President Bush said he hasn't considered the global war on terrorism in light of Bible prophecy.
Asked by a questioner following his speech on the War on Terror at the City Club of Cleveland whether the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism are signs of the apocaplyse, Bush responded, "The answer is – I haven't really thought of it that way."
"My question is that author and former Nixon administration official Kevin Phillips, in his latest book, 'American Theocracy,' discusses what has been called radical Christianity and its growing involvement into government and politics," asked an unidentified woman. "He makes the point that members of your administration have reached out to prophetic Christians who see the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism as signs of the apocalypse. Do you believe this, that the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism are signs of the apocalypse? And if not, why not?"
The president responded: "Here's how I think of it. The first I've heard of that, by the way. I guess I'm more of a practical fellow. I vowed after September the 11th, that I would do everything I could to protect the American people. And my attitude, of course, was affected by the attacks. I knew we were at war. I knew that the enemy, obviously, had to be sophisticated and lethal to fly hijacked airplanes into facilities that would be killing thousands of people, innocent people, doing nothing, just sitting there going to work."
"I also knew this about this war on terror, that the farther we got away from September the 11th, the more likely it is people would seek comfort and not think about this global war on terror as a global war on terror," he said. "And that's good, by the way. It's hard to take risk if you're a small business owner, for example, if you're worried that the next attack is going to come tomorrow. I understand that. But I also understand my most important job, the most important job of any president today, and I predict down the road, is to protect America."
He continued: "And so I told the American people that we would find the terrorists and bring them to justice, and that we needed to defeat them overseas so we didn't have to face them here at home. I also understood that the war on terror requires some clear doctrine. And one of the doctrines that I laid out was, if you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorist. And the first time that doctrine was really challenged was in Afghanistan. I guess the Taliban didn't believe us – or me. And so we acted. Twenty-five million people are now free, and Afghanistan is no longer a safe haven for the terrorists. And the other doctrine that's really important, and it's a change of attitude – it's going to require a change of attitude for a while – is that, when you see a threat, you got to deal with it before it hurts you. Foreign policy used to be dictated by the fact we had two oceans protecting us. If we saw a threat, you could deal with it if you needed to, you think – or not. But we'd be safe."
No comments:
Post a Comment