And this is because Republicans never, ever do this, right? This is the same crap that comes every 4 years. The opposing party spends the next 4 years whining about how everything is the current president's fault and not theirs. Grow up guys. If this worries you so much then walk the walk and talk the talk. Democrats control congress. How about supporting them and Bush to get some work done. When I see Republicans spending more time working with the President, even if he is on the other side, than bashing him and trying to impeach him over an affair with an intern, then maybe you can talk about blame laying.
Me, personally, I'm aboutr to jump ship to the Libertarians. Both of the main parties make me sick.

Tim, Knoxviille TN,

Alfonso Parelli, London, UK argues that saying "we will miss you, George" is about the same as saying "we will miss you Pol Pot". Frighteningly foolish moral relativism. It is as dangerous as the idiotic idea often heard around Europe that "Iran should be allowed to have nukes because the US does..." Of course, such sentiments are uttered from polite cafes, while drinking latte of a precisely specified type of milk, temperature, number of shots, amount of foam, etc, smiling and accusing Bush of tyranny while completely and utterly free to do so. Alfonso should try going to Iran and calling Ahmadinejad a tyrant...

Nick, Seattle, USA

Europeans' pathological need to assign blame to America for all the ills in the world and problems besetting their lives has been manifest for several decades and in varying degrees, regardless of who was President .

George, Palm Beach, FL, US

Red Sleeves, the scientific consensus is that global warming is happening, is a threat, and is caused by man. The more evidence comes in, the more this is re-inforced and the worse the prognosis looks. Unless you are a scientist then I'm afraid I trust them more than you. Worry not who's 'making money out of this', worry who'll lose out: virtually everyone. Ask insurers - they're already panicking.

Andrew, London,

Climate change? Global warming? We're talking about the recorded increase of 0.6 degrees Centigrade since measurements have been maintained with half of the estimated temperature increase occurring before 1950? Fine, I can accept that. Our Earth is a living, dynamic planet and change is natural. But I want empirical evidence that the measured deviation is anthropogenic before I throw my hands into the air and begin running around in a wild panic. Other than computer models based on assumptions about how we think the Earth works, what evidence is there that humans have contributed to the change as we have measured it? Doesn't the deviation fall within the margin of error? I would think that some form of evidence should be necessary before we suggest abandoning the technological, socioeconomic, and cultural revolution that has allowed us to become so soft and sensitive that we now have the luxury to sit around and allow ourselves to entertain the idea of actually regressing into some kind of agrarian utopia.

Somehow, someone is making money off of this.

red_sleeves, Phoenix,

How true it is that GWB makes an "easy" target, not that he does not deserve some of the dirt thrown his way. Yet all of the EU sitting on thier hands and worrying about everything will not fix anything. It must be nice to live in a world were one believes that someone or some other country will do all of the dirty work for you! Sometime in the near future, possibly '08, the EU and the UN will have to start doing thier own bidding.

Ash, kaiserslautern, DE

Saying "we will miss you, George" is about the same as saying "we will miss you Pol Pot". Both Bush and Pot have needlessly killed thousands in the name of a perverted ideology. The only difference is that Bush is white, American and President of the most military powerful regime of the day - so most people have to line-up behind him so they don't get blown to shreds as well.

Alfonso Parelli, London, UK

Anyone blithly looking forward to the return of pro-American goodwill when Bush leaves office had better pack a big lunch, it's going to be a long wait. Hating GWB is just about the easiest thing in the world to do, once he does leave office I think a lot of people are going to be surprised by how much hatred remains. It is indeed a different world. Europeans are too often blinded to reality by this hatred, not to mention a big chunk of the rest of the world. For all its faults and shortcomings America deserves a lot better.

John , Melbourne, Australia

Bush has already attempted to shift the blame by having the cheek to say that if the Iraqis don't sort out the mess it will all be their fault. That doesn''t alter the fact that it is Bush himself who has unleashed untold suffering and destruction ton the Iraqi people. He is to blame for invading a sovereign state in contravention of international law, starting a religious war, increasing terrorism and endangering American citizens wherever they happen to be in the world. And he will still be to blame even after he has quit the office of president and left the mess he has created for others to sort out. Perhaps he will one day have to answer for his actions before an international court of justice. We should continue bashing him until this happens. In the meantime, US standing in the world will, I hope, improve if Americans elect a more intelligent and morally responsible president.

alan, cologne,

David Letterman will miss the President. Jay Leno will be retired just in time. Conan will find himself in tears over a hard future. All the comedians on stage and off will deeply miss this man. He won a war against a vile man, lost the peace and found another war. Tired of Iraq? There's a volume of jokes devoted to Katrina and New Orleans. The cartoonists will hold a candlelight vigil to mark the passing of America's worst President and shed a tear for the poor slob who must deal with the mountain of work left on her desk.

DTL, Cohasset, Ma., USA

To blame global warming on Bush and the United States alone is a bad joke and not constructive in any sense. But to point fingers across the Atlantic and call each other bad names is even less constructive. To join forces and technology in actual planning for reduction of greenhouse gases e.g. starting with the ratification of the Kyoto protocol would be much more intelligent for the European countries as well as for the United States

Sune Pedersen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Now, apparently, global warming has also been observed on Mars. Is George Bush responsible for that as well? Probably Europeans think so. Idiots.

Rachelle Young, Los Angeles, California

First of all, there are many consequences to Bush's horrendous decision making, many of them have caused secondary and tertiary problems. Moving all focus to Iraq has caused Afghanistan to be ignored and also caused US allies to get uninvolved. Muslims killing each other in Iraq is a side effect of poor handling of the Iraq post "war" situation (firing all Baathists for example).
If you think Iraq, the huge Bush caused deficit, and side effects of other terrible decisions will instantly disappear when Bush is out of office, you are not thinking very clearly.
Yes, a Democratic president will have to make tough and sometimes unpopular decisions, but they will likely be made for better reasons and with more involvement of the world (not just Texas I mean). But, a lot of time will be spent just undoing the damage of the current president. So, people will have something to complain about for quite a while.

Paul K, Alamo, US/CA

Thank you for a great article that opened my eyes a bit. I am more than happy to blame Bush for everything-am mortified that he represents our country. But, now I see that the happy day when we have a Democrat elected (and actually put in office, unlike Gore) everything won't immediately be better. Unfortunately, the world has been working on all of these problems long before our guy came along.

Jessica, Tualatin, OR

President Bush is one of the best President, US ever had and history would place him alongside Abe Lincoln in stature. He towers over the loony liberal leaders of Europe. He listened to his advisors about the Islamic threat, while EU leaders thought they knew better than their own advisors and decided to cave in to the Islamic blackmail. The European liberal politicians refused to cooperate with third world countries over Islamic terror by arrogantly accusing them of torture, just because they are third world. Paradoxically, Bush appointed blacks as trusted Secretary of State and National Security Advisors and cooperated with the third world countries to confront the Islamic terror. In spite of being an unchallenged superpower, USA under Bush, reached out to India to establish strategic alliance. This shows strategic vision which is lacking among the European leaders. Bush arrived on the political scene to ensure freedom for the whole world when it was under Islamic attack. Without him, the black flag of Islam would now be flying over Downing street, London and Elysee Palace, Paris.

Hyder Ali, London, England, UK

Jim, wrong way round. Global Warming IS the 'PC' term. Climate change is the wishy-washy term right-wingers use. "Hey, the climate is changing, but that could change is good, right? That could mean the temperature could be going up or down, or it's just 'changing'!"

Andrew, London,

If a Democrat had been in power at the time of 9/11, that Democrat would have had to make hard decisions, too. Go figure! Of course, he wouldn't have had an incredibly vociferous left-leaning mainstream media harping on about how awful he was every day of his tenure, now would he? (Look how Bill Clinton is handled with kid gloves even today. It's shameful.)

The UK mainstream media blasted Margaret Thatcher way back when but, today, even you Brits have had to start realizing that SHE WAS RIGHT TO DO WHAT SHE DID.

Pres Bush will suffer the same treatment and, in a few years' time, when all the unhinged Bush-haters have lived another prosperous couple of decades in America, despite 8 years of Pres Bush, there will, too, be grudging recognition that what HE did was indeed right.

Love the way the whole of Bush's decision-making during (nearly) 2 terms in the White House gets called 'disastrous' by knobs like the guy who wrote this article. Been to the US lately? We're fine.

V Trevino, unfortunately overseas, from TX

Thank you, Peter! This is a terrible time in America's history. Many of us are trying to change things, but it's nearly impossible to get much more done until 2008.

It's good to know the pro-American goodwill will return once we have good leadership again. We've been hoping you felt that way.

We worry about the voting machines that don't leave paper trails. Keep us in your prayers; we need them.
Terri, WA, USA

terri, Ellensburg, Washington

I guess no one remembers the UN resolutions that Saddam was violating, the main premise for going into Iraq.
If the US truly wanted oil, we'd invade our largest supplier - Canada, followed by taking South America. Why travel halfway around the world for oil?
China's gonna seize it soon, financially or militarily, anyway, and they are not going to "appeased" by anyone.

