Honestly, is the left as represented here by the two Richies and Terry naive enough to truly believe that the terrorists at war with this country will modify their behavior if they like us? If they like our President? If he apologizes (time after time after time)?
Heaven help us that these fools are running our country.
Hats off to Mark for his brilliant posts on this issue. To be clear, I will stand at the gate, pitchfork in hand protesting any torture done for political gain or even in "unclear" circumstances. This clearly does not appear to be the case. We are at WAR with a dark, hiding enemy which obeys no rules and who, given the opportunity, would use a weapon of mass destruction within this country.
Now, I ask a question of my liberal, pacifists bloggers. Now, damn it, answer don't obfuscate.
How exactly would you fight the war on terror? The whole thing! Remember, they start with, (as Rush Limbaugh-Gasp) our death.
For those who care to offer an answer...Military or Criminal? Does it end if we catch OBL? Do we enforce a doctrine once we announce it? Honestly, besides criticism, what does the left offer?
I honestly would like one of you to give this a try, because the logical extension of your silliness will be to "reason" with them and treat them as criminals. Mark and I are just waiting to take a swing at that soft ball.
And let me answer one right off the bat. OK, we don't invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, I know, I know. But there will still be prisoners, there will still be terrorist plots, there will still be Afghanistan. There will still be Spain, Bali, London. Terry! Stuff is coming, you are in charge. Protect us!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It is a damn good thing we are in charge!
I'll take your bait:
I would fight the war on terror by framing the issue as civilization vs terrorism. I would rebuild alliances torn apart over the past eight years. I would build new alliances and recognize that it is not all about us. I would rejoin the International Criminal Court at the Hague. I would lead the world through internationalist diplomacy rather than incompetent unilateralism.
I would work assiduously to bring Russia into the west – into the European Union and then eventually NATO. I would constantly press the Iranian issue and make it clear that it is ultimately non-negotiable. I would constantly point out that an Iranian nuclear bomb would more likely end up in Moscow by Chechen delivery than New York by Hezbollah.
I would continue to develop our relationship with the Chinese and foster interdependence. I would make the fall of North Korea the primary goal and would create a circumstance where it is clearly in the Chinese (and South Korean) interest for Pyongyang to fall. Does China want a nuclear program in Japan? I would bring this to a head – I think Beijing may be ready right about now.
I would provide leadership to bring peace to Palestine/Israel. I would adopt the role of honest broker rather than co-opted enabler. I would utterly cut Israel off if they spend one more dollar expanding settlements in occupied territory. I would covertly fund Fatah to strengthen their hand relative to Hamas.
I would concentrate on our efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I would provide far more funds to consolidate and protect areas taken back from the Taliban. I would go on offense with the drones – liberally attacking Talib power centers and personnel wherever they may be. I would “bring in” the Pakistan military on drone attacks to provide a domestic fig leaf. I’d rather the locals get credit for killing the radicals rather than the foreigners. The best defense is a good offense, no?
I would continue to press President Bush’s democracy initiative. That’s right – I give credit where it is due. This may prove to be his sole positive legacy, but it is a big one. Ultimately, democracy creates temperate government. Radicals may be elected, but the responsibilities of governance produce moderation. The transition period here may be very difficult – the electorate in the Middle East is profoundly anti-American. So long as democracy is maintained, the populations will politically westernize. The principles of democracy must be fostered through international political pressure as well as money, delivered overtly and covertly.
You asked.
I would fight the war on terror by framing the issue as civilization vs terrorism.
Boom! That is the sound of a dirty bomb exploding in the middle of...I don't know...Seattle. You know the one we did not know about because we did not get the information from captured terrorists.
Crack! That is this sound of the rifle shot from the Gitmo detainee, released into another of our cities on a jihad shooting spree.
Interesting and high minded as your thoughts are, the dirty work of protecting this country requires uncomfortable decisions. You still cannot/will not comment about what to do to obtain critical intelligence or prisoners.
Having said that, you are way ahead of other brother Richie, who responded to the challenging post by requesting, to my E-mail, we no longer deny Global Warming. Huh?
The Good Doctor greatly overestimates the upside of torture. Even the Bushies only felt it necessary for precious few detainees.
It's efficaciousness is in dispute. Can we trust what we are told or does it send us down an entirely wrong path? Can't we learn as much or more using myriad other tools?
We know the downside. We lose our moral authority. Our enemies and former allies will see us just as we see the Gestapo in all the old movies. We are a "shining city on the hill" as Reagan said and there is far more power in that than there is in applying thumbscrews.
Post a Comment