Mr. President: War Is Not A ‘Struggle’ Or ‘Situation’
by Mark TapsonFirst, President Obama jettisoned the admittedly empty and useless phrase “war on terror,” a label which pleased pretty much no one, primarily because it didn’t specify an enemy; it’s often been pointed out that the phrase was like calling World War II a “war on blitzkrieg.” Next, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano avoided even mentioning the word “terrorism” in her first congressional testimony. Now the Department of Justice has announced it is dropping the legal designation “enemy combatants,” which referred to suspected terrorist detainees. The aim of all this muting of the language in the War with No Name is twofold: for the Obama administration to distance itself from George W. Bush’s “politics of fear,” and to whitewash a plain fact that liberals are suicidally reluctant to acknowledge - that we are at war with radical Islam.
Earlier this year the members of MoveOn.org identified liberals’ top ten priorities for 2009 in a poll. Their agenda is very revealing: nowhere among the list of usual suspects – stopping climate change, ending the war in Iraq, “restoring” civil liberties, holding the Bush administration “accountable” – is there any mention of national security or any acknowledgement that the United States even has an enemy – unless, of course, you count climate change and the Bush administration, two threats that the left has no problem confronting fiercely.
There is no priority in the poll about countering violent jihad – whether Mumbai-style, low-tech terrorism or the threat of a WMD unleashed on American soil – or pushing back against what the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilizational jihad” – the hidden dangers of Islamic finance, “creeping sharia,” or the assault on our rights and liberties such as the threat to free speech in the form of Islamist pressure on the United Nations. In the minds of liberals, to admit that we are at war on many fronts with radical Islam would be to buy into “the politics of fear” generated by the despised Bush cabal. In that sense they truly believe we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
The refusal to acknowledge the enemy isn’t just an Obama failing; it’s a congenital blind spot of the left in general. In the New Hampshire presidential debates of a year ago, all four Democratic candidates referred to Islamic terrorism by name a whopping total of zero times – by contrast, their four Republican counterparts mentioned it twenty-two times. This underscores the fact that one party in this country has at least a partial grip on the threat we face – and the other party, the one now in power, prefers either attempting to placate the enemy by “making nice,” or pretending it doesn’t exist.
“Our administration does not believe in a clash of civilizations,” Vice-President Joe Biden announced at his February address in Munich, referring to the now-famous title of Samuel Huntington’s prescient 1998 book The Clash of Civilizations. Well frankly, I don’t believe in it either; I believe instead that we’re embroiled in a clash of civilization versus barbarism, and that it is the defining conflict of our time.
Unfortunately, Obama/Biden in particular and the left in general think the conflict is just one big cultural misunderstanding which can be resolved by reassuring fundamentalist Muslims (like the mythical “moderate Taliban“) that we’ll sit down with them, listen to their so-called grievances, and make whatever concessions are necessary (like throwing Israel under the bus) to move forward as mutually respectful partners in a brave new world of prosperity and inter-faith pablum.
“My job to the Muslim world,” Obama said in his very first interview as President, which he gave to the Arabic-language news network Al-Arabiya, “is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy.” Too late, Mr. President – Muslim extremists have been hammering home the point for decades, all across the Muslim world, that America, the Great Satan, is the enemy. Believing he can defuse Islamist hostility by being more “respectful,” by engaging them in still more “dialogue,” and by offering to make their grievances right – all of which the Islamists consider signs of weakness – is a fantasy.
There are a couple of gaping holes in this Kumbiyah theory of international relations. First, as much as Islamists would like us to believe this clash is about American foreign policy, it isn’t about their grievances, though their skewed perspective on our foreign policy sometimes provides them with useful recruiting points. In the words of a former Hezbollah leader: “We are not fighting you because we want something from you. We’re fighting you because we want to destroy you.”
And it certainly isn’t about poverty and economic opportunity, a favorite theme of Obama’s. The ranks of al Qaeda and every other Islamist group you can name are packed with moneyed, college-educated professionals; conversely, impoverished non-Muslims worldwide aren’t taking out their frustration by strapping on explosives and targeting Westerners and Jews.
Second, we’re not dealing with an enemy that thinks the way we do in the West or that wants the same things out of life. “In all my travels throughout the Muslim world,” Obama intoned on al-Arabiya, “what I’ve come to understand is that. . . regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.”
Actually, they don’t. In the U.S. and the rest of the West, we’re generally content to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In stark contrast, our Islamist enemies love death more than life, reject freedom in favor of absolute submission to a totalitarian ideology, and won’t be happy until the world is entirely Islamic. They cannot be swayed from their goal by promises of economic prosperity and peaceful coexistence with infidels.
