The United States must fight against the "axis of evil," declared George Bush in his State of the Union address Tuesday night. But the question is will we fight alone?

The last time we fought an axis, we had allies. That alliance helped win World War II, and another alliance helped keep the peace in the decades since. But now, as America engages in a new worldwide war, the president seems eager to go it alone.

The first Axis, of course, was Germany, Italy and Japan. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, determined to rally an anti-fascist alliance, knew that he needed an umbrella term for the good guys. FDR's ally, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, had been toying with phrases such as "Allied Nations" and "Associated Nations," but none of them had enough idealistic lift. But, in January, 1942, according to Roosevelt aide and biographer Samuel Rosenman, "The President thought of 'United Nations,' not as an analogy to 'United States,' but rather as expressive of the fact that the Allies were united in a common purpose."

This bit of name-gaming clicked. For the next 44 months of fighting, Roosevelt and Churchill insisted that the war wasn't just a struggle of factions, but rather a grand crusade, in which the lofty-sounding "United Nations" had come together to vanquish a few evil-doers. The formal United Nations didn't come into existence until Oct. 24, 1945; it was soon joined by other multilateral peacekeeping institutions, notably, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

To be sure, these world-girdling organizations have their critics, but it's hard to argue with the overall success of the last half-century.

Bush himself eagerly embraced allies in the scary days immediately after 9-11. In his speech to Congress on Sept. 20, he invoked the dead of "80 countries" as justification for American action. And he looked up into the visitor's gallery to say that he was "honored" by the presence of yet another British prime minister, Tony Blair. So, for the critical months thereafter, America worked with Britain, NATO and the UN to liberate Afghanistan. And, today, other countries are shouldering the burden of peacekeeping and rebuilding.

Now, as Bush said on Tuesday, "the war on terror is well begun, but it is only begun." But what of the 9-11 alliance in the fighting ahead? The president doesn't seem interested in it any more. Although he made a few vague references to "allies," he offered no specific mention, let alone a thank you to Blair or Britain. And no mention of other staunch friends, including Canada, Germany and Japan. Nor an acknowledgement of NATO or the UN. Yes, Bush took time to thank the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, but they are more dependents than allies.

America would have had more and better allies in the next round of fighting if Bush had taken time Tuesday to express appreciation to his comrades in the last round of fighting. It may seem petty to reduce geopolitics to personalities, but it's human nature for leaders anywhere to want credit for what they do.

Bush, who took time during his speech to heap praise on his sometime domestic political ally, Ted Kennedy, did not simply neglect to thank those international allies. That's not the way presidents operate, and that's not the way the Bush family operates. Instead, the president left his comrades out in the cold for a reason.

But what reason? Most likely, Bush figures that his allies in the war against al-Qaida will not support attacks on the possible next targets -- the new "evil axis" of Iran, Iraq and North Korea. So it's better, the Bushies might be thinking, to dump the allies before they start dumping on the United States.

From a narrow military perspective, Bush might be wise to go it alone.

But if, as he said, the broader goal is to create a world in which countries are permanently safeguarded from terror, especially from weapons of mass destruction, then a more comprehensive solution will be needed. That's a long-term task. As the president conceded, "This campaign may not be finished on our watch." Yet he offered no ringing or memorable phrase to inspire listeners to join the long task ahead.

Six decades ago, Franklin Roosevelt thought ahead, beyond winning the war, to winning the peace. On Tuesday night, Bush talked only of war.