With Global Warming, oops, non-PC term; I meant Climate Change causing so many problems, I hope Europe can burn enough wood to stay warm.

Jim, NY,

Reading today's comments it is cleraly obvious that the 'ridiculous' right are just as bad as we members of the 'loony' left. The self-centred right do have to answer for their mistakes, but can anyone blame them? George and co were elected by the USA to represent the USA. They have done their job. End of story. What the right needs to answer to is why they let their own selfish interests take precedent. The USA is THE leading nation and it does have some responsibility. What we on the left need to remember is that George's fist responsibility is to HIS COUNTRY and not the world. Once we can all overcome that distinction then perhaps the best of both sides of the spectrum will solve many of the issues that affect the world.

Rob, Northolt,

I found this article fascinating and perceptive. Then I read the comments and felt people have missed his point. This isn't about Bush or about Europe's arrogant persective of the US, it is simply saying that the world is a mighty complex place and blaming one side or the other is an fanciful.

simon monk, Sydney, Australia

I found this article fascinating and perceptive. Then I read the comments and felt people have missed his point. This isn't about Bush or about Europe's arrogant persective of the US, it is simply saying that the world is a mighty complex place and blaming one side or the other is an faciful.

simon monk, Sydney, Australia

Note that if the "surge" is successful, and Baghdad pacified over the next few months, there will be no change to a Democrat in the White House, and the Congress will promptly swing back to a GOP majority, also. Americans will reward victory--they like to win.

Larry Hughes, Calhoun County, Michigan

Sorry, Mr. Baker. You're wrong. The left will be blaming every ill of the world on the lingering effects of the "disastrous" policies of President Bush for years to come.

But while there are serious problems with those policies, they are nowhere near "disastrous" contrary to the opinions of the previous hysterical commenters. Said commenters have probably accepted uncritically the anti-American propaganda BBC news has been peddling on tv owners' dime, oops, shilling, oops, tenpence.

Jeremy in Cologne: Yes, it can work to defeat Islamofascism. After all, it defeated your country's fascism.

Jim C., Chicago, USA

I just love to see liberal intellectuals spew their high and mighty views about Republicans and conservatives as dim-witted idiots. And this article by Gerard is just another example of the elitist attitude of the enlightened left at work. Say what you want about Bush, sure he isn't the most gifted of speakers, but he is man of principle, who saw a threat and acted on it. Yes, WMDs were never found, and yes there have been mistakes made, but the world is better off today for a decision that he and Tony Blair made, a tough decision that many US senators (many Democrats) supported, but now are shamelessly backing away from because they want to get re-elected. Bottom line, Republicans are the adults and are the only ones who can be depended on to do the right thing, even if it may be unpopular. Democrats want to be loved, they want to talk things over with the enemy, they want to understand them. Where are people like Winston Churchill gone? I'm seeing way to many Neville Chamberlains

Todd Eliason, Allen, Texas, USA

To all the who think all our problems will disappear when GW leaves office....what are you smoking? I believe he inherited more problems than he caused, made tough decisions the "other presidents" didn't,and kept our economy going.Tough news to those who actually believe what they read in newspapers.Clintons presidency was remarkable in that in wasn't a disaster, considering the mentality of the Democratic leadership.Who the hell get's to leave the National Archives with thier pants stuffed with sensitive documents,and wait......why ? Keep waiting for that answer. No, lets not talk about that, lets talk about Bush dynamiting the levies. Our press in the US is Third world,and the people who believe them are too.

Danny K, Winthrop Harbor , Illinois USA

I am not sure what the motives of the U.S. were in invading Iraq, any more than I'm sure of the motives of an out-of-control adolescent with no understanding of the real world engaging in random violence. After the U.S. was attacked on 9/11, our job was to hunt down and kill or apprehend al-Qaeda operatives and their Taliban supporters. An invasion of Iraq made absolutely no sense. In March 2003, one of American co-workers was sure that Saddam Hussein, the "guy with the beard and white robes", was the one behind the 9/11 attacks. Osama/ Hussein- sure,anybody could see they're the same person. I have never been impressed with the average American's knowledge of the real world. The difference now is that we're in an extremely critical situation, and we still have to fight al-Qaeda and its allies. No forward movement is possible until our government admits that it made a terrible mistake, which was not only strategically, but morally, wrong. Pope John Paul II condemned the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Now is the time for all Americans who have any semblance of rational thinking left to do the same, so that we can get on to the real war against the terrorists. (I'm sorry, Pres. Bush, it is not possible to have a "war on terror"- terror has been with humankind forever, and will always be there.

Bob G., Austin , TX

I'll tell you what we anti-Americans will do when President Bush goes. We'll go back to being pro-Americans, just like we were before he arrived.

Because, of course, we're not actually anti-American. We're simply critical of the disastrous policies of one administration, a position now shared by most Americans.

Peter, London, UK

The day George W. Bush leaves office will truly be a bright day for the United States and the World. Bush has proven to be a disaster as U. S. President. His policies re: The Patriot Act, the Iraq War, and the Katrina disaster have shown Bush is a danger to democracy and a threat to World peace.

The Republicans, most of them, have shown themselves to be "the party of the wealthy and corporate elite." Most Republicans have shown they have no real concern for hard-working Middle- and Poor-Class Americans, except for figuring out how many more $$$$$$$$ they can soak out of them. "God forbid" that tax cuts for the wealthy be cut back...the tax cuts that Bush and his Republican buddies so strongly advocated for.

So yes...it will definitely be a good thing for just about everyone, when Bush's term of office is finally up. Thank God I didn't vote for him!

Jean Coltart, Monmouth, Maine, USA

Don't worry - once George Bush is gone they'll find another focus for their hate.

Mikey NTH, Lansing, Michigan

Well, why shouldn't we blame George Bush for everything that is wrong in the world? After all, the Republicans are still blaming Bill Clinton. Now they're saying that Obama is a secret Muslim and Gore is a hypocrite because he uses electricity to light his home.

Boyd Scheff, Huntington, NY

President Bush blew it. He performed magnificently in the initial months after 9/11. He made courageous decisions to topple the Taliban and Saddem, but when queried what ordinary Americans could do to help the war effort, he said something like, "Go shopping."
How is it that New Yorkers, who grabbed the $80 billion federal handout after 9-11, detest Bush the most?
Highpoint of his presidency -- leading U.S. leaders in Battle Hymn of the Republic.
Ricky Acuchillador-http://conservativehumor.net

Ricky Acuchillador, Independent Hill, Virginia - USA

Am I the only one who thinks it was Bush's fault for the tornado and the bus off the bridge in GA? I am surprised the Dems (read libs) haven't blamed him for both of those. They already have blamed him for Katrina. It's a standard joke that every bad thing in the news today is all Bush's fault. The even sadder part is the drive by media influence (read make up) stories that don't even rise to the level of news. Oh, and that's Bush's fault too!

KAR, TC, MI

A world without America would be one without any hope.
When war breaks out again as it always has between foreign powers, who you ganna call?

johnny, denton, tx

The "Comical Ali" routine is wearing a bit thin.

Andrew Milner, Yokohama, Japan

So the Germans - and I am one - don't think that the problem of radical Islamism can be solved with wars in foreign countries. Why do you blame us for learning our lesson from WWII? When it's time to fight radical Islamism - and I'm afraid the time will come - you'll find us ready but we try our peaceful ways first.

Jeremy, Cologne, Germany

I am terribly afraid that most Europeans have become just as us Americans, quite soft, accepting of any behavior by anyone as long as we do not have to become involved. This will lead eventually if it has not already to a clueless, gutless society.

Mr. Baker is exactly on target. The American left has no solutions - not a single one - only a critical finger to point - with the ultimate goal not of finding solutions but of regaining political power. All realism has been deleted from the debate here - you are either all left or all right. Those on the left now believe this is the direction that will help them regain power.

Now you hear from the press in the US how all Americans want out of Iraq and now the political left here is beginning to actually believe this is true. It is not true. And of course they are going to make the mistake of playing that card in the next election and another Republican will be elected. You can bank on it.

James Fowler, St. Louis, Missouri

I can't wait for George W. Bush to get out of office for several reasons. First, because I dislike him, didn't vote for him and think he's dangerous. Second, I hope his absence will force the intellect of the European debate of world affairs out of the pit of absurdity. (I look forward to the departure of Tony Blair for the same two reasons.) Straw men, even ones who are not completely blameless, don't last forever...they are bound to rot eventually. People have forgotten how to conduct discourse nowadays. We ignore the facts we don't like, bolster the ones we do, find support from dubious sources (citing either Noam Chomsky OR Rush Limbaugh as sources of "fact" just doesn't cut it), put lipstick on the pig that is hysterical emotion and personal bias and try to pass it off as reasoned debate. Both left and right are guilty of this. It gets us precisely nowhere.

