you play ball with us..." shining example that was supposed to show others is was best to go along with his demands. He just had no basis to see eye to eye with people he couldnt intimidate or buy.

[Querent]

Good article, Paul. You nailed it. The Bush administration started with lies, continued with lies, and is finishing with lies. But the lies are irrelevant to the realities.

[Bitsko]

Excellent commentary, Mr. Abrams. You pretty much said it all.

[bknott]

Great column - although nothing seems to get through to the knotheads who still insist that Bush is doing a great job.

[smallgovliberal]

I would say that we have suffered nearly the equivalent of a 9/11 attack every year since Bush became president.

Roughtly 1.2 billions hours of life was lost on 9/11. Blast doors on airplanes was a common sense fix that would prevent another 9/11. The silly lines and taking off of shoes wastes about 600 million hours of life every year (or the eqivilent of another 3 9/11s.
9/11 also counts as one 9/11 attack
Iraq counts as at least one 9/11 attack. But since the people dying are young people with their whole lives ahead of them I count it as 1.5 9/11s
Not doing anything about our countries national health care costs us a bunch more lives. But they are mostly old people so I will only count it as one 9/11s.

Where else has Bush's cost us significant lives.? I am only up to 6.5 9/11s that are directly attributable to Bush.

[Weribe]

Keeping us safe means far more than just preventing actual (not contrived) terrorist attacks.

-It means protecting our civil rights as outlined in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights
-It means freedom of the press (and a truthful press)
-It means the right to assemble and protest in freedom
-It means economic protection (Bush have failed this one almost beyond belief)
-It means being a moral compass in the world (again, Bush has failed this one almost beyond belief)
-It means not abusing our warriors
-It means protecting our warriors by adhering to the Geneva Convention
-It means protecting the rights of voters, not doing all that can be done to disenfranchise those who disagree with him
-It means protecting jobs and healthcare access
-It means governing by law, not theology
And the list goes on....

It also means truly protecting us, including our water supplies, bridges, ports, roads, food, toys, utilities, etc.

No, Bush has not protected us; he has failed us miserably.

I hope that he ends up on trial in The Hague and in prison for the rest of his life for wars against humanity.

(And for those who would say that he could not do all of this by himself, you are correct. But, he has been the President, and as Harry Truman said "The buck stops here." He IS responsible for the chaos brought on by his incompetent administration and he should pay the consequences.)

[lisakaz2]

Excellent response and excellent column.