The jeers will not make him think again

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 11/22/03 | David Frum

[Pokey78]

So what did President Bush make of it all? A presidential visit is a whirl of scattered impressions seen from the back of a limousine - and intense hours of conversation in formal rooms: a snatch of bunting on The Mall and planning sessions with Prime Minister Blair; an edited collation of evening news programmes and detailed briefings on the state of British public opinion.

From all that, he would take home hard facts and general impressions. He would have observed the continuing strength and intimacy of the Anglo-American alliance. He would have read the polls showing that a majority of British people support the war on terrorism - and his visit. He would have seen that important parts of the press vigorously support the war. He would have been forcefully reminded that Britain, too, is a terrorist target - and that the British are able to mourn their losses and to keep fighting.

At the same time, President Bush would have perceived how very nervous his British hosts were about this visit. He would have understood why no public events had been scheduled for him - and why his car took him only as far as from the back door to the front door of Buckingham Palace. He would have apprehended the hostile political attitudes of the heir to the British Crown - and his acute political senses would have perceived the loosening of Tony Blair's grip on the Labour Party. Of course, he would already have known that many even in the Conservative Party oppose his policies and fantasise about outbidding Mr Blair for the anti-war vote.

It's an ambiguous picture, in other words, tinged with tendencies both good and bad from an American point of view. But there is at least one unambiguity that he would certainly have witnessed - and that millions of Americans will witness with him.

The culminating moment of the big anti-war demonstration on Thursday was the toppling of an effigy of President Bush, parodying the liberation of Baghdad on April 9. Demonstrators took turns stamping and trampling on the statue; as soon as they were done, they invited the MP George Galloway - of all the people in the world - to step to the microphones.

I spent three hours with the marchers on Thursday and talked to many dozens of them. Many ridiculed the "bubble" in which the president supposedly moved - and wondered, with varying degrees of sarcasm, whether anyone would tell him about their actions in Trafalgar Square. They seemed to take for granted that if Mr Bush - and Americans in general - saw what the demonstrators were doing, that Mr Bush (and Americans) would somehow be impressed. Talk about living in a bubble!

Europeans can become so fascinated with the subject of their feelings about America that they can sometimes lose sight of the - at least equally important - issue of American feelings about them. After a recent visit to America, the historian Timothy Garton Ash reported, "The current stereotype of Europeans is easily summarised. Europeans are wimps. They are weak, petulant, hypocritical, disunited, duplicitous, sometimes anti-Semitic, and often anti-American appeasers."

Thanks to Mr Blair's leadership and courage, Britain has been exempted from this indictment. But those people who parodied and scorned the triumph over Saddam's tyranny seemed all too eager to join the French and Germans in the dock.

What does Mr Bush make of it? The protests and jeers he drew on his visit will not cause him to rethink the rightness of his policies. He thought long and hard about them before he put them into effect, and having made up his mind, he will see them through - to the end. Instead, those protests and jeers will feed worries about the future direction of Britain.

The problem is not the old communists and ex-hippies who did the jeering. That old Left has been stranded by the tides of history - it is shrivelling and dying before our eyes. The problem is the new nationalisms now emerging in Europe that hope to exploit anti-American feeling for their own purposes: the new nationalism of the Eurocrats, who dream of building a superpower of their own; the new nationalism of the extremist fringe within Europe's Muslim minority, that makes common cause with antique peace groups in order to advance a quite different ideology and cause.

I asked everyone to whom I talked in Trafalgar Square to express for the record an unqualified condemnation of the murder of their fellow Britons in Istanbul. Not one of them could do it. "Of course, I condemn it," they would say, and then, with a pause that barely rated a comma, they quickly added some words to the effect of: "But you have to understand how we have driven the bombers to do such things."

The argument over President Bush's visit to Britain is not an argument about him at all. It is an argument about Britain and its future. The anti-Bush mood is a spur that some hope to use to hasten Britain ever further into the European Union and that others hope to use to legitimise their ill-concealed sympathies for the enemy in the war on terrorism.

The war in Iraq has become a war within the countries of Europe over their future identity - and that war is now being waged in Britain: the most stable, the most cohesive, the most unabashedly patriotic nation of the whole continent.

Which side will prevail in this war? The answer matters hugely to Americans. It matters even more to the people of Britain. And, if as President Bush wings his way homeward, he allows his always practical mind to drift toward abstract speculations, it is this question that will, and should, worry him most.

[SamAdams76]

It would appear that Europe is fading away. I wonder if England will be able to hold out.

[Mentos]

Very sharp article.

[workerbee]

The problem is not the old communists and ex-hippies who did the jeering. That old Left has been stranded by the tides of history - it is shrivelling and dying before our eyes. The problem is the new nationalisms now emerging in Europe that hope to exploit anti-American feeling for their own purposes: the new nationalism of the Eurocrats, who dream of building a superpower of their own; the new nationalism of the extremist fringe within Europe's Muslim minority, that makes common cause with antique peace groups in order to advance a quite different ideology and cause.

Very astute analysis. Do those on the "old Left" recognize any of this, or care? It's their own demise they encourage with their petulance and denial, as well.

[Arpege92]

"But you have to understand how we have driven the bombers to do such things."

UnFriggenBelievable! I guess the deaths of thousands of people on 9/11 is justifiable in there eyes.

[TrappedInLiberalHell]

I found this article on RightWingNews.com, a satirical online site. I thought it was appropriate for this thread:

Your Pink Tank Convinced Me That The War On Terrorism Is Wrong!

This is going to be hard for me, very hard indeed. But...sigh...I realized that I was wrong about the war today. We never, ever, should have invaded Iraq.