Tracey Roth, Danbury, CT, USA

May be the role of the United States cannot be confined to the direct action taking against the imminent threats the world is facing. The natural role the US have to play is to lead a coalition of the free world against common threats.
It is possible that a new Democratic President will do a much better job in keeping the western world together, providing sufficient guarantees that efforts from individual nations will not be wasted in absurd wars and taking the time to set forth a plan that the public opinion both sides of the Atlantic understands and endorses. Because for all the blame we want to put on French and German politics, we must admit that they found themeselves alienated by a US foreign policy that totally ignored their domestic sensitivities and, let's face it, occasionally even defied the most basic common sense.

Clay Gordon, San Francisco, CA, USA

Historians will judge W. Bush much as they do Truman, unpopular when he left office, but later appreciated for his clear view of a future threat that challenged the west for generations. The Vietnam allusions break down when one contemplates that America never sacked Hanoi - much less captured, tried and hanged Ho Chi Mihn.

tom Liddy, Chandler, AZ

I would have to say Europeans are a little more cautious when the war is in their backyard. Do you think we would be so eager to go to war if the war was in southern Mexico?

Nate, Denver, colorado

I am an American and am very disappionted in western Europe. When we asked them for help to secure freedom for Iraq as we had helped secure freedom for them, they refused and to cover their refusal, accused the USA of having deep dark and nasty motives.
Our motives in this struggle are the same as they were in the struggles against Hitler and Stalin, i.e. to eliminate a threat to us and to the world in general. Our strategy of spreading freedom as a practical way to make the world more peaceful and humane is the best one I know of. If there is a better idea out there, I want to hear it.

Joe Deegan, Philadelphia, United States

A number of opinion polls have made it clear that at least two thirds of the American people are against the Iraq War and oppose the foreign policy of their President. According to Gerard Baker, these Americans must be deeply anti-American. How can we persuade the Anti-American Americans to become pro-American Americans, especially when it's really none of our business? My goodness, Gerard, but you’ve certainly got your work cut out.

John Sargent, Trieste, Italy

This is a good opinion piece. As a Bush-loving American I can tell you that I am personally "beat down". I'm just tired of the fight. Why are we sending GOOD Americans to die in Iraq when BAD Americans (Liberals) won't support them? The message of 9-11, even with thousands dead - was not loud enough for us. Sadly, it will take more attacks - more deadly - more devastating attacks before we awaken to the danger of Islamo-fascism. Hopefully it's not too late for us - but sadly, it may be. If we are unwilling to fight the enemy on HIS home ground - then we must fight him on OURS.

There are days when I believe we are not worthy of the freedoms bestowed upon by our founding fathers. We probably deserve the whipping, and the subjugation that is coming to us - because we are unwilling to fight for our freedom.

Mark, New Orleans, LA

yeah right Ges, blame is part of the human condition, we love to do it, right now Bush is in the firing line, in time it will be someone else there is ALWAYS a scapegoat so stop moaning about your boyfriend.

MarkC, London, UK

I think Mr. Baker is exacly right. Bush has been blamed for everything by the left. Even global warming. Or "climate change" if you prefer. Because there is no global warming. Please feel free to visit the midwest United States. It's freezing and we've had some of the worst storms in decades. So please don't tell me about "warming" when I'm freezing.

Eviros had to change it to climate change because there is no warming. Climate change is all encompassing. Of course there is climate change. Every day the climate changes. And oddly enough, everywhere Al Gore goes the temperatures drop.

Bush is right to ignore Kyoto and global warming because it is a figment of the left's imagination.

Bill, Virginia Beach, VA

President Bush is defending western civilization from annihilation by the islamist savages. Europeans seem to be have given up already.

As for global warming, it seems the US understands it is cyclical and not man-made. The whole global warming industry is an attack on capitalism and a power grab based on resentment for the prosperity of America.

Again, man-made global warming is a myth. Warming is happening but there is not a damned thing any of us can do about it.

On the other hand, we can fight back against islamist extremism. Thank God for George W. Bush.

Mike, Austin, Texas

Good article. Much will become clearer when Bush leaves office. I have often found him to be an easy target for the short minded. The world's problems are far too big for one man to cause. Europe's problems, having been there, has always been in not dealing with things until a huge crisis developes. I feel for them as they will pay a much higher price for their obsession with Bush than those of us that are already looking beyond the next election. Its sad when you feel your country's worst problems are caused by another country's leader. Has Europe grown so weak that they believe they are powerless to positively affect their own future without the American president they desire? They are far more capable a people to be limited by American politics. Maybe someone ought to remind them of this.

Byron, Belmont, USA/California

I think history will remember President Bush and his administation as people who stepped up and did what needed to be done when the rest of the world had their heads hidden in the sand.
Where would the rest of the world be if America didn't spend as much on defense as it does?
Who will you blame if the next American president does just exactly what you think he/she should only it doesn't produce the results you are expecting? You'll probably still find a way to blame Bush. It would be funny, if it weren't so sad

Connie Patterson, Saratoga, Wyoming, USA

At last a well balanced article on America and George Bush, Many people (besides Iraqis - how many of them have you seen on an anti war demo?) jump on the hysterical anti America bandwago without thinking about the fact that Saddam killed far more innocent civilans than America ever did or ever will in Iraqi, Where is the ridicule and the critisim reserved for George Bush and America, when ordinary people Iare being blown up in Iraq London, Nairobi, Bali, Madrid, New York by muslim terrorists. George Bush and America are easy simplistic targets for people who are too afraid to condemn the real souurce of much of the conflict and carnage going on in this world, this world, radical Isalm.

Uche George, London, England

You are oversimplifying the Democrats' position, Mr. Baker. First, even if Democrats "wished to end the war in Iraq," they lack the numbers to do so in Congress. Second, no Democratic candidate for president with a serious chance of winning has expressed the naive views you attribute to, apparently, all of them. And finally, you overlook the fact that Bush has botched the war in Afghanistan as much as anyone by becoming distracted by Iraq and sending U.S. military forces there instead. The world at large gave us Americans every benefit of the doubt after September 11th, but Bush squandered that good will in myriad ways.

Incidentally, what makes you think assume that Bush thinks that victory in Iraq is crucial? He has he never asked Americans to make WWII-like sacrifices at the home front. Nor has he proposed a substantial military buildup to meet the challenge. Lots of talk, this man, but inadequate action.

Lewis, Auburn,

If you insist that the global challenges, as you call them, should be considered in their full complexity, then please be consistent and try refrain yourself from such anectdotical arguments as "possible 18cm increase in sea levels by 2100", as global warming is is a complex problem too, which will not just go away by making jokes about it. The same about radical islamism, sectarian violence in Irak, or the Iranian issue. The last ones were not invented by the Bush administration, which just put salt on bleeding wounds, while blabbering "terrorism", "al-qaida", "nucular threat" or "bringing democracy"; the Iranian president found a perfect partner in Bush, as fot the war on terror, it created more problems than it solved. And the Europeans couldn't be but dismayed by the simple-mindlessnes of the fundamentalist psyche, bludgeoning its way trough the challenges you are talking about. The world needs the US, but what the US need is a competent Administration in Washington.

Rick Trope, Hannover, Germany

You're absolutely correct, Gerard, in what you write of today. However, you've omitted the remainder of what should have been written. Mr. Bush and what has been globally polemicized as "America" is not the singular source of "The World's" ills. The folly that persists and has not been adequately spoken is that Mr. Bush (and his policies...) are not the monocultural " Solution" either. Woefully, the battle of the Absolutists on each side of the political spectrum is what we are plagued with. Given the conduct and verbiage of the Absolutists, I'm of the opinion that so much of this proves the contention that politics is nothing more than the socially acceptable expression of irrationality. Yes, the "something must be done" phrase is in play, however, Mr. Bush's conduct demonstrates that he's not the capable one of "doing it". Next Leader, please.

Art, Ellensburg, USA

To Peter Donson,

Why do we spend so much on defense? Because every time some problem in the world has to be taken care of it is always the US that has to do it.

If we are always going to be bailing the world out, we should develop the best equipment to do it with

Instinct, Dublin, OH

First of, to my fellow American, Amir Shukri, I'm not fan of Bush, but you've touch on a deeply relevant issue and, have done so in a straight-forward manner.
Second, as a young democrat I look forward to a change in 2008, my vote going to the 'green' Barack Obama. However, I had to scoff, while sitting through many a posh dinner party while in the UK, at those who declare Bush a dictator and, while sipping fine wine and eating gourment food, denouncing him as a capitalist pig. I mention this only to highlight the unfortunate hypocrisy that boils under the supposed banner of European open-mindedness and camraderie. Once he goes Europe, and the rest of the world, will have take a long hard look at itself; I suspect finding a new scapegoat mind be harder this time around. It all boils down to one thing; accountability. The US is being held, and will be held, accontable for its wrongs, but when will Europe, Asia, and other nations that would burn the flag and beg for aid at the same time.

Rachael Marie, Rockville,, USA

By mid century or so, it won't much matter what Europeans think about the American President, even if he were a cowardly Murtha or Webb. Europe's socialist experiment will have long imploded due to the cost. Nonetheless, I suspect many Europeans will be standing around saying "How could the Americans do this to us?" Funny thing is that they will be speaking Arabic or Farsi.