The left’s plan for convincing these monsters to change their scimitars into plowshares is to get the whole world to “like us” again, since we were apparently such boors during the Bush years. Should that be the primary goal of a country? To be well-liked? What would that really mean, if America were liked by everyone? It would mean our European allies wouldn’t resent us cowboys anymore because we’ll finally be just like them: weak-willed, enervated and conciliatory. It would mean our enemies would like us more because we’ll have rendered ourselves impotent to stop them from blitzkrieging right over us.
Getting the rest of the world to “like” us means dismantling America as a pillar of moral, economic, and military strength in a world that desperately needs us to lead the way. It means unbolting the gate of civilization’s last line of defense, against an enemy that is waving the banner of an openly supremacist, totalitarian ideology and doesn’t care if the rest of the world likes them or not. The Islamists have thrown themselves into war with us with all the abandon of medieval Berserkers, and meanwhile we’re busy trying to win a popularity contest.
When asked about the “war on terror” phrase by CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Obama said, “Words matter in this situation because one of the ways we’re going to win this struggle is through the battle of hearts and minds.” Indeed, words do matter, which is why Obama should call the “situation” and the “struggle” what it is – a war. And if he wants to win the hearts and minds of the Islamic world, here are some words to keep in mind from Osama bin Laden himself: “When people see a weak horse and a strong horse, they naturally gravitate toward the strong horse.” The strong horse in this clash will be the one that is not hamstrung by cultural self-doubt, that is not mired in apologetic self-abasement, that is not burdened by historical guilt induced through decades of politically correct indoctrination, and that burns with a will to win, no matter how long it takes or what it costs.
Right now radical Islam is that strong horse. We will win those Muslim hearts and minds, and this war, not by pretending there is no conflict, but by showing the world that we are the stronger horse.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
153 Comments
Excellent article.
The only America the left can tolerate is an America which always has its head bowed in shame.
The War on Terror was unforgivable to them, in spite of the fact that freeing 50 million Muslims from dictatorships and creating electoral democracies in their place will eventually transform the Middle East into a sane, civilized collective.
Scary.
The One appears to be a legend in his own mind.
Ask any soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan whether the "war on terror" is a useless phrase and the President will get a much different answer. When the next attack happens, the finger-pointing in Washington D.C. will be disgusting. It will make the AIG bonus situation look like child's play.
http://the100mostannoyingthings.blogspot.com/
I'm so sick of worrying about what " the rest of the world" thinks of us. The rest of the world is a mess. Why should we care what anyone else thinks?
Nice guys finish last.
Amen. To quote Ted Nugent: "If the U.S. sucks we still suck a whole lot less than the rest of the world!"
Excellent article! It's nice to be liked, but it's more important to be strong, to remain true to our democratic values, and to fight for what's right. It amazes me that the left can't or won't comprehend that the radical Muslims will never like us until they have oppressed us.
"We will win those Muslim hearts and minds, and this war, not by pretending there is no conflict, but by showing the world that we are the stronger horse."
Amen. In an interview last year, a 'Son of Iraq,' a former insurgent, was asked why he had switched sides. He answered, simply, "The Ameriki are the strongest tribe."
Bill
Ted Nugent is so refreshingly unapologetic. I love that guy.
I'm waiting for Obama to call terrorists "folks."
The battle with Islam is with us whether we like it or not. It’s just a matter of time before we’re hit again. The barbarians are at the gate, and as Rome fell from marauding hordes so shall the USA, if we do not hold firm. The wise man once said, “it’s better to be feared than it is to be loved.” We have an enemy within the Republic, and as we re-enter the fight with liberals lets all remember how feckless they really are, they yell and scream, but their ferocity is a mile wide and a millimeter thick. “God Bless America!”
Ah, but the Obama Administration has spoken. There will be no more attacks. Only "man-made disasters." Now if you'll excuse me I need to go listen to George Carlin talking about euphemisms.
I think he has already called them folks. Now the head of DHS calls terrorist attacks, "man-caused disasters" or some foolishness. This newspeak makes it very clear that these people think they're playing a game,moving pieces around a board, being clever with the semantics. Carter undermined the Shah, we ended up with Islamofascism, how do you beat that ??
Believe me, we don't want to find out. I wonder how the media would treat a dirty in LA harbor ? "Alleged man-caused disaster possible Halliburton nuclear spill ?"
We have to lock arms now and push back, they will try to roll right over the country and most of the bill of rights.
