NewYou can listen to Fox News articles now!
The war on terror led to changes in the Iraqi regime and a brief democratic Afghanistan – at least until the disastrous evacuation of former President Joe Biden. Recently, another conflict between Israel and Iran has caused the United States to step in to help destroy nuclear facilities, but observers should pause before making any apple-to-apple comparisons between the two eras.
Andrew Card, then-white House Chief of Staff, whispered in an elementary school reading event where President George W. Bush’s ears, terrorists were hit by terrorists for thirty years, and we continued to have thirty years of U.S. participation in the Middle East.
Steve Yates, a senior research fellow in China and national security policy at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital that the big orders in the Middle East and around the world were another place at the time.
Yates had previously served as the top national security advisor to then Vice President Dick Cheney in the Bush administration. Recently, he co-chaired the 2016 RNC Subcommittee on the National Security Platform.
The squad burst into anger when Trump takes bold action against the Iranian nuclear threat
Left President George Bush and Donald Trump, right. (Reuters)
When asked to compare the two governments, Yates said: “In 20 years, the world has changed dramatically.”
“And I think my view of things has changed a lot because I’m all the other things in the world and what’s going on in China.”
In Bush’s era, the Chinese Communist Party was led by Hu Jintao, and Yates quipped “the definition of boredom” and XI jinping was the definition of boredom.”
Yates said the differences there and the Middle East present challenges the United States.
President Donald Trump essentially leads the first “post-globalist” presidency as the world awakens[ed] “Moment of Globalism” since the 1990s.
“None of these things were factors in the early 2000s. I think it’s crucial to try to see how things are being processed now,” he said.
“Frankly, I’m a supporter of President Trump and something he’s been trying to do. I think he’s very clear that he’s willing to use decisive power when he judges it’s necessary.”
U.S. military in the Middle East may face increasing threats amid Iran conflict
In the Middle East, U.S. intervention during the War on Terror led to the removal of dictator Saddam Hussein, which followed a decades-long ground war.
At that time, Iran was led by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a more prominent president. Compared with the current President Masoud Pezeshkian, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei has become the most prominent global figure.
And, despite the war on terror that led to boots on the ground, Yates noted that Trump is well aware that he wants Middle Eastern allies and their friendly and Western neighbors to take “fair risks and responsibilities” for what happened in the region, a conflict since the age of Jesus Christ.
“At this point, Israel is clear. They have not asked for American boots on the ground. As far as I know, they have not asked for anything other than rhetorical support.”
Yates predicts that Trump has made it clear that he is ready to use “decisive American forces” when necessary to prevent Iran’s nuclear proliferation.
Media announces we declare war in war after Iran strike, White House postpones narrative
“It’s a sure-fire goal…it’s not a professional war, nor is it trying to ‘reproduce Iran in our image’ [have] Iraq is characterized by fairness or unfairness. ”
“So, I think the president’s logic is deeper than most people.”
The question at this time in history is more about whether the “old world” will act in a common interest in supporting non-nuclear Iran or similar outcomes in a meaningful way.
He mentioned “EU 3” – Germany, Britain and France, the three largest European economic powers – and said they were previously “regulating forces” in negotiations that allowed Tehran to “reduce sanctions” and deliver on their promises.
Click here to get the Fox News app
However, the EU3 model failed to solve this problem, suggesting that the diplomatic style of the early 21st century, which often puts the United States in conflict, may no longer work. Israel’s decisive response to October 7 only emphasized this.
“I still have a lot of gratitude and respect for my colleagues in the Bush administration. I just see us as a fundamentally different place,” he said.
“And, I will give President Trump a high mark in his balanced stocks – loyal to his definition of what America means first, but also loyal to allies in the age of need.”