John, Arlington, VA

It's a little early to say how history will view Bush. I suspect history will view him far more kindly than most do now, during his 2nd term. That's been the case with numerous US presidents who we now view as iconic, the greatest of the great.

Sadly, while the US will looks strong compared with its European contemporaries, too many Americans still look to Europe and imagine the wisdom of the ages is to be found there. The US public has seen them lacking the will to tackle major global issues for some years now, and has started to waver in turn.

Western societies are largely based on instant gratification these days, and when victory or success takes years, most westerners simply lack the patience to see things through. No president, Democrat or Republican, is likely to change that anytime soon.

Matthew Huntley, Stockton, California

Peter,
The reason that the defense spending of the US is so high is because everyone expects us to go into the world's troublespots and fix everything.

Jon P, New York state, US

The USA feels so threatened because there are people threatening us. I might also ask why the UK even bothers with a defense budget. Do you feel threatened as well? America bashing is such an easy thing to do, just let go and have at it. Don't think about what you're saying, don't think about how silly it sounds, don't even live in the country you're bashing so you can actually understand the people, just bash away. It's easy to be like Natalie Maines, it's another thing to LEAD. If England and France had answered Hitler's incursions early on how different would the world be today. Some thought Winston Churchill crazy for wanting to stop the Germans. I guess history has shown him right. Many people criticized Abraham Lincoln for his war to save the union, and wanted him gone. But he, too, was right. George Bush has made some mistakes, as all leaders do (all humans, actually). History will be kind to him, even if present day people refuse to take their heads out of the sand.

Scott, Snellville, GA

We produce a lot of heat and consume a lot of stuff because we support basically 80% of the planet.

And even IF "global warming" is occurring, it was occurring long before Americans were riding in covered wagons going west and coming across in ships to escape dreaded Europe, its governments, and institutions.

So blame all you want...go ahead and drive your tiny cars that burn less gas...blah, blah, blah...because I'm not going to.

I like how warm the world is supposedly getting and my car gets 12 mpg. Gotta go and fill up!

Dave, Parker, CO, USA

Nick from France,

I'm so sorry about the "incompentently led" military action of the United States. I would juxtapose it with a competently led military action by France, but my limited knowledge of history only goes back as far as the establishment of Mesopotamia and I'm unaware of any such French examples since then.

P.S. Loved "the Resistance" prior to D-Day. Both of those guys did a great job!

John S., Washington, D.C., USA

Tell me which American president has not been mocked by Europe's left-leaning media since the rise of American power. Indeed, America-bashing has been the continent's past-time sport for over a century. Peter of Princeton and others are right. European in general have not got the will and self-confidence to survive under the currency of globalization.

James Wong, Macau,

"why does the US spend so much on defense?"

Because you all hate us. Even when you dress it up in big words. Even as you slash your own military budgets because you know we'll come to your rescue if you need an army.

Heather, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

So, the whole world is ruled by nitwits; that however doesnt say anything good about GB Jr. One form of madness and extremism always leads to another. Bush's madness is being reflected in the irrationality of his critics.

NZ, Rawalpindi,

Another great commentary from Mr. Baker. Lefties have no new ideas and no answer to the threat from radical Islam except to retreat (Spain) or negotiate with insane figureheads (Iran). Since their position is weak and unpopular they are left with vilifying the one man who is willing to fight back and stand up to these oppressive thugs and bullies.

Fred, Kansas City, MO, USA

What a ridiculous argument. Most people in Europe and around the world despair of the currents occupants of the White House and can't wait for normality to return.

The world united behind the USA in 2001 and supported the invasion of Afghanistan to destroy the Al Qaeda training camps and the Taliban government that supported them. But within days of 9/11, the White House was looking for ways of justifying an invasion of Iraq. With the subsequent occupation, Abu Ghraib, the suspension of habeus corpus, tax cuts for the rich, the withdrawal from the 'diplomatic' world, is it any wonder that Bush-bashing occurs. Even most Americans now agree with George's approval ratings now down in the 20's.

As a bumper sticker on the whitehouse.org satirical site says : ' 2009 - The End of an Error'.

Al Grant, Bendigo, Australia

Dear Sir: For many valid reasons -- Nazi-induced guilt, the U.S. security blanket, post WWI/WWII and colonial exhaustion -- the largest and richest (I do not include the UK in this summation) European powers have evolved into largely pacifistic and impotent nations from a military perspective. These are facts which do not make them "bad" countries. However, when the question of military will and capacity is asked -- for, I suspect, the next 10-20 years at least -- the U.S., UK, and potentially Israel -- will largely stand alone as bastions that will oppose the will of radical Islam. This is the challenge of the generation of men and women born in the 1950s and 60s.

Brent Bauer, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA

It's interesting how at the end even Mr. Baker can't resist a slap at President Bush. The urge seems to be irresistible.

Carly, Hudson, Michigan, USA

According to polls SEVENTY PERCENT of the US wants to get rid of Bush, so it is not just those with "smart dinner-party conversation and clever debating-society repartee" that feel he is a hindrance in the world. It is typical of those who see things only in black and white (or good and evil) as GWB and GB (Gerard Baker) do, that he would suggest that people who care about what goes on outside their own backyard would want Bush to still be around. What the US and the rest of the world needs is someone who is not focused on apportioning blame but a leader who is can fix the mess that Bush has created.

Daniel Ryan, Melbourne, Australia

Mr. Baker's article is steel on target. The facile "blame Bush" reflex may be convenient for self-styled "elites" and their acolytes in fashionable circles in the US and in Europe, but it's time-limited. In January 2009 these weak-minded dupes will be forced to find a new figure to cast as the centerpiece of their anti-American demagoguery. Bush has not been a perfect president, but he is not the focus of evil in the modern world, nor is he responsible for most of the situations he's been thrust into. The Iraq War is not an ideal situation, but it is also not the quagmire it is usually portrayed as. Unfortunately, we need to be in it to win it. Even our own Democrats recognize this, which is why they snipe from the sidelines but will do nothing substantial to bring it to an end. As a veteran I feel like we have been sold out by most of our allies, and are now being sold out by our own pols. Thanks to you Brits for standing by us up to this point Never, never, never give up!.

Ron B, Charleston, SC

I am not sure if the left in America is beating up on Bush, as much as everyone( both sides) is beating up on Blair.

bernard michael ( Florida), delray, FL. U.S.A.

I doubt that any president, past, or future had or will have so much on his platre. None of his detractors would ever give him credit for juggling so many balls but I certainly will

Judy, West Lebanon, NH

Let's be clear. Anti-Americanism is not just an invention of the left. It's manfactured by Euro politicians with the help of the the Euro media - a media using its propaganda machine to advance the Brussels agenda. Anti-Americanism is designed to create a unified Europe (just as colonial American politicians used anti-europeanism to get sovereign states to cede power to the US federal government in the early 1800s). Just for the record, Kyoto was not about limiting carbon emmisions, it was about anti-American global trade. And George Bush understood that goal clearly. Anyone who doesn't undestand that is naive.

ken, Huntsville, USA

Good article.

What happens when you take the US out of the equation? Out of East Asia, out of the Middle East, out of Europe... The answer is a much more dangerous world.

Why does the US feel threatened? Partly because it must take more responsibility than any other country for world security.

The US doesn't always get it right. The current president has got it wrong more than most. Either way, I would sooner have Bush than no US at all.

Reg, London,

Great article. I have supported Bush because there was absolutely nothing better, nobody out there making any REAL decisions other than Blair. Was Blair a poodle? Nope. He's a pretty smart guy who made some tough decisions that ultimately savaged his political assets. I think Maggie woulda done the same though, and you KNOW what Ronnie woulda done.

I visit the EU often and am proud of the British and the guts they display. The French are confused as always, and the Germans are still too guilt-ridden to ever act normally. But I proudly wear my American flag button on my coat walking around the EU. If one is embarrassed to be American... move to France. And don't get me wrong, I love France! Just not the confusion of Chirac and French national insecurity.

The war was not what people wanted, it's what we were forced into. And nobody wants the aftermath either, but it has to be executed to the very end, lest we waste the precious human and political capital used to gain this ground.

David Hartson, Post Falls, ID

To save Mr. Baker the trouble, I'll respond to Mr. Donson's challenge to "justify the level of expenditure by the USA on 'defence'." The U.S. commits more to defense than the next 10 top-spending nations combined because we're serious about keeping the peace in an always dangerous world. This commitment frees France and Canada and other self-absorbed nonplayers to spend on social programs while the U.S. defends freedom itself, protecting sea lanes, aiding in disasters (U.S. sailors brought supplies within hours to tsunami victims) and keeping watch on the world's bad guys, especially the "religion of peace" followers, the lovely beheaders who even now are planning to nuke New York, L.A., or London -- or should we believe Mr. Donson that this isn't terribly threatening? The U.S. military is the West's best hope to preserve and expand the blessings of freedom. And it's these "rough men" who make it possible for me and all others who love liberty -- even Mr. Donson -- to sleep soundly.

