Who really put American power on a slide?

The common criticism of George W. Bush is that he put American power on a slide by damaging international credibility and draining our resources. I believe he is responsible for making a lot of these problems worse, but on a large scale, the picture looks fairly different.


George W. Bush seems guilty of the following:

-Going to war in Iraq and draining both our military resources and our national credibility
-Refusing to research alternative energy, and thus putting us 8 more years behind in gaining energy independence
-Overspending and putting us in massive debt to China

I will not go into the credit and housing crises because it seems that it would be hard to point a finger at anyone for causing these, despite the many theories.


However, when looking back on the 90s, it seems fair to say that a lot of these things were already in the making. Military cuts meant that fighting one major war would drain our resources. While Iraq, in my opinion, was an unnecessary military adventure, there is a danger to a country as influential as the U.S. putting its military in a position where it can only fight one major war.

In addition, it seems to me that the U.S. has had trade problems for a long time now. With the emergence of globalization, Americans have found themselves losing jobs to people that were used to working harder for less money (this is no disrespect to Americans, we're some of the hardest workers in the developed world and simply used to our way of living), while academia in America has been falling behind. Since the late 70s, America has been falling prey to an increasing trade deficit. The hand of the market dictates that our current way of life will not go unchallenged, and while outsourcing has only become a huge issue recently, it was only inevitable.

On energy, some of the same things can be said. I will warn that in this following paragraph, I a making some guesses as I have not found data for everything, and I would appreciate clarifications/corrections if anyone sees a problem. That said, before and during World War II, America was the industrial giant with the resources to become a world superpower. This was in part because America for a time was a net exporter of oil. As the Germans could attest, military power and oil are tied together quite tightly, and as the Germans struggled with synthetic fuel, the Americans powered a fleet of unprecedented size, approximately 25 aircraft carriers by my estimates, along with the fuel to mobilize an military of 16 million personnel. As America continued to economically grow in the post-war years, we inevitably used up more of this natural resource and dried up more of our own reserves. By the 1970s, we were a net importer of oil. Our military and industrial position is weakened by our own lack of oil, as more has to be spent on fuel, and eventually this could spell curtains for our military predominance.

Moreover, America has had a bad pattern of how it consumes on a larger scale. Our infrastructure is mostly dependent on highways; while suburbs, a uniquely American design of habitation, have created costly sprawl. The average American car, thanks in part to the inability of legislation to enact a gas tax decades ago, consumes only 20 mpg, around half as much as their European counterparts. Reliant on roads, encouraged to move to distant suburban communities, and given no reason not to buy flashy inefficient cars, we've failed to solve the infrastructure issue. Putting two and two together, our energy consumption is downright reckless, and has been well before Bush came into office.

The last thing to address then may be the overspending and overborrowing done by Bush. The budget deficit, excluding Iraq, is alone a whopping $460 bn. A lot of our debt burden comes from Iraq, but it also comes from major tax cuts and pork-barrel spending. Economic policy is a tricky question, and I am generally a proponent of not resorting to higher taxes as a source of revenue, but the Iraq war is clearly a crippling mistake in that it has cost already approximately $1 trillion. Here is one major problem that I believe could have been avoided in recent years.


This said, the United States has been facing natural-resource, trade, and workforce problems for a very long time. It is only natural that our ability to compete in the global workforce, our energy supplies, and our nation defense would be put in danger, but Bush's policies have failed to address these problems using the resources currently available to us. I wonder however, what a democrat would have done to address these problems in the past eight years. We seem prey to events that arguably make self-created problems like Iraq look like a blemish.

Welcome!

I've just started this blog as of today, and thus I'm the only writer for now. If you want to write on my blog, drop me a line, and I'll consider you. Chances are we'll have to engage in some discussions before I know you well enough to decide. Other than that, feel free to discuss the issues I post, and by all means bring up your own. Here are some basic facts on my stance for those who are interested:


Foreign Policy:

-I was against the invasion of Iraq when it's happened; I've never particularly favored the idea of a quick pullout, but I now think a faster timetable would be best for all parties involved

-A military strike against Iran should not happen (unless under extenuating circumstances), negotiations in addition to sanctions are necessary

-I support the war in Afghanistan fully, and believe the U.S. should throw its full weight behind the conflict

-The U.S. must tone down the over-expansion of NATO, Russia is a key player that should not be taken for granted. Plans for a "missile shield" ought to be thrown into the fireplace

-Tougher action must be taken on Pakistan, despite the risks, given the situation in its frontier regions

-I do not believe that Al-Qaeda is the biggest threat to American security by any means. I also do not condone the removal of civil liberties in the name of protection. I think everyone knows the Ben Franklin quote.


Economics:

-I am generally speaking an advocate of free trade. Protectionism will only harm us in the long run. Although other countries are using sub-standard labor conditions to gain an edge, it does not seem that these are putting the majority of the American population at a terrible disadvantage. For those in American manufacturing, it is up to us to help them find alternatives, rather than try to block out competition

-I will not hold an opinion on the current housing and credit problems. I do not know enough, and it would be all too easy to scapegoat Greenspan at the moment. Hindsight is not always 20/20


Energy policy:

-I am a proponent of nuclear power. It is very clean, and safer than most would expect. Safety has improved by leaps and bounds since the time of Chernobyl, and Chernobyl was caused by gross misuse.

-I oppose a gas tax holiday, which would only serve to increase consumption and drive oil prices further up

-I am highly opposed to oil exploration on American soil. Evidence shows that the amount of oil gained would be minuscule. We also know that the change would not take effect for at least five years. This is in addition terrible for our environment, and distracts us from the need to reduce oil dependence through alternative sources


Misc:

-I am socially liberal on all issues, but believe that issues of assisted-suicide, gay marriage, and prayer in schools should be left to the states. America is very culturally complex, and to lump the issues into federal law will only serve to alienate more people and divide the country. Abortion however I believe should be universally available, the risks of not doing so seem too great.

-I fully believe in global warming, and thus back measures to drastically reduce carbon emissions




That sums up my own beliefs. Feel free to introduce yourself and your stance, I'll post an issue to discuss when I find some time.



-"America is the worst nation on this planet, except for all of the others"