The Real Danger
This presidential election is a pivotal point in history. It is not only a referendum on the global war on terror but is also a referendum on two distinct world-view ideologies. One ideology says tyranny and terror must be met head on with force and no compromise. The other ideology says you placate, negotiate and use diplomacy with those that want to kill you and use murder and terror as a weapon of choice. This ideology also says it is somehow the fault of those being terrorized which causes murderers and terrorists to act the way they do.
Iraq is presently the center of the war on terror. Islamic jihadists pour into Iraq to make war on Americans. Those who claim that Iraq is "the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place" are fools if they somehow think America should only be hunting bin Laden in Afghanistan. We ALL want bin Laden, but Islamofascists aren't bound by countries and borders. Our military is killing these murderers and terrorists by the hundreds if not the thousands in Iraq. But the war in Iraq is only a prelude in the real war on terror. To be sure, the struggle in Iraq is real and the cost is terrible in human lives. The willful slaughtering of innocent civilians with car bombings is incomprehensible to any civilized person. The lives lost in Iraq is tragic but pales in comparison to what will happen when the mullahs in Iran actually have nuclear weapons.
The UN is powerless against rogue states that are determined to be a force of influence in their region of the world. Evil does not respond to threats, resolutions and sanctions, because evil only respects power and force. Saddam Hussein toyed with the UN and never changed his ways because of sanctions and summits. Only the power of the American military kept him hedged in after Gulf War 1. Power and force removed him when diplomacy and hot air would and could not do it. THAT is the only way to treat evil. Iran is snubbing it's nose at the world and is determined to pursue it's WMD's. The mullahs desperately want to influence and control the region. It is too late to stop them without force or an internal regime change. Go here for a pessimistic yet hopeful view of how the UN should respond to Iran and go here for a more realistic assessment.
At some point within the next 12 to 24 months our country WILL be faced with the bone-chilling reality of doing something about Iran, not by sanctions and summits, but by force. Once engaged, the conflict could very well make Iraq look the Granada operation. It appears to me that planners in Washington are already preparing for that distinct possibility. Go here. Troops are being restaged out of former trouble spots, in addition to the Korean peninsula, and brought into areas closer to the Middle East.
Hopefully, Iraq will be more secure and on the way to sorting out it's democracy. There will still be problems and violence but Iraq will be focused on it's problems and not on threatening it's neighbors. But now imagine that Gore had won the 2000 election and Saddam was still in power, defying the UN and still laughing at sanctions while desperately trying to implement Iraq's weapons programs. In the past, Iraq and Iran have been bitter enemies. Saddam would have been energized to implement WMD's by Iran's success in flaunting nuclear development. Saddam would also have been stirred to act from his deep distrust of the Iranians. It would have been unthinkable to have these two nations with the bomb side by side hating and distrustful one another. As bad as that would have been, can you imagine our country having to handle both Iraq and Iran at the same time? Both with nukes? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" surely applies here. We see the joining together or at least the mutual cooperation of former foes in Iraq to try and defeat a common enemy, the great satan. If Gore had won the 2000 election we surely would be facing an almost unthinkable nightmarish situation in Iraq and Iran.
Now Kerry wants us out of Iraq. He talks "peace with honor" talk that blinds and weakens a country into pulling back when resolve is needed. Kerry would have us go back to the days of summits, sanctions and no action. Kerry's actions would embolden Iran to fulfill it's desires to be a nuclear power and embolden Islamofascists in Iraq to pursue civil war. Once emboldened and seeing no consequences, Iran will give nukes to Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas and the nightmare on our country's soil begins.
Iraq is presently the center of the war on terror. Islamic jihadists pour into Iraq to make war on Americans. Those who claim that Iraq is "the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place" are fools if they somehow think America should only be hunting bin Laden in Afghanistan. We ALL want bin Laden, but Islamofascists aren't bound by countries and borders. Our military is killing these murderers and terrorists by the hundreds if not the thousands in Iraq. But the war in Iraq is only a prelude in the real war on terror. To be sure, the struggle in Iraq is real and the cost is terrible in human lives. The willful slaughtering of innocent civilians with car bombings is incomprehensible to any civilized person. The lives lost in Iraq is tragic but pales in comparison to what will happen when the mullahs in Iran actually have nuclear weapons.
The UN is powerless against rogue states that are determined to be a force of influence in their region of the world. Evil does not respond to threats, resolutions and sanctions, because evil only respects power and force. Saddam Hussein toyed with the UN and never changed his ways because of sanctions and summits. Only the power of the American military kept him hedged in after Gulf War 1. Power and force removed him when diplomacy and hot air would and could not do it. THAT is the only way to treat evil. Iran is snubbing it's nose at the world and is determined to pursue it's WMD's. The mullahs desperately want to influence and control the region. It is too late to stop them without force or an internal regime change. Go here for a pessimistic yet hopeful view of how the UN should respond to Iran and go here for a more realistic assessment.
