"Ending tyranny in our world"

I didn't see any of the Inauguration Day ceremonies and only got around to reading President Bush's speech last night. I've already read a lot about it, so I wasn't that surprised by it.

I don't want to go too much into the history of Presidential speech-making, primarily because I don't know enough to do so, but as I was reading the speech two previous Presidents' speeches came to mind: Woodrow Wilson's speech to Congress seeking a Declaration of War on Germany in 1917 and Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

When I finished reading Bush's speech I had the feeling that he had just declared the slaves freed world-wide.

We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.

America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.

So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.

"Ending tyranny in our world"? Here's Wilson:

We are accepting this challenge of hostile purpose because we know that in such a government [he's referring to the German government under the Kaiser - IE], following such methods, we can never have a friend; and that in the presence of its organized power, always lying in wait to accomplish we know not what purpose, there can be no assured security for the democratic governments of the world. We are now about to accept gage of battle with this natural foe to liberty and shall, if necessary, spend the whole force of the nation to check and nullify its pretensions and its power. We are glad, now that we see the facts with no veil of false pretense about them, to fight thus for the ultimate peace of the world and for the liberation of its peoples, the German peoples included: for the rights of nations great and small and the privilege of men everywhere to choose their way of life and of obedience.

The world must be made safe for democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundations of political liberty. We have no selfish ends to serve. We desire no conquest, no dominion. We seek no indemnities for ourselves, no material compensation for the sacrifices we shall freely make. We are but one of the champions of the rights of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been made as secure as the faith and the freedom of nations can make them.

I've always been of the impression that Wilson was something of an idealistic do-do. Now Bush is reminding me of him and that scares me.

I love the noble gesture, but if "ending tyranny in our world" is now American policy we'd best prepare for a long century of war that will drain the US of resources and leave the country a weakened shell of what it is today (and, thus, less able to defend liberty).

The absolute worst thing President Bush could do is lead the country on a freedom crusade. Sure it would be great if it happened, but let's be a little realistic. Trying to bring some semblance of freedom (and sanity) to the Middle East will occupy us for at least the next decade or two. Those noble, lofty ambitions are more than enough for me.

{Richard (& countless others) has a more up-beat take on the speech.}