Cliff Hadley, Huron, South Dakota, U.S.A.

"Loved and admired"? Mired possibly. This is the same view my mother has about her royal family- that they are admired abroad. I have lived in two countries abroad and visited a third regularly for the last eighteen years, and they are figures of derision rather than hatred. However it is the same type of self delusion. Every American I have met in Europe almost opens a conversation by disassociating themselves from Mr "Freeman Moxie"
"Europeans are born without a backbone"? I am shortly going to visit Edinburgh, and would suggest that Pepsiholic does the same, and while there visits the military museum to see real battle honours. The Americans sing well while they march though.
"Propaganda" - "from sea to shining sea"

King El, Heidelberg, Germany

Amen Mr. Baker:
One group that will be VERY happy that Bush is gone are the terrorists themselves: they openly cheered (as noted by several released statements by Hamas, and Al Queda after the November elections) when they heard the news that the Democrats won last year's elections. Enough said, but just to summarize in case some of you missed the point...There is no negotiating with Radical Islam, and its threat is equal across the globe, whether it exists in Iraq, Palestine, Afganistan, the Balkans, or the Philipines. It is all privy to the same hateful ideology, and they will spare no expense of human life to ensure total conquest of the globe-this is their goal. Bush understands this fact and he has also made perfectly clear that this world was changed after 911; these groups brought their ideological war to OUR shores, not the other way around. I would vote for another "Scape-Goat President" one-million times over before voting for a no back-boned, appeasment loving, Holly Wood pandering, UN @##--kissing, Liberal Hack.
Sean

sean, Palo Alto , CA, USA

Absolutely correct. And please continue the theme to its logical conclusion. America will become increasingly introverted in the next decade. A savvy Democratic President will likely withdraw from all International involvement, except the occassional humanitarian aid cause.

Then let the chips truly fall where they lie. Europe will once again be forced to deal with its own demons, malcontents, and incompetence.

Let the chickens come home to roost!

Peter, San Quentin, CA

I agree that Bush is an easy target for the Eurowhiners, but I doubt the hand-wringing will end once he leaves office. Anti-Americanism is an old disease. It is always easier to blame "the other" - especially if that other is powerful - than to look in the mirror at your own failings.

When Americans look across the Atlantic to Europe, they see a continent that is effectivley committing suicide - what with demographic decline, civilizational ennui, state subsidized infantilism and a growing underclass of angry, unassimilated Muslims. It is all rather depressing and I can't help feeling that the best thing we can do is to stop subsidizing Europe's national security and put the whiners to the test. If Europe has the will and self-confidence to survive (and prosper?) as part of the "Western" world, so much the better. If not, no amount of American help will save a continent too feckless and enervated to halt its transformation into Eurabia.

Peter, Princeton, NJ, USA

"It exceeds the combined expenditure of the next 10 top spending nations."

Not as a percentage of GDP. Leaving relative GDP out of the equation renders the discussion meaningless.

And a big part of the reason for the disparity is the EU's and Canada's continued DECLINE in defence spending, not only in raw Euros, but as a percentage of their own GDPs.

I agree. The US should reduce defense spending. And we should start by shutting down all the military bases in Europe. Maybe the petulant teenagers will get a dose of reality and take responsibility for their own damn defense. Here's on American who's sick to death of being sneered at by the very people who would be speaking Russian were it not for the blood and guts of the US soldier.

"Why does the USA feel so threatened?"

Why DOESN'T Europe?

craig, san jose, ca

Who are you kidding? The loser, underachievers on the left will be blaming GWB for everything until the end of time.

Just look at how they STILL invoke the name of Ronald Reagan with venomous hatred in their voice.

mjnessler, Birmingham, AL

To Peter in the UK, your comments "justify the level of expenditure by the USA on "defence". It exceeds the combined expenditure of the next 10 top spending nations. Why does the USA feel so threatened that this has to be?" The reason we do spend so much on defense is to protect those countries and come to the aid of those who either won't or cannot defend themselves. That's why.

Rita Etter, Nawshville, Tennessee - USA

Ms. Ball, read your misguided comment:

"Bush's main downfall is an insistence on power and domination, as a country we should stop running alongside him like a puppy as it makes us equally guilty in this giant mess."

And would be curious to know if you can name 3 ways in which President Bush's "insistence on power and domination" has had any impact on your life at all. Fact is is that your entire statement sounds almost exactly like the shouting of our intelligentsia about how debate is being squelched at the top of their lungs.

Bob Compono, Colorado Springs, USA/Colorado

Nice article Mr. Baker...although I don't share your view that electing a democrat "may be a good thing". The level of illogical vitriol that has been leveled at this president has always been a bit baffling to me, but it's no secret that there are many who believe any conflict can be quelled by diplomacy alone - "If they only got to know us...", coupled with the fact that people like Bush, who have strongly held convictions and stick to them, are never popular in politics. Unfortunately, the real world is governed predominantly by the aggressive use of miltary force, and to many of us in the states, it is inconceivable that most of Europe appears to have forgotten the fact. As for our defense budget, it's a non-issue. All the social programs in the world don't add up to much if you never know when the next bakery is going to explode.

Scott James, Los Angeles, USA

When the Dems eventually gain the presidency, they will excuse their incompetence by saying that Bush screwed up so badly, it will take decades to undo the damage. Expect the Bush Blame/Excuse to be around for many more years.

Ding Fod, Nebraska, USA

Of course George Bush is an "easy" target. He is every bit the blundering fool that he appears to be.

Jon Adams, Hampton VA, USA

"Has George Bush and his Administration done this to us?"

Question: who hates us now, that didn't hate us when Tricky Bill was Pres?

Answer: No matter who is President, there will always be those who envy hard work and success.

Thus, Mr. Pinto, yes, Mr. Bush is guilty, so is Mr. Clinton, Mr. Carter, Mr. Reagan, Mr. Nixon.......

Don Johnson, Tulsa, OK, USA

Mr Baker is correct that Bush's critics here and abroad have had a free ride. The only flaw in his reasoning is that he does take into account media bias. When a democrat is elected in 2008, many of the worlds problems will just miraculously get better - at least according to the news.

Ian Board, Mission Viejo, USA, California

What is truly tiring is the continued insistance that President Bush A). Is some kind of Dummy,and B). Acts only out of a need for personal aggrandizement.. Such twaddle is the product of small conspiratorial minds and does not pass the most cursory review of the facts.

Ted Wilcox, Gorham, Maine, USA

George W. Bush has been a Republican President. He has cared about national security. He has been a boon to the economy. He has been committed to our allies, believe it or not
Europeans have hated every American president in recent memory for one failing or another.
What I think needs to happen is, we need to have a president that just decides to stay home and let the rest of the world fend for itself.
Will Europe like that outcome any better? I think it's high time that the EU field its own army. It will be interesting to see if the EU finds any thing worth fighting for.

Susan Kobussen, Plymouth, Minnesota USA

We have a name for it here - BDS. (Bush Derangement Syndrome) Anti-Americanism, in Europe especially, pre-dates either Bush by decades. It has as its foundation the same thing that makes the Catholic Church, Wal-Mart and Microsoft such villains - they have all risen to the top and therefore need to be knocked down a peg or two.

As for how Bush is portrayed in the history books depends on two things, who writes the book and how the Islamic fascists make out in the decades to come. If the Islamic Jihad peters out (which I highly doubt) Bush will look like an misguided aggressor. But if the Jihad claims one country after another Bush will look like a prophet and a leader who "tried" to beat it down. How will today's European leaders be portrayed?

Static, St. Paul, Minnesota,

Although I agree with the statement on America, having recently been there on hoilday. These comments are a typical example of a small minded isolationist correspondent, still obsessed with the Franco-German link and wallowing in tired, lethargic, defeatist and dusty arguements. How little faith you must have in Europe, and more importantly the UK.

Jon Kingsbury, Southampton, UK, UK

Mr Spinola; I fear that I'm not the Mr Milne you hoped would reply to you. However, I would take you up on us wanting the US to take the lead on greenhouse gases. Britain is one of the few countries doing well on its Kyoto commitments, and "green" ideas have become central to the platforms of both main opposition parties in the UK.

On matters like Iraq, Britain feels it has been made a bit of a laughing stock; it has been conclusively proved that "the dossier" was all concocted up - Britain (Blair and the Foreign Office) favoured regime change long before the war, the question was, how to swing public opinion. Moreover, Britain has lost confidence in itself. A nation which swung within 50 years from ruling a fifth of the globe to being a sort of extra US state, humiliated at Suez, this followed in turn by a lot of criticism of our imperial practices beforehand...

I'll use my last few characters to say that Mr Baker's article makes an excellent point. Who will they blame indeed?

IRJMilne, London, UK

My wife and I are visiting Italy in a couple of weeks. We love the history art and culture. My grandparents were born in Italy, They taughtt me too love and be proud that I was an italian and an american. This seems to be gone, We are almost embarassed when we visit Europe to call ourselves American. Has George Bush and his Administration done this to us?

