Give It A Few Days, And Bush Will Have Won

Due to a strong opening, repetitive language to solidify key points, and an excellent closing statement, I think Bush comes out on top in this debate. It may take several days, maybe even a week, for this sentiment to spread and be recognized, but I believe it is true. After just watching the debate, which of Kerry's issues can you describe as Kerry described them? How about for Bush? Kerry jumped a slight bit when his performance is simplified, which the average voter and the media will try to do, but Bush had a consistent - if repetitive - argument that does not get diminished or distorted when it is compacted. Also, Bush's closing speech was excellent. He spoke directly to the American people in saying "we", as in "you and I", to connect with the audience. This connection will make them remember Bush's closing, and it may have helped him to have gone last (though the speech may have distracted some attention from Kerry if Bush were to go first).

So, I may be one of the first to call this as a victory, even if it may be a small victory, but I am saying it went to Bush. This won't take effect until perhaps 3 days to a week from now, but Bush's style and message should put the debate in his favor.
Because I am having difficulty being sure, I think there's a good 70% chance I'm right, and a 30% chance I'm wrong. I'm going to stick with saying I'm right unless it becomes rather obvious that I'm not.


Now, there are two issues that are of importance, but might not get the necessary attention (excluding Sudan, which the candidates skimmed over): The first is North Korea, the second is the invasion of Iraq helping Israel.
Bush is right with North Korea, but few people know enough about the subject to determine this. North Korea started its desire for nukes under Clinton, and the nation acquired nukes under Clintonian or Clinton-like agreements. Now that North Korea has nukes, the US can't invade it for fear of nuclear retaliation. Sudan is trying to get nukes for a similar reason: if it gets nukes, the US can't invade it. So, Iran is literally racing against the clock for its survival as a fundamentalist Islamic state. If it gets nukes, it stays the same. However, the US is trying to destroy the fanaticism in Iranian Islam, and would therefore either be able to invade Iran (right now, all of Iran would be opposed to the US. It would be over a dozen times worse than Iraq, at least), or a shift in Islam will force Iran to change. That change would either end its desire for nukes (unlikely, as few give up nukes unless strongly threatened with destruction), or it would make a nuclear Iran a smaller risk to the world (somewhat likely). A third option is to change Islam enough for the Iranian people to support an invasion by the US against the government, but that is quite speculative.
Now, the invasion of Iraq helps Israel because a democratic Iraq will lose religious extremism. That loss will spread to Iraq’s neighbors. Because Israel is hated partially due to Islamic extremism, a less extreme Islam means a safer (or at least less-hated) Israel. This topic actually goes back to my very first post on this blog, and it exemplifies why I choose such an awkward and then-outdated subject as my first post. I highly recommend this for background information and relevant analysis, by the way. Let me quote myself:

Arabs have also gained a desire for revenge after losing many wars to Israel. The US military and monetary support of Israel has further bolstered the view of Israel as a colonizer.
Common claims, such as an unfair occupation of Palestinian territories or revenge for civilian casualties during Israel’s military actions, are mere excuses for continued suicide bombings. In fact, the claim of occupied lands adds evidence to the fact that Muslims see Israel as a colonizer. In addition, the often-repeated claim that Israel subjugates Muslims in its territory is inaccurate and is based only on the suspicion that Israel is a colonizer. More Palestinians work in Israel than in neighboring Egypt (which fought against Israel many times), and Palestinians in Lebanon, now occupied by Syria, have become helots, while the Lebanese themselves form a lower class to Syrians (my source is Between War and Peace, by Victor Davis Hanson, page 82). Indeed, Israel is probably the most successful nation in the mid-east, and it is far more accepting of Muslims than its neighbors are accepting of Jews.
Thus, the Muslim view declares that Israel is a foreign invader and colonizer. However, this claim is proven wrong by the fact that Israel has exercised restraint and treats Muslims better than Muslims treat Jews in other nations.
…
The only way to end the Arab-Israeli conflict is to start a complete renovation of Islam. Such a renovation would allow the belief to greater recognize the endless changes of the world, and remove Israel’s stigma of a colonizer. This renovation has already begun, and can be seen in two major factors; economic development and some form of representative government (democracy).

The first portion is from the start of the post, the second is from the last section of the post.
I can not stress how a revolutionized Islam will make Israel safer enough. It is the best and the only permanent way to make Israel secure. When Islam develops and becomes less fanatical, there will be less hatred of Israel. There may be problems over national boundaries, but those issues will be legitimate international issues only after the mideast stops hating Israel for what it is, rather than where it is.
A safer Israel makes a safer world because Israel is currently the Achilles heal of the Western world. Surrounded by enemies, it is the easiest nation for America’s enemy to attack, or at least to help organize an attack on. That attack could serve as a distraction while America’s enemy does an even more devious thing (such as China capturing Taiwan, Hong Kong, or maybe even one or both Koreas). That is a huge threat to America, because not dealing with an emerging superpower competitor would demolish the balance of power and could start another version of the Cold War. By fixing the liabilities of Israel, America assures that it can not be challenged in this way.
That is why securing Israel is important.


I hope I have helped explain two under-reported issues which are of great importance to the international development of the US.