Bush Doctrine Revealed an Empire Building Crusader

In September 2002 when the Bush Doctrine was written our country was in a transitional lull from one era into another. President George Bush viewed the twentieth century as a struggle over ideas, which were between "totalitarian visions versus freedom and equality." In his view, September 11, 2001 marked the end of struggles with "conquering states" and a transition to battles with "failing ones." Looking at where we were in history and our stance in the world will provide a better idea of where we are to go as a nation.

History shows that there was a great shift in the twentieth century, which marked the end of the cold war era. During this era, deterrence and containment were the preferred methods to handle rival nations. As many struggles have been portrayed in the past, we are led to believe it was one of ideology where "liberty and totalitarianism" were pitted together in an epic battle. This provided a "single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy, and free enterprise." This has provided a situation where nations in the twenty-first century who share the similar principles of fundamental human rights while guaranteeing political and economical sovereignty will permit their citizens to achieve their full potential.

The doctrine also lays out the transition of nations who share similar interests where instead of persistently getting ready for war they can now compete in peace while marching towards the same innate goals of humankind against the dangers of terrorism. As we can see in Bush's opaque view of history the stress is on ideology and less on the power struggle in the world.

The overarching perspective taken in the National Security Strategy follows along the lines of a empire building crusader. We can see throughout this strategy that the call for working with countries that share similar interests to address the threat of global terrorism. To do this will require bolstering other nations that are our allies because "their security increases American security."

President Bush also sees a shifting in the ideal of "defending our nation against its enemies is the first and fundamental commitment of the Federal Government." In prior years our country was involved in wars with enemies who had vast armies to an enemy now that utilizes "shadowy networks of individuals" that can "bring great chaos and suffering to our shores."

Bush lays out that the only way to preserve the peace is through constructing relationships among the great powers who share the same desire of combating terrorism and doing so will help the proliferation of "free and open societies on every continent." This is to be intended as an example of America being the role model to help build a safer more democratic world but thus far, it has only been through coercion and not by example.

Through the epic struggle of American empire building it is imperative we also establish the illusion that we must also bolster our partner's security in the world. This is accomplished by assuring a firm alliance with nations that are willing to stand with us during this fight, which for them the reward is free trade and free markets, with the intention of eliminating poverty. In essence, through free trade nations will prosper and allow freedom to flourish, which is what our Founding Fathers desired but we have forgotten the main ingredient of, "entangling alliances with none."

According to Bush, "In building a balance of power that favors freedom, the United States is guided by the conviction that all nations have important responsibilities. Nations that enjoy freedom must actively fight terror."

Bush stresses that in order to be triumphant in the war on terror "we must make use of every tool in our arsenal." To this date, this has meant the degradation of our Constitution and discarding the principles laid firm by the Declaration of Independence. We have been caught in the snare of cowboy politics where the "you are either for us or against us," mentality rules.

The best hope for our future in America would be to follow a noninterventionist foreign policy, which "simply means America does not interfere militarily, financially, or covertly in the internal affairs of other nations. It does not we that we isolate ourselves; on the contrary, our founders advocated open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations." (Ron Paul, 2006)

Our hope for change this election cycle comes from the new age FDR revival Barack Obama who will revive and "improve" new deal policies while increasing government and our taxes. Our other option is a neo-con rerun named John McCain, which will only serve as a continuation of both the demise of America and the Republican Party much like Millard Fillmore did with the Whigs. In all reality, the notion that it will be a political "leader" who will save us is only a dream because in reality it will only be "we the people" who can reclaim this great

WORKS CITED

President George W. Bush. The National Security Strategy of the United States of America.

Ron Paul. "The Original Foreign Policy." Texas Straight Talk, December 18, 2006. http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst121806.htm (accessed July 1, 2008).