Having had a bizzare (for a European) preoccupation with American history in the 19th C, I do find that current American Foreign policy still has implict in it the religiously inspired rationale that enabled Americans to seriously claim that the ethnic cleansing of the West, and the genocidal behaviours that this often entailed, was because God wanted them to do it.
From certain newspaper articles I've read it seems as if some of those in the White House believe that Bush getting in despite not having the majority of the popular vote was a sign, and that 9/11 backed up their belief that Bush was a man put in a certain place for a certain time and role. That Bible Studies are a regular expected activity of White House staffers.
Now, this makes me VERY NERVOUS. I prefer my religious fanatics to come from developing countries that MAY have weapons of mass destruction, rather than from the most powerful millitary country in the world with more weapons of mass destruction than the rest of the world put together.
Obviously just because it was in a newspaper doesn't mean it's true (yesterday's Guardian I think).
But what do you think?
1/ Do members of the Bush administration feel that their campaign against the axis of (we)evil is backed by God?
2/ How does this make them different from other peope who believe their campaigns are backed by God?
3/ Is current American foreign policy influenced by some pseudo-religious view of the USA as a great peace-maker?
4/ If so, does this make it any less wrong than the obviously evil 'Divine Mandate' of the 19th C? If so, why?
I'd appreciate if people would answer the questions, rather than speechifying or going off on one, and possibly to back up their answers, as I am not really asserting my opinion here but seeing if press coverage of the issue reflects what 'ordinary' American's feel.
I pesonally love the story of a Royalist commander from the English Civil War, who would loudly ask before battle that god keep out of it and let the humans settle it between themselves...