Well you have to understand the illusion that Liberals think is reality. They believe that everyone around the world is just like us and wants the same things as we do; and, every 'situation' around the world can be resolved through politics. Liberals believe that the word peace means the same thing to everyone and that everyone universally wants peace. Liberals believe peace means the absence of conflict. Muslims believe the word peace means they have killed all of their enemies and no one is left to oppose their oppressive theocracy. Guess who their enemies are?
Excellent article. I really enjoyed it.
Many on the Left like to use the 'rest of the world' argument against Bush, claiming he squandered the kindness and solidarity that the U.S. enjoyed with other nations. I've been overseas well before Bush took office. During the Clinton years, there was plenty of anti America rallies, flag burnings, etc. We, as in the United States, have been hated a very long time overseas, even by our 'friends'. It was only after Bush attacked the Taliban and Saddam, in other words didn't accept our demotion from being king of the hill, that the rest of the world felt it fashionable, and profitable to 'turn against' America publicly when they had been, at least politically, for decades.
I recall an incident which is hardly unusual or rare:
I was with a group of ex-patriots, about 10 or so foreigners. A military jet happened to fly over. It was quite loud. It was not in afterburner, but still, you felt it in your chest. One of the foreigners, a Brit looked up and scowled, "f%&king American a$$holes".
I pointed out that the aircraft was, in fact, a Mitsubishi F-2 belonging to the Japan Air Self Defense Force. It was Japanese. It was a Japanese aircraft flown by a Japanese pilot for the Japanese military.
Their reply to that was, "maybe that is, but Americans are always doing that f%$king s&%t"!
So, you see, it didn't matter. The person just wanted a reason to gripe about America. When the reason was removed, deemed invalid the gripe was still there and not taken back. 9/11 was a much larger version of this same kind of mentality by many who have held grudges against America for whatever reasons they can imagine. The French and Korean, and of course Canadian (some of the worst offenders of America bashing overseas) who were there were in full agreement with their friend.
Mind you, they love MTV and liberal Hollywood, especially movies that attack America. Like the youth in America, they've been fed a steady diet of anti-Americanism through MTV and liberal Hollywood product.
The only love I've seen, real adoration for America in Japan comes from the very people who have a reason not to love us. The elderly. I've been greeted with more kindness and selflessness by seniors here than one can imagine. One of my friends was a boy when his father took him to Tokyo for the first time. They were poor, and had to walk much of the way, but received a ride on a wagon for the latter part of their journey. By the time they got there, he recalled, "the city was on fire." He couldn't see any buildings or anything but walls of flames all the way to the horizon. It had been bombed.
This is a man who has a small American flag and Japanese flag joined together on a stand on his desk. Imagine that. Many can recall their first encounters with American G.I.s after the war. I've never heard a single negative comment, only glowing accounts of how kind American G.I.s were to them, many of them, like my friend, were only children then and were often given candy or food or blankets or other supplies, even though it was against the rules.
So, it's very amusing when a Canadian or British person will go on and on about how America is wrong, or evil or whatever, to a smiling middle aged or elderly Japanese, whom they think is in agreement, only to hear them reply with something like, "I love John Wayne movies." or "Do you think John Ford was America's greatest director?"
I've been fortunate enough to overhear this kind of thing and it always makes me smile. No wonder the martial arts of deflection, Aikido and Judo, are Japanese in origin.
How often I have questioned that term 'clash of civilizations.' By definition it would appear to presuppose two equally civilized sides to a confrontation. In this case — and most like it — there is but one. Only a fool or a leftist would argue otherwise.
As the bumper sticker sez, liberals: If you don't stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them.
Mark's article is truly superb and should be required reading for every American (it's much too late for the Western Europeans however- they are "dead men walking").
Back here on earth however, this administration will simply continue along its path of appeasement and surrender to those vile, murderous Islamofacist lunatics until we too end up like those toothless eunuchs that inhabit Eurabia.
For those who wish to see what's in store for all of us (and our children), I suggest you read the news reports and articles on the following websites:
frontpagemag.com
thereligionofpeace.com
Islam-watch.org
mulitantislammonitor.org
westernresistance.com
anti-jihad.org
creepingsharia.wordpress.com
barenakedislam.wordpress.com
jihadwatch.org
These sites report news stories that you will seldom (if ever) see elsewhere.
Read 'em and weep- for our country, our civilization, and our children…
Besides the obvious problem — that the left just hates America and everything it stands for — the problem in dealing with Islamics that "elite opinion" has decided that we've brought it on ourself through our "arrogance." Thus, you get things like a recent Economist article that basically concluded that the make any efforts to stop them from attacking us (even those who are planning to attack us) would only cause them to attack us more. Incredible.
