Over at Right Thinking From the Left Coast Lee posted a comment on the phrase "war on terror" to which the Bush administration clings every time it tries to justify our invasion of, and prolonged occupation of, Iraq. While I fully supported the war initially, the mismanagement of it, the stupid rules of engagement, the kinder gentler, politically correct approach to fighting we do, has soured my enthusiasm dramatically. Why are we tip-toeing around and fighting only whoever happens to shoot at us, while allowing an endless resupply of terrorists to flow into Iraq from Iran, Syria, Jordan and whatever other Arab country wants to send their jihadists to fight the great satan? I get the whole we-must-fight-them-over-there-or-they-will-come-here argument. That's a valid argument in theory, but look what's happened since we invaded: Europe continues to be victimized by terrorists, our soldiers continue to die in great numbers, the enemy in the field is unidentifiable, other countries are subsidizing our enemies, the expense in blood and treasure is rapidly mounting, and autonomous terrorist cells exist in great numbers in every western country. Killing a bunch of terrorists in Iraq only kills a bunch of terrorists in Iraq. It doesn't cut off the head of the snake as Bush would have us believe. For every terrorist we kill in Iraq, there are hundreds of unidentified terrorists around the world just waiting for the right time to attack a mall, gas station, airport, commuter train, whatever.
The problem with fighting in Iraq and nowhere else, and Bush should have forseen this, is Iraq is not where all the terrorists are. They are all over Europe. They are in the U.S. waiting for an opportunity to attack. They are in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Pakistan, Indonesia, Gaza, Egypt, you name the Muslim country and there you will find hot-beds of jihadi indoctrination. That we are spending the current amount of effort in Iraq seems to me, short-sighted and ineffective.
"But Ed", you smugly point out, "it's easy to be a Monday-morning quarter-back. Instead of criticizing the actions of others, why not offer your solutions"?
Very well, I will. First of all, we have to recognize that the Islamic jihad against the West exists, is moving forward, and cannot be stopped short of complete nuclear annihilation of those countries which support it. Not an altogether unpleasant thought, but I assume that's out of the question. That being the case, spending all our resources in Iraq fighting a relatively small, endlessly replenishable pocket of jihadists when there are thousands around the world who would kill us when the chance comes, is to me, mind-numbingly obtuse in vision and strategy.
Second: we should extricate ourselves from Iraq at the earliest possible time at which they can defend themselves.
Third: we have to become petroleum independent. Relying on mid-east oil compels us to care about how we treat the Arab countries who hate us while selling us oil and accepting our aid. Energy independence would allow us to not care what they thought if we called an air-strike on a mosque in their country that we knew harbored terrorists.
Fourth: Every time we even think there is a plot to strike in the U.S., we should have the resolve to attack the source regardless of whose country it's in.
Fifth: we must close our borders and increase the vigilance with which we inspect those entering from known terrorists states.
To sum it up for you, we must make it more painful to be a terrorist than to sit peacefully in the third-world squalor and misery that part of the world will always be in. We don't have to invade any country, but we should be willing to attack any training facility we find...anywhere.
If anybody has a better idea about how to peacefully coexist with crazed, blood-thirsty, murdering terrorists, I'd love to hear it.
4 comments:
"The problem with fighting in Iraq and nowhere else, and Bush should have forseen this, is Iraq is not where all the terrorists are."
The real tragedy is that the terrorists never were in Iraq - UNTIL we invaded the country. Iraq did not destroy the Twin Towers, they didn't have WMD and they didn't welcome our soldiers with open arms as Bush assured us they would.
The regime was terrorising their own people, yes - but since when did that become a reason for America to declare war?
You say you fully supported the war initially and you've ridiculed anti-war demonstrators and Cindy Sheehan etc. Now your 'enthusiasm has soured dramatically'.
All in all, I think a Monday-morning quarter-back is exactly what you are, Ed.
Wrong you are, cp. Iraq was a major sponsor of terrorism and there were plenty of connections between Iraq and Al-Qaida prior to our invasion. Though you may be correct in the items you listed, Iraq being the single largest sponsor of world-wide terrorism was reason aplenty to topple the regime.
Should we maintain an extended occupation? No. We should install a puppet regime and exit post haste.
You sound like a Bush hater to me and nobody second guesses more than liberal Bush haters. The only problem is you have no solutions to world-wide terrorism (which is always aimed at the U.S.) of your own. You only criticize those who're trying to do something.
Point the finger at yourself cp.
Sorry, Ed - repeating a lie doesn't make it true. There was no links between Saddam and Al-Qaida. It's even logical - Saddam, being a secular dictator, just couldn't support an Islamist group. Bush wouldn't support liberals, would he?
And about criticizing those who're trying to do something - I think the last years show you've done pretty much everything wrong.
CP, I didn't use an Al-Qaida/Saddam link to justify toppling that ragime. It was state sponsored terrorism in general that justified the invasion.
As to your assertion that "we've" done pretty much everything wrong...that may well be the case where Iraq is concerned, but what would you panty-waste liberals have done differently? Ask the U.N. for permission to act? Treat 9/11 as street crime and let NYPD detectives solve it? Invite Saddam, Bin Laden, Zarqawi(sp?) to the peace table for crumpets and tea so we can iron out our differences?
Seriously, what would you have done to avenge 9/11, and prevent it from re-occuring?
Post a Comment