Ralph Pinto, Shohola, Pa. USA

Mr. Donson, the US must continue to spend money on defense so that the enlightened European @#@$% will have someone to rescue them when appeasement fails again. what world do you live in that you don't feel threatened?

Bill Kelly, Delran, NJ, USA

The United States must stop guaranteeing the security of the European Union. Much of the stupid anti-Americanism that now passes for thought among Europeans is rooted in a post-war decadence that has only been able to take hold because American taxpayers have shielded us from the reality of the violent world we live in for far too long.

It is time for America to pull the plug on our European ‘welfare state’. The costs of European security should be borne, in full, by Europeans. Make us grow up.

L O Grundy, Liverpool, Great Britain

I'm replying to the comments of Peter Donson. He complains that the level of expenditure by the US on defence exceeds the expenditure of the next top 10 spending nations. That doesn't say much for the ability of Western Europe to defend itself, does it? Many Americans are annoyed at the post modern attitude of the EU concerning the issues on the war on terrorism and their accommodation towards radical Islam. We foot the majority of the bill for your defence and listen to your moralizing. Perhaps the US should leave NATO and then Europe can defend itself in a politically correct, kind, caring and sensitive manner.

Craig Strand , Farmington , MN USA

Personally I am not a fan of Mr Bush I think that he has often taken bad decisions, is blinkered, has a tactless approach to diplomacy and is only able to see things in black and white.

However Baker makes a good point, Mr Bush is an easy target to blame and to constantly do so is to over simplify very complicated issues (something which Bush himself is often accused of doing by the left (including myself)). To address the problems that face us at present we need to consider their complexities before we can propose serious solutions to them. The reactionary America-bashing of the left does nothing to help anyone.

I hope that after Mr Bush leaves office (or possibly even before) we can have a proper debate about the causes of problems rather than just blaming the American Presidency for everything.

Verity, Cornwall, UK

Mr. Baker, you are right in one respect: Leadership qualities are lacking everywhere- both with the American Democrats as with (most) of the European nations (exception France with Chirac's staunch anti - Bush position).
The issue of the Afghanistan campaign is a text book exemple of a misguided one. That campaign should serve as a lithmus test for pinpointing the goals and underpinnings of the NATO - treaty. The debate is overdue.

Why don't you dedicate your next commantary to that crucial topic!

Rolf Joachim Siegen, Kiev, Ukraine,

There was a time no so long ago when the Brits were made of sterner stuff. They didn't wait for America to take the lead in ending the slave trade. They didn't wait for America to take the lead in confronting Hitler. But now they want America to take the lead in reducing greenhouse gases. And now they are afraid to confront the religious-based fascism of radical Islam. Why? What has happened to the once manly race of Great Britain? Perhaps Mr. Milne can offer some insights?

Greg Spinola, Charlotte, NC

One expects totalitarian states to blame the US and demonise the President in order to shift responsibility for conditions imposed on their subjects. It has been rather disturbing, though, during the past 6 years, to discover how useful the same rhetoric might be to nominal Western allies.

Dan Collins, Ferrisburg, VT, USA

"I suggest he justify the level of expenditure by the USA on "defence". It exceeds the combined expenditure of the next 10 top spending nations. Why does the USA feel so threatened that this has to be?" Peter Donson, Southwell, Notts, UK

Well, sir, war has been declared on our nation. Defense is costly in souls and treasure. If it is also costly in world opinion, so it shall be; to unecessarily suffer and maybe perish is not an attractive course to achieve alliance.

J.Riley, Blue Grass, USA

I think the thing about Bush that is so bothersome to many ( and heroic to others ) is that the man actually has a point of view and (gasp) he acts on it. He sees something to be done, and he does it. That is an American trait. So don't be surprised if a President Obama, or President McCain acts similarly.

Chris, rural, Colorado

I certainly agree that a new leader will make little difference to the attitude the French + Germans take to the Iraq war but that is not the point, the point is how we got there in the first place - a new leader will maybe have common sense and half a brain at the very least, thus making decisions based on fact rather than the glory of themselves and their country which we are all getting pretty tired of hearing about. Bush's main downfall is an insistence on power and domination, as a country we should stop running alongside him like a puppy as it makes us equally guilty in this giant mess.

Sarah Ball, Kent, UK

Bravo!!!

Ed , St. Louis , MO

"It exceeds the combined expenditure of the next 10 top spending nations. Why does the USA feel so threatened that this has to be?"

We don't feel threatened. I think the answer here is for the United States to withdraw all troops and bases from western europe and to stop supporting the UN.

Let's let the EU put its money where its mouth is.

Timmah, Saint Louis, USA

Dear Sir,
Your point is well taken. Mr. Bush is sure to be listed amongst our worst Presidents to date. His governments obvious lack of judgement combines with an infelxablity of policy to produce an environment in the Middle East which all the West will live to rue. Yet the Europeans seem to me to be living in a fantasy world. They focus on climate change the EU and believe that, if they are harmless to others, they will not be harmed. The comparison with Europe in the 30's is astounding. Blaming Mr. Bush for the worlds problems is a convernient way to avoid the reality of the situation. While Europe may be weary of war, enemies of Europe are not.

Allowing some of the worst horrors at the end of the 20th Century to occur in their own back yard is amoral. If Europe will not defend her civilization and her borders, then they will fail. And the world will be much worse for the loss of that light.

Patrick J Mc Guigan III, Philadelphia, , PA, USA

Putting an escapist in charge won't cure the world of escapism; they'll just announce that all the world's problems are solved, and promptly ignore them.

To think that they will wake up and notice the world around them, simply because they receive the power to affect it, is an escapism in and of itself.

Voyager, LA,

Mr Donson, the USA stands ready to defend the West, including your own remarkable nation, and that takes one devil of a lot of money!!!

Judy Shimkus, St Louis, USA

"If he is trying to find something serious to comment on then my I suggest he justify the level of expenditure by the USA on "defence". It exceeds the combined expenditure of the next 10 top spending nations."

Eh, Peter, that's because it's had to protect Europe too.

Toady, WC,

Interesting point re Nixons China example. However one can't underestimate the lefts commitment to having the US lose in both situations. They will leave Iraq and let it go its own way. They want to use the money for domestic programs to insure future power. Vietnam is a better example. We left with the South in control and having smashed the North in the 1972 offensive(along with our airpower and ground advisors). The peace treaty was signed in 1973. The Democrats were elected to power in Congress in 1974 after Watergate. They cut off promised funds immediately. The South fell to a massive North invasion in Spring of 1975. They were gleeful and proud at the outcome.

Ben Walsh, ringwood, nj/usa

A previous commentor asked "why does the US spend so much on defense?" Because we're rich enough to spend $500 billion a year on the Pentagon budget, yet defense spending is still less than 1/6 total US federal spending. And that money provides us with the security to live peacefully to generate the commerce to in turn pay our cloated US governemnt the cash it uses for defense & non-defense budget. Without defense secutity, there can be no peace or economic growth.

Mando, Miami, USA

History will undoubtedly judge Bush as a disastrous President, but it is true that he has made other leaders look better by comparison. Just because Bush was hopelessly wrong about so many things doesn't mean others were right, or just. For example I suspect that Chirac opposed the Iraq war for reasons just as selfish as those that drove Bush to invade. Politics is always easier when there's a villain. Just as Iraq got more complex after Saddam, so will world politics after Bush, only this time it will be because of the opportunities provided by what one hopes will be more open minds in charge.
As America finally ceases to be the biggest obstacle to tackling climate change, leaders in Europe lose their excuse to do so little themselves, and instead it will fall to both continents to lead the way if we expect China and India to follow.

Richard Milne, edinburgh, UK

Firstly, the unwillingness of European governments to involve themselves in US led military operations can be explained simply in terms of rational self-interest. Why get involved in incompetently led operations that do not achieve thier stated aims, yet lead to an increased threat to the nation.

It is true that Europeans politicians show extreme reluctance to commit troops to war. However this is mirrored by an recirpocal reluctance by US politcians to commit to any policies that might threaten any aspect of the US consumer lifestyle - however much it might be in the strategic interest of the nation. And I am not talking about global warming here.

A gradual, yet persistent policy to reduce oil consumption in the US (started on 9/12) would be showing real results by now. Every Middle East country would be weaker, especially Iran, which is struggling even now. As it is, the oil price has been driven relentlessly upwards, strengthening all the homes of Islamic Fundementalism.

Nick, France,

Bush has been betrayed by the limp willed American public. Where did all those who backed the action in Afghanistan go? Would they have let him stay had he done nothing? I think not.