At some point within the next 12 to 24 months our country WILL be faced with the bone-chilling reality of doing something about Iran, not by sanctions and summits, but by force. Once engaged, the conflict could very well make Iraq look the Granada operation. It appears to me that planners in Washington are already preparing for that distinct possibility. Go here. Troops are being restaged out of former trouble spots, in addition to the Korean peninsula, and brought into areas closer to the Middle East.
Hopefully, Iraq will be more secure and on the way to sorting out it's democracy. There will still be problems and violence but Iraq will be focused on it's problems and not on threatening it's neighbors. But now imagine that Gore had won the 2000 election and Saddam was still in power, defying the UN and still laughing at sanctions while desperately trying to implement Iraq's weapons programs. In the past, Iraq and Iran have been bitter enemies. Saddam would have been energized to implement WMD's by Iran's success in flaunting nuclear development. Saddam would also have been stirred to act from his deep distrust of the Iranians. It would have been unthinkable to have these two nations with the bomb side by side hating and distrustful one another. As bad as that would have been, can you imagine our country having to handle both Iraq and Iran at the same time? Both with nukes? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" surely applies here. We see the joining together or at least the mutual cooperation of former foes in Iraq to try and defeat a common enemy, the great satan. If Gore had won the 2000 election we surely would be facing an almost unthinkable nightmarish situation in Iraq and Iran.
Now Kerry wants us out of Iraq. He talks "peace with honor" talk that blinds and weakens a country into pulling back when resolve is needed. Kerry would have us go back to the days of summits, sanctions and no action. Kerry's actions would embolden Iran to fulfill it's desires to be a nuclear power and embolden Islamofascists in Iraq to pursue civil war. Once emboldened and seeing no consequences, Iran will give nukes to Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas and the nightmare on our country's soil begins.
posted by B0Z at 10/05/2004 03:18:00 PM
3 Comments:
The Christian Science Monitor published a report on the new crop of al Qaeda recruits:
"Younger, educated recruits tapped for suicide missions like 9/11 typically came from Middle Eastern countries with long histories of pan-Islamic resistance. What sets this new breed apart is that they are joining from places like Pakistan, where the focus has been on regional grievances, like independence for the disputed area of Kashmir. But as the Al Qaeda leadership ranks begin to thin, men like [Atta-ur] Rehman are starting to climb the ladder.
'It is a new generation of Al Qaeda,' says Riffat Hussain, a leading defense and security analyst based in Islamabad, Pakistan. 'These are new converts to Al Qaeda. They may have no links with Al Qaeda in the past, but now they are willing to sacrifice their lives for the cause as they feel Al Qaeda is the name of defiance to the West. They are young and angry, and their number has swelled in the aftermath of the US invasion of Iraq.'"
I don't blame us for acts of terror against us, but I don't think it's foolish to examine the reasons for the hatred directed our way. And I don't think Bush/Cheney's opponents think we should "only be hunting bin Laden in Afghanistan." But many of us think the resources we have committed there could be far better invested in other ways.
Kitzi,
Thanks for the well thought out response.
I agree that we should always examine the reasons behind our enemies' hatred toward us but I contend we will never understand the kind of hatred that says, "You love life, we love death". Should we have examined why the Axis powers of WWII whipped up their nations passions into hatred toward us before investing the resources into killing them? Of course not! If so then we would all be speaking German or Japanese today. Our enemies today want us dead not because of anything we have done but because of the twisted view of the Koran that hardline Islamic fanatics have created in their schools. They convince even children from early impressionable life to die and instantly go to paradise, that there is no greater service to Allah than to die a martyrs death. When all you have known from childhood is poverty, despair and hatred it becomes easy to die for a cause that wants all enemies of Islam dead. There is no understanding of or reasoning with this kind of hatred. When evil is manifested in this manner you have to kill or be killed. I wish it were not so. But it is.
As for Afghanistan, in what other ways would you invested the resources we have put there? It seems that it would be OK with you if about 10,000,000 people did not have the opportunity to vote this year. The powerful message that will be sent to other people in the Middle East when about 4,000,000 women in Afghanistan cast ballots is beyond reckoning. Reduce the resources? No. I say increase them. Kerry would pull out and leave Afghanistan to be run by the UN with all of it's food-for-$$$ wisdom.
When you have time, please go read this post at Eject!Eject!Eject!. It's a long read but well worth it. This person articulates very well why you cannot reason with or try to understand our enemies.
Kitzi,
I forgot to specify which essay to check out. The essay at Eject!Eject!Eject! is a two parter about deterrence. It's an excellant read.
Post a Comment
<< Home