The US House Intelligence Committee recently released a classified National Intelligence Estimate that says that the Iraq war, among other US Government actions, have fueled terrorist sentiments worldwide and made life more dangerous for US civilians. In short, the US government makes the world a more dangerous place, and therefore causes chaos. The New York Times had this to say:
The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of “self-generating” cells inspired by Al Qaeda’s leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants.
Read that carefully. The US Government is creating enough worldwide hatred to spawn totally independent terrorist groups. These terrorist groups are comprised of people who would not otherwise have engaged in terrorist activity.
I do not believe that there exists a more telling indicator of the fueling of hatred, violence, and chaos by a government than the spawning of "self-generating" terrorist cells in response to that government's actions abroad.
So it seems (to no surprise, really) that when Bush said that America was safer because of his administration's actions, he was a liar, a lunatic, or an idiot. I'm guessing a combination of all three.
Another lie that Bush constantly says is "They hate our freedom," but do people across the globe hate the US because of Hollywood gossip, or fast food, or boob jobs? No! People across the globe hate the US because of the actions of the government. People across the globe want to kill US civilians because of the actions of the US government.
Perhaps when Bush says that they hate our freedom, what he really means is that terrorists hate the US because of the pseudo-legitimized "freedom" of coercive force that the government wields so frequently.
Collective concepts, like governments, are the instrument of chaos. There is chaos when the government drops bombs abroad that it bought with stolen money. There is chaos when collectivist religious groups attack the entire US, both military and civilian, because no distinction is made between the two; both civilian population and government are viewed collectively as the "United States of America."
A society based on mutual, free consent, and absent of a government, would not lead to chaos. Governments lead to chaos. Government officials think that they can bring order through coercion, or force. Government officials think that they can bring order through the violation of self-ownership, or consent. When government actions lead to chaos, as they often do, the politicians declare, "We must use more bombs and bullets, and steal more money, in order to stop the chaos. You need us more than ever now."
Since the world does have some degree of stability, and since governments are only effective at creating chaos, where does the stability come from? I know where it comes from: The Free Market. Consent-based social frameworks bring stability and security. Consent-based competition is also cooperative; they are not mutually exclusive terms (see this post). How many have died due to the "battle" between Pepsi and Coke, or between Chevy and Ford? Who last picked up a gun and said they would give their life to protect Sony's market share? When did Nike last issue a call to arms to keep its customers and products safe from the evil aggressions of Reebok?
When parties compete and interact in a free market, they do so in a consensual framework, and bring forth stability through productivity. It becomes a race to see which party can produce the most and win the most customers. Consent-based competition is stability, and private parties in a free market play the consensual competition game.
Coercion, on the other hand, is mutually exclusive from "cooperation." You can't cooperate with someone when you are forcing your will onto them and violating their self-determination. Governments play a game of who can brutalize who the fastest. They play a game of attrition, each one betting that they can leech more money, resources, and cannon fodder from their respective civilian populations than their opponent can. Governments need not compete for their customers; they ban competition, and enforce their customer base artificially through taxation at the barrel of a gun. Chaos is coercion, and governments play the coercion game.