Alex, London,

1-Bush the second and his clan are a curse, true enough for most people. However, militant anti americanism or even anti present state of things, was the norm long before him. Remember, there were always people who believed the soviet and sattelite regimes, even the khmer rouge were better than capitalist America.
2-The "bible belt" of America, its taleban christians if you will, can be found in any western european backwater, though by another name and less publicised.
3-Western Europeans have always been smug, content with lecturing the world whilst ignoring their past, and present debt to it.
4-There has never been a case of europeans keeping their word on anything, nevermind keeping the piece, or dare I say putting an end to injustice. Indeed, as if to ilustrate my point, someone here is taking their news about child raping Nato from the russians!

Jondi Saka, London,

Believe me JD Ronayne, plenty of people dislike the attitude of Western Europeans like yourself as well. Ask people in Central and Eastern Europe whose attitudes they most admire- American or German. That's right JD Ronayne, right now Europe has statues of Ronald Reagan being raised in Eastern European squares. I think we can agree that those "German" memorials are much different in nature, can we not?

Remember, Central and Eastern Europe is much more pro-US than it is Pro-German by a long shot. Don't fall into thinking that Western Europe is in any way indicative of the whole of the continent. Besides, Germany was happy to provide bombing coordinates for the USA in Iraq.

moose, manchester, UK

Bush will be remembered in history as one of the great presidents of all times. He calmed the country after 9/11, got rid of Saddam, helped a people write a Constitution, albeit an Islamic one, and facilitated free elections for a people who still that their women may be beaten up. The economy is booming and he has successfully kept the religious right at bay by appearing to side with them but doing almost nothing that is part of their agenda. This is evident from the moderate justices he appointed to the Supreme court. No one predicted that the Iraqis would reject this golden opportunity to become fully democratic and secular and this failure belongs to all of us. The Shia-Sunni conflict was inevitable. The Shias had the oil and the Sunnis were pocketing the oil revenues and the false equilibrium in Iraq would have been shattered even if Saddam had been in power. The real failure is on the part of all secular and democratic countries for not going to Bush's aid in stabilizing Iraq and helping some 20 million plus fellow humans in Iraq enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Where are the Muslims leaders who were up in arms when cartoons of Muhammad were published but are doing nothing while scores of their fellow Muslims are killed daily in Baghdad by fellow Muslims?

Amir Shukri, Dearborn, USA

Is this article to be taken seriously? The hysterical rantings of this author give the impression that he is somewhat bitter and twisted. If he is trying to find something serious to comment on then my I suggest he justify the level of expenditure by the USA on "defence". It exceeds the combined expenditure of the next 10 top spending nations. Why does the USA feel so threatened that this has to be?

Peter Donson, SOUTHWELL,Notts, UK

I would like to know when did the genetic mutation occur in Europe. You know... the one where Europeans are born without a backbone.

Pepsiholic, Toledo, Ohio

Bush at the moment is the target because he is President but do not mistake a total surrender in the face of extremist Islam and various lefties anti Americanism as only anti Bush.

David Dunn, Newcastle, UK

Wonderful article, Sir! I think you have hit the mark- a rarity in UK commentary.

JL, London,

I always thought that the role of a Jounalist was to speak truth to power, not whinge because the proles are getting restless. For an Assisstant Editor of The Times (part of News Corp one of the biggest and most influential media outlets on the planet) to complain that the public agenda is skewed unfairly is ridiculous and borders on the offensive. The claims of increased Anti-Americanism are even more dishonest, America is loved and admired and it is only because the current administration have sought to trample over alternate views then implemented its own policies so unforgiveably incompetently, in such a wide range of spheres, that such approbrium is currently directed towards it. Whomever succeeds George Bush will be faced with an unprecedented opportunity to mend bridges with allies and hopefully forge a genuine consensus, with America at the fore. It will be difficult but it will be worth it and you are wrong to confuse opptimism for the future with ignorance of the difficulties.

Thomas Davies, London, UK

Gerard Baker hits the nail squarely on the head. The comments previous to this demonstrate why Gerard is correct.

Gary, birmingham , UK

Just read these comments. Case proved.

S.Rowley, London, UK

Of course you are quite right Mr Baker.

The 'left' is very lost at the moment and 'clinging to serpents' in an attempt to find direction. Deep in their hearts they know they have lost the argument with the collapse of the Soviet system and the abuses of socialist power through out the world.So they have to rely on good old Bush baiting to justify their existence.

I find it rather sad as I used to enjoy a good argument with my lefty friends but now the same old tired propoganda blasts they come out with are just tiring.

They've lost the plot and know it.

mike, london,

I think this is one of the most intelligent pieces of writing I have seen on the subject for some time. I am equally weary of bland anti-Americanism and superficial anti-globalization clap trap that passes for intellectual conversation in some quarters.

Jeremy, Basel, Switzerland

George Bush's record will assure his place in history as one of the most incompetent ever Presidents of the United States. Stubborn, surrounded by equally tin-eared advisers, beholden to vested interests, encouraged by a primitive and unthinking sense of right and wrong, incapable of appreciating or evaluating any position other than his own, uninformed and with a disastrous sense of judgement. It is possible that Clinton, Obama or Edwards might do worse but they would have to be really trying.

John Duggan, Lisbon,

The US will always be able to take the more decisive stand in international politics because of its inherent unity and stability, when compared to the multiplicity of democracies within the relatively notional EU.

It's unrealistic to expect 20 independent democracies to always follow the same line of thinking, when they each also have domestic agenda to meet at differring points in the electoral calendar.

European states individually showcase dissent to the US's thinking, grandstanding off the wall policies knowing that there is always scope for a little irresponsibility when others will take on the responsibility that they choose to pass on.

Steve Stanton, Edinburgh, Scotland

1. Bush and Cheney have proven to be the most disastrous leadership the USA and the world could get. Hence bashing them is not fun, just a duty.
2. Europe indeed shuns it's responsibility in participating to stabilize conflict areas (like Bosnia and Ruanda at the time, and Darfur now). However, I still believe they were quite right not to back the occupation of Iraq

bill, bRISTOL, uk

Mr. Gerard Baker
I sympathize you for not having the dictionary. The word you are looking for is PEACE, SERENITY.
I don’t know which school you went to in the bushes.

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD, Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania

Bit of a rant surely!
Simplistic, incoherent, badly structured and shodilly argued...and this got passed by the editor!
My reading of this is that Bush good, everyone who does not agree/support Bush bad!
Is this like Baker right, anyone who disagrees wrong?

Stephen R, Belfast,

I think you are right in observing that the Bush administration is merely a reflection of interests in America that will still be there when Bush goes. They are the ‘problem’, and their counterparts in Great Britain. If, somehow, American and British troops could be banned from entering other countries except as part of a properly constituted United Nations force, it would solve a lot of the world’s problems, but it is, as your article implies, wishful thinking.

Henry Percy, London, UK

It is true that things won't change immediately after Dubya leaves. But I don't think that should stop one considering whether it is his own personal conduct which has torn alliances apart and driven the US's allies further away. I remember in the summer of 2001 how the US was almost as unpopular as it is today, because it was unilaterally withdrawing from treaties limiting the development of chemical and biological weapons (ironic, in view of later events).

NATO was not particularly popular in the Balkans (Russian website videoclips of "NATO troops raping Serbian children" anyone?) and there were difficulties, such as the Dutch at Srebrenica. But at least then they all pulled together, and there was no sense of "anything but co-operate with US policy".

Something - or someone - must be the cause of this sea-change. And if Dubya is the cause, then it may well be that the most important part of his legacy may be the length of time it takes to undo it.

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

I once worked for an American company and it changed my life immeasurably for the better.

Complacent Europeans wallow in their history and feed their inferiority complex they suffer from because of America's rather brilliant society by claiming moral and intellectual superiority - the very worst manifestation of an inferiority complex.

fred keeling, Almunecar, Spain

S John Massoud, Leesburg , USA Virginia

So you're happy to be less secure than you should be, ie the rising number of terrorist attacks worldwide ('tho I guess only the States concerns you) caused by your govts. insane policies, the lack of "Homeland Security", the erosion of personal freedoms, torture (it could be you next). I could go on. If I lived in the US I'd be worried about both the Mexican and Canadian borders lack of security, the lack of any attempt to make ports and coastlines more secure...........I could go on. If this person is a real person and that is a genuine opinion it can only be a case of "You just don't get it" ie there are none so blind as those who will not see. Or maybe it's just self delusion.
This kind of post makes me worry for the future of mankind.

Howard, Bangkok,

Dear S John Massoud

I don´t hate Americans.
I dislike Americans with an attitude like yours.
I strongly dislike your President.and his Policies.

JD.Ronayne, Muenster, Germany

No, actually I won't be dreading the moment he leaves. The simple reason being that we can all start clearing up the mess he's created. The underlying assumption in the article is that the mess, i.e. a seriously de-stabilised Mid-East, increased world terrorism, masses of money down the drain, higher oil prices, President as King, disregard for habeus corpus, I could go on, would have happened under any US leader. Are you seriously suggesting that any US leader would have made matters as bad as they are?

No, the world will be a safer place without him. Yes there will still be problems that we can all grump about but not quite on this scale. The world looks forwards to the moment he's gone. Maybe we should hold world-wide "Bush is Gone, Hurrah Hurrah!" parties

John Small, Faversham, UK

God Bless George W. Bush and the U.S.A.!

