Ten National Security Myths
By Sherle R. Schwenninger, New America Foundation with Katrina vanden Heuvel
The Nation | October 6, 2008
If left unchallenged, these myths and fallacies could influence the outcome of the election and shape policy in the next administration.
The Iraq War is a testament to the great damage a foreign policy based on myths, lies and distortions can do to our nation’s security and well-being. As the election draws near, a new set of myths and fallacies as misleading as those that led the Senate to support George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq have become embedded in our foreign policy discourse. Many of them are being perpetuated by the very same political forces that peddled the myth of mushroom clouds coming from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Others are the product of muddled thinking on the part of both Republicans and Democrats.
If left unchallenged, these myths and fallacies could influence the outcome of the election and shape policy in the next administration. Here are the “top ten” myths followed by what we believe is a more accurate depiction of what is at stake for the United States and the world.
Myth 1. It’s a dangerous world. We face an array of serious national security threats that require an experienced Commander-in-Chief.
John McCain’s supporters have repeated this refrain over and over, replete with 3 am imagery, to call attention to his presumed national security credentials and to cast doubt on Barack Obama’s readiness to be Commander-in-Chief. Obama has on occasion challenged the politics of fear, but many of his supporters have too readily conceded that it is a dangerous world.
The world is more dangerous than it would have been had the Bush administration not invaded Iraq, spurned Iran’s diplomatic overtures in 2003 and unnecessarily antagonized Russia by expanding NATO and withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Missile Treaty.� [more]