There are some things that are simply known. No evidence or proof is required. One of those, according to the Irish media, is that the world is more dangerous thanks to the Bush Administration.
The Irish Independent says so in its editorial today. The proof of this is that Osama bin Laden was on t.v. the other day.
Well, I'd like more proof. Is the world safer or more dangerous today? I find it very difficult to answer that question. However, I think it goes without saying that America is safer than it was on September 10, 2001. Impenetrable? No. As safe as it should be? Possibly not, but definitely safer.
But, what about the rest of the world? (Isn't each country's government charged with its nation's security, just as the Bush Administration is charged with defending America?)
There's a view here and in Britain that the world was safer before President Bush. Was it? Wasn't there a deadly war that killed hundreds of thousands in Europe during the last decade? Has President Bush done anything to undermine the prior Administration's work to end that conflict?
Has the Bush team sat back quietly while millions were killed in Africa, as happened during the last decade? No, in fact, the Bush Administration has been pushing the UN & EU for a tougher stance against just such a possibility in Sudan. In S. America, the Bush Administration has helped President Uribe mount a successful offensive against rebels, which has the support of 70% of Colombians.
No major wars in Asia have broken out. So, what is so dangerous about today as compared with the previous decade?
What's happened is that our delusional security has been shattered and for many in Ireland this is the real problem. They want their delusions back.