Haven, KY, USA

It has always been thus: once it was the landed gentry that wanted to maintain the status quo, were unduly worried about the pace of change and who would order society to do their bidding. They wanted no boats rocked, would brand the progressive and the radical as public enemies. Today we have the same sort of outlook being avowed by the bien pensant; middle class, comfortable and incestuous, who find life so comfortable and so assured (for them) that 'change' has become a dangerous place. Yes, they will campaign for rights and the disaffected but only in as much as they believe that this self-identification and flummery will distract from the undue benefits that the current system offers them. In order to protect their Chateau Margaux they will fight tooth and nail to curtail disruption, as upheaval may threaten their bloated, self-interested society and interrupt their lines of control. It is in the public interest that there are people in this world beyond such prosaic matters.

Malcolm Turner, Alsager, England

When George Bush has gone we can blame George Bush. I still blame Thatcher for everything, even for Tony Blair.

eric, harrogate, UK

Like Babbington in Fairfax Station, I wake up every morning and thank God that we have GW Bush as our president. Why do you say?

In his 6-7 years so far as president, our economy has rebounded from a recession that started at the end of the Clinton years. We have gone through shocks such as September 11 and Katrina and our economy has rebounded.

Europeans may hate us, but the world respects our power. Libya has given up it's WMD. The Bush years have been relatively scandal free (excepting a bogus prosecution of Scooter Libby).

Given the alternatives, anyone with a brain would and should be glad that Bush is our president.

S John Massoud, Leesburg , USA Virginia

Pax Britannica lasted for two centuries until Germany destroyed it.....the USA belatedly took up the torch and initially preferred to do so alone, dismantling the British Empire and driving Britain from the Middle East in 1956.

Now decide if you want to live in a world of Russian values, or Chinese values, or Muslim values ?

Once America retreats it will not be "human rights" that will be in the ascendant but the line-up for the next great conflict which US interventionism is simply postponing.

The West is swamped in sentimentality and has forgotten the strategic; it will end as a colony of the New Great Powers like China or perhaps India

TomtOm, Leeds, England

Please spare us - I come from Denmark - one of the most USA friendly countires in western Europe (the only place wher 4. july is celebrated in public in Europe) and I can say that in resent years no president has been as bad for the general appreciation of the USA in the public as George Bush.

I think that most danes still back the USA and are in favour of supporting your actions around the world - but more people are beginning to doubt this policy.

Best regards

Morten Andersen, Copenhagen, Denmark

I will hold Mr. Bush in profound esteem if only for his ability to stick to his principles in the face of the scorn of all the ex-colonizers in the world, who now think we're wrong to try to spread democracy. France is passé as a world power. The sun now sets on the British Empire. America will probably become too effete to influence world affairs. If Europeans find us Yanks too overbearing, wait until we adopt isolationism once more and it's China's turn.

I think that Europe would find itself hugely embarrassed if, like America's Democratic Party, it were suddenly put back in power and couldn't come up with a coherent policy.

Allen Thorpe, Orangeville, Utah, US

Too many people have such short memories. The old proverb that if we don't learn from history then were doomed to repeat it is so true. The politicians vying for presidency either carry baggage (Clinton) or are real yawners (McCain). There is no solid individual, who doesn’t wavier on traditional values, who‘s running for president.
We experienced a similar political situation with the mess Nixon and Ford left us and onto the scene was a dark horse named Jimma Carter. I clearly remember so many people voting for him because he was going to “change things”. He turned out very weak both at home and in his foreign policy. When Ronald Reagan ran, it was a blowout against Carter. Thus, the people, expecting the Democrats to “change things”, will face a huge disappointment.

Randall Harris, Oshkosh, USA/Wisconsin

I get up every morning. Breathe the fresh air of freedom and thank God for President George W. Bush.
A US MARINE

Wm Babbington, Fairfax Station, USA/VA

"replaced by an enlightened, world-embracing Democrat"

Clinton ? Obama? Edwards?
Surely you jest. Not enough substance to fill an egg cup.

Next !

Stan(expat), USA, USA

I can't wait for the democrats to win in '08. Then I'll be able to buy "war credits" along with my "carbon neutral" credits and display them on my wall like a good patriot. Surely, this will end all wars and peace will spread throughout the land. We will be able to convert all those nasty missile silos into shelters for our underpriviledged and we will have a lottery for all the surplus humvees so our unemployed can get to work

Guy Ciavattone, Detroit, USA

"Bush is only the symptom. America is the disease."
Seconded.
We'll still have those that voted for him. Twice.

Mark, Hong Kong,

Thank you Mr. Baker. Right on point. You deserve a Pulitzer prize, or whatever is the UK's equivalent.

P. Peterson, Saint Paul, MN

After this military action I hope America never sends its troops anywhere in the world for any reason.

Jim, smithville, MO

The comments show that the author is correct. Europeans continue moaning about Dubya and the mistakes he has made. The Democrats whinge and whine but don't come up with any concrete proposals on Iraq, apart from advocating surrender. Yes, who will the Europeans blame when Dubya and Cheney have gone and are replaced by Democrats and what will happen if Europe continues to suffer terrorist attacks? Don't forget that European liberal values are even more unacceptable to extremist muslims than the values of the average American. The obvious answer is that the French will save Europe!

Tony, Calabasas,

Two things once said about American political liberals could be applied to far too many Europeans of all political persuasions: "A [European] is a man who leaves a room when the fight begins...." apologies to Heywood Broun; and, "A [European] is a man too broad minded to take his own side in a quarrel...." apologies to Robert Frost.

Face it: For the most part, when it comes to doing anything hard in this world, there is no one quite as useless as a European.

Roger Butters, Corry, USA/Pennsylvania

Mr Baker doesn't seem to have quite taken in the significance of the elections last year in the US; Americans aren't exactly enamoured with Mr Bush either.

John Reid, Wellington, New Zealand

What a fluffy little editorial. American politics must seem like real fun to you. With so much blood on the hands of Bush and his regime, it's nice to see you can view things so light-heartedly. Not having old Georgie to kick around anymore is what is essential for the survival of our country. I pray that we can make it until then. 690 days, 2 hours, 37 minutes and 43 seconds. I hope the rest of the world will allow us to fix our country and do what we can to repair the damage that has been wrought.

Rich Charron, Orlando, FL, USA/Florida

The other great thing about Bush's departure will be no more tiresome columns from Gerard Baker in which he bypasses Bush's genuine stuff-ups simply by throwing volumes of mud at the US President's critics. Some of Bush's critics were right all along about Iraq, Mr Baker. In fact, you eventually got close to the truth yourself a few months with a jeremiad against the handling of the Iraq war, a backflip of almost cosmic dimensions on your part. Whoever takes over from Bush will have to clean up this mess, and the budget as well. It doesn't matter how many straw men you surround him with. This is the unvarnished truth.

luke hughes, Bangkok, Thailand

Dead right Mr, Baker. What the Yank-bashers can't begin to grasp is that if America, with all it's faults, were to vanish tonight, the rest of us would be in a hell of a mess tomorrow. If we want to know how much load someone's carrying, all we have to do is listen to the crash when they let go.

P.S. I see Sylvia (Westborough) lost no time diving back under her comfort blanket.

Ken Leyland, Liverpool, U.K.

Hi, my name is Douglas Kruger.

I'm an early morning talk-show host on a radio station called 702, in Johannesburg, South Africa. I deeply enjoyed Gerard Baker's response to the Bush-bashing crowd, and mentioned it on air this morning.

Well done to him, and thanks for a great column

Douglas, Johannesburg, South Africa

Bush is only the symtom. America is the disease.

Phil, Hong Kong,

The fact that you you dismiss as irrelevant an 18 cm increase in sea levels by the year 2100 is proof positive of the irresponsibility and short sightedness of republican conservatives. May your worst wishes (the election of a Democrat) be realized.

Silvia, Westborough,

Maybe the next president will go after the terrorists hanging out in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, instead of building bases to secure oil and natural gas in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That would be nice, wouldn' t it, if we actually worked to build freedom and democracy in the world instead of sucking up to 3rd rate dictators and 14 century monarchies.

Robert, Skokie,

The author is quite correct that one day, G.W. Bush will no longer be U.S. president. No one would ever wish him back but the most pathetic imaginable moron...and apparently the author of this column, as well. He has presented a strange argument which makes little sense. For years, the Bush administration has demonstrated unparalleled skill in choosing the worst possible way to deal with almost every single issue of significance. Additionally, they've shown themselves the most vile authoritarians, who impose widespread suffering and death with no afterthought, all in the name of their "Neoconservative" machine. The day Bush leaves office is the day meaningful dialogues can begin to occur, dialogues that have been suppressed and suffocated for years now, beneath the incessant drumbeat toward fascistic repression. The conscious and concerned wish to move forward and face the day. The columnist has entirely missed the point: The world is a complex reality which must be confronted.

Ferdinand H. Novak, Bloomington,