What has Bush done that follows Machiavelli's philosophies?

I am writing a paper about Machiavelli, and I want to compair Bush to him...





One quote of Machiavell's that I am focusing on is:


"Men are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that he who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived. One recent example I cannot pass over in silence. Alexander VI did nothing else but deceive men, nor ever thought of doing otherwise, and he always found victims; for there never was a man who had greater power in asserting, or who with greater oaths would affirm a thing, yet would observe it less; nevertheless his deceits always succeeded according to his wishes, because he well understood this side of mankind. "





*Has Bush decieved America? In what ways?


-Please be specific, I really need help!!!!








Thanks to all who answer!!!!!

What has Bush done that follows Machiavelli's philosophies?
Hello supermodelb,





Well, arguably Bush deceived Americans with the Iraq war in the sense he proposed a reason for invasion, which he obviously knew was a lie. The reason was WMDs, however there is and has never been in the past few years been any evidence of such material; but since it at one time existed, it functioned as a creditable excuse.





As we say in politics, it is easier to tell a lie when it is blended with a 'touch' of truth. It is then hardier to distinguish between the two...and it becomes easier to believe. Americans in post-9-11 thinking were inclined to believe that the Middle East was a geopolitical realm of enemies hell-bent on destroying the USA. Bush utilized this common characteristic of the broader US societal then-norm and advocated a first strike against the Saddam government in Iraq.





Conventionally speaking Americans in the past, especially post WW2, have been more geared towards diplomacy given the nature of thermonuclear devices and MAD theory politics (mutually assured destruction), but now the evolution of warfare has reached a new point. The events of 9-11 changed that righteous, UN-like attitude. Wars are even more subjective and clouded than before. Adversaries are no longer military units, but loose associations of people geared towards a common goal that is sometimes political or religious...not always in association with a state or government (ex: al Qaeda, Bengal Tigers in Sri Lanka, Irish Republican Army) . Americans were hurt %26amp; justifiably so in 2001. This sense of hurt and fear of further hurt supplemented Bush in his aims.





Bush's overreaching agenda is arguably up for debate, however in context to Bush %26amp; Machiavelli, both are very much "I'll get you before you get me"....even though Bush claims to the contrary....look at his record...I hope this helps and doesn't sound partisan....I tried not to be....I'm a college senior and majoring political science and just recently finished studying Machiavelli in context to political philosophy. The hardest thing with philosophy, is its like art...it means different things to different people. Politics is even more complicated than that...I hope my quick analysis helps...good luck!!!
Reply:I was always more of an East Coast guy, Makaveli, Dre... never did it for me