So why did I back the war for so long? Well, I have to admit that I was seduced by the logical and reasoned arguments for going to war. After all, the only hope we have of preventing future 9/11s and worse, much, much worse, is to go after not only the terrorist groups with global reach, but the rogue states that back them.

By taking out Saddam, we not only struck against an anti-American, mass grave filling thug who either had or would have reconstituted his WMD, but we knocked out a tyrant who had direct ties to Al-Qaeda. It all makes soooooo much sense...until you stop thinking about it logically and just let the pictures speak to you.

What pictures you say? The pictures from the protests in Britain that I got from UK Indymedia. Now I know what you're probably thinking, "Come on Hawkins, those people are a big bunch of 'useful idiots' for Saddam and the terrorists!". Sure, that's true, but you have to set aside logic, facts, and common sense and just look at the pictures. Let me give you some examples. Here are 3 pictures, all followed by what each pic said to me...when I let them into my heart!!!!!!!

"Our pink tank filled with children will stop terrorism!"

"Our facepaint and puckish attire proves we're right about laying down for terrorists!"

"Mindless slogans and street theater will make the world safe from Al-Qaeda!"

So you see? It's like Richard Gere said,

"In a situation like this, of course you identify with everyone who's suffering. (But we must also think about) the terrorists who are creating such horrible future lives for themselves because of the negativity of this karma. It's all of our jobs to keep our minds as expansive as possible. If you can see (the terrorists) as a relative who's dangerously sick and we have to give them medicine, and the medicine is love and compassion. There's nothing better."

That's right folks, maybe if we Americans weren't so concerned with building democracies in long suffering countries and stopping terrorists who want to murder all of us, we'd take the time to give a little love to the terrorists and Saddam Hussein. That's what the protestors taught me folks & I hope you can learn from them too.....

NOT!!!!

[McGavin999]

While President Bush was over there he reminded the British of what they really are....a strong, noble, steadfast country. When he said they had grit, that was quite a compliment.

[Brian Allen]

<< The war in Iraq has, within [The Euro-peon Neo-Soviet's squalidly socialistic satellite states,] become a war over their future identity ....

Which side will prevail in this war? >>

Who cares who prevails among the collectivised component parts of that dead and decadent and depraved degeneracy as it gallops toward its self-imposed third-world irrelevancy?

Let Our Beloved FRaternal Republic and our three or four foreign allies [And/or without them!] continue to know we are not engaged in a popularity contest -- and get on with Our Judeo-Christian Civilization's War Against the Barbarism that threatens US only slightly more than our domestic enemies -- and those Euro-peons to whom they turn for amoral support.

Bump/Ping

[Frank_2001]

No guns, no Bill of Rights... sadly, I doubt it.

[FRgal4u]

would be nice if there is a human bomber in those crowds and goes kaboom...and then interview the scared sissies there about the event..maybe they will answer - "yea, we sure can understand what we have done to drive the bombers here!"...

lmao..

[armymarinemom]

"But you have to understand how we have driven the bombers to do such things."

Beyond hope. No matter what is going on in the world the U.S. is wrong, according to these people.
I have a feeling that I'm going to have a run in with one of these fruit loops in the morning. One of the ladies who works at the Airport is insisting on bringing someone in that I can talk to about having three sons deployed. I explained to this lady that I may be unhappy at the moment but I would never request to have my grown children brought home! She countered with the Sullivan Law. I countered with the fact that it wasn't a law at all. Did she listen? Nope. I have a gut feeling that she is going to drag someone in with "Veterans For Peace" boldly printed on his shirt.

[FlyVet]

One of the ladies who works at the Airport is insisting on bringing someone in that I can talk to about having three sons deployed.

Stand fast, stand tall, stand proud. No matter what happens, you have done something profoundly right, if you have raised such sons. God bless you.

Whoever these "ladies" are....maybe they're just a bit jealous of, and intimidated by you. It seems to me the sides are clearly drawn in this: People who believe it's time to fight, and the others, who are afraid, and believe it's never time to fight. Who wins, in the long run? It's always been those who are willing to take the risk, and sometimes suffer unspeakably, and sometimes die. The rest will be controlled, if that's what they want. Or think they want.

Apparently you have raised sons who don't want to be controlled.

[July 4th]

It is an argument about Britain and its future.

Frum nails it here. Britain must soon choose between the Anglosphere or the European Union. It will be incredibly difficult to be a strong American ally under the banner of the EU.

[Moose4]

After a recent visit to America, the historian Timothy Garton Ash reported, "The current stereotype of Europeans is easily summarised. Europeans are wimps. They are weak, petulant, hypocritical, disunited, duplicitous, sometimes anti-Semitic, and often anti-American appeasers."

Well, yeah, don't soft-pedal it, man. Yeesh.

}:-)4

[ladyinred]

After just reading Legacy, about the failed policies of Clinton, I hope with all that is within me that nothing will stop President Bush from continuing the course he is on. It is the fact that Clinton did nothing, or if he even bothered to attempt to fight back against terrorists, he would pull out at the first GI death, that emboldened the terrorists more. We looked weak and like paper tigers. I am just shaking with anger having just finished that book.

[MEG33]

This article expressed my main fear,that the Brits won't hold on to their very identity.We fight and scuffle with our cousins but we are family.

[DB]

Dark days.

[MeekOneGOP]

Thanks for posting that ! I went to the UK Indymedia link to see the pics. What a bunch of Maroons !

[demkicker]

Did you notice this in the article?

He would have apprehended the hostile political attitudes of the heir to the British Crown -

Does this mean what I think it means, that Prince Charles is an anti-war pris-pot?

[MeekOneGOP]

I didn't catch that part but it does sound that way, doesn't it ? ...