So we're just supposed to let ourselves get killed an everything will turn out ok? Give me a break.
Keep in mind Gary, the politicians in the rest of the world use us a crutch. When things go wrong, we're easy to blame to divert attention from their own failures. Not to mention, that they make themselves seem bigger and braver by attacking the big kid on the block — us. (Plus, they know that if they attack us, we're not likely to do anything in response.)
I just happened to be in Japan on the 50th Anniversary of the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima. I asked my translator, who was probably in her 20's at the time, what she thought of our dropping the bomb. Without missing a beat, she said "we all know that we would not have stopped our madness if the US had not done it." Needless to say, I was not expecting that answer and I have never forgotten it either.
It's funny how liberals hoot and holler about how "America-centric" or "Eurocentric" or "ethnocentric" we are, but then prove themselves to be the most America-centric of all — by assuming that the rest of the world is just America in funny clothes and strange languages.
After his stellar performance last night on Leno, it is now blindingly clear that he doesn't understand that this is not "American Idol". He wants so much to be liked and to keep his numbers up, that he forgets he is the President of the United States and the leader of the Free World (for now). Unfortunately it is going to take another "man-made disaster" to get him and these other idiots to understand that we are at war and they cannot wish it away. For whatever people might think of George W. Bush, he was not weak and, blessedly, did not care what the people of France thought of him. Something I greatly admired.
My family, on my mom's side, is English. I get updates on what's going on over there all the time.
I know how we're hated. But I also know that there are those that still love us.
The haters just have the bigger mouths.
Thanks for your continued clarity on this issue which gets enveloped in more and more fog everyday. Too bad our media cleans up visuals of terrorist attacks like 9/11 and Mumbai so that the viewing public only gets a bird's eye view of these atrocities. People should be seeing the blood smeared floors of that hotel and the body parts that fell from the Twin Towers on a daily basis. Because that's what it will be like for any of us who end up in the wrong place at the wrong time. We will not be able to change the channel. Thank you again for your concise and powerful case.
That's precisely the policy that's been adopted in Eurabia- give the Islamofacists everything they want, and then maybe they'll change their minds about slaughtering all of us "infidels" (or at least those of us who decline to convert).
I've witnessed this policy first-hand in the Netherlands (where I lived from 1971-2002). You saw what's been happening to Geert Wilders didn't you? This same ignoble fate awaits ANYONE who dare to expose the true intentions of the Muslim fifth column living in their countries. There is not a doubt in my mind that the exact same thing will eventually happen here in America- unless a truly radical sea-change in attitudes takes place.
But for the next four years at least, things will only go from bad to worse as Obama and his legion of spineless politically correct liberal left wing comrades suck up to the Jihadists, both foreign and domestic, at every opportunity in the hope that they'll love us and renounce their ways (e.g. renounce the stated purpose of their religion).
My biggest problem with this stuff is that we tend to approach it as though we are looking at a democrat perspective vs. a republican one. As if this is what 52% wanted. Truth is that whether you're talking about directives from Teleprompter Jesus or polls at MoveOn, you're dealing with a vocal (and influential) fringe punching way above its weight. I find it hard to believe that even the average democrat voter thinks this way. And to me that makes these progressive loons even more frightening because they are an American fringe regardless of how well they've been able to hide it and package themselves with the help of a pathetic and sycophantic media.
That just sent chills down my spine. Wow.
Well, duh. It's just a phase. They'll grow out of it. Eventually, they'll get sick of the killing, and then we can all be friends.
My family, on my mom's side, is German and we get the same kinds of updates. Another problem, besides the politician problem I just mentioned, is that the average German gets their news from some very anti-American sources (CNN International). We are always made out at the villains.
I don't think the same thing will happen here for four reasons.
1. We're a very practical people, we see problems and find solutions. The Europeans tend to accept many problems as just the natural state of being, things Americans never would.
2. We are a more religious country. Thus, unlike the Europeans, we understand that religion can motivate people. Therefore, we are not as likely to fall for the "it's not a matter of belief, it's just a lack of economic opportunity" argument that they use in Europe.
3. This country's Christian founding gives us a sort of cultural "judgmentalness" which means we are much quicker to call things right or wrong — at least compared to the Europeans who try so hard to be value neutral.
4. We are much better at integrating people and turning them into Americans. Usually, by the second or third generation, immigrants are completely Americanized. That