Originally Posted by The Casuist
I haven't read the speech by Mr. Cameron yet, but I believe that it is correct for the U.S. and G.B. to march to the same drummer.
I can tell you I voted for President Bush and I thank my God that he was in charge when those planes flew into their targets on 9/11. If we had had a liberal leader we would have really been screwed. Really screwed.
It's a long speech and to save you the time I've pulled out some of the parts which I found interesting.
For the record I agree that the UK and USA should be alligned - we are similar countries. However, I am not happy to support Bush without condition or question.
I have never agreed with this tactic used by Bush immediately after 911:
Anyway ... this is some of what David Cameron said - remember he is the leader of the conservative opposition:
On Foreign Policy
I also believe that we should try to debate foreign policy in a mature and responsible way.
It is not responsible to try and polarise debate through simplistic exercises in political positioning.
If you question the approach of the US administration, you're "anti-American".
If you support what the United States is doing, you're "America's poodle".
If you care about civil liberties, you're "soft on terror". If you back an extension of our security laws, you're "building a police state".
These are not mature contributions to debate.
On Islamic Terrorism
And the deformed vision of Islam which inspires some of them is part of a wider picture that includes the perception by many Muslims that Islam is under attack, the suppression of political freedom and economic opportunity by ruthless dictatorships, the relative lack of progress in some Muslim societies, and the belief that the west deliberately fails to resolve issues of crucial concern to Muslims, like Palestine.
The clear implication of this is that we cannot just rely on conventional counter-terrorism.
We need a broader and highly co-ordinated strategy...identifying and thwarting terrorist plots, separating the terrorists from their recruiting base, and winning the trust of the majority Muslim community, addressing the geopolitical issues that constitute direct and indirect security threats.
On our Special Relationship:
Britain does not need to establish her identity by recklessly poking the United States in the eye, as some like to do.
But we will serve neither our own, nor America's, nor the world's interests if we are seen as America's unconditional associate in every endeavour.
Our duty is to our own citizens, and to our own conception of what is right for the world.
We should be solid but not slavish in our friendship with America.
But I believe that in the last five years we have suffered from the absence of two crucial qualities which should always condition foreign policy-making.
Humility, and patience.
These are not warlike words.
They are not so glamorous and exciting as the easy sound-bites we have grown used to in recent years.
But these sound-bites had the failing of all foreign policy designed to fit into a headline.
They were unrealistic and simplistic.
They represented a view which sees only light and darkness in the world - and which believes that one can be turned to the other as quickly as flicking a switch.
I do not see things that way. I am a liberal conservative, rather than a neo-conservative.
Liberal - because I support the aim of spreading freedom and democracy, and support humanitarian intervention.
Conservative - because I recognise the complexities of human nature, and am sceptical of grand schemes to remake the world.
A liberal conservative approach to foreign policy today is based on five propositions.
First, that we should understand fully the threat we face.
Second, that democracy cannot quickly be imposed from outside.
Third, that our strategy needs to go far beyond military action.
Fourth, that we need a new multilateralism to tackle the new global challenges we face.
And fifth, that we must strive to act with moral authority.
I have said I am a liberal conservative.
Let us remember the words of the perhaps the greatest Liberal prime minister, and the great Victorian advocate of moral interventionism abroad.
WE Gladstone's famous Midlothian campaign was founded on the proposition that, and I quote, "the foreign policy of England should always be inspired by a love of freedom".
But he also warned against imperial hubris and international arrogance.
As he said, "even when you do a good thing, you may do it in so bad a way that you entirely spoil the beneficial effect".
In short, we must be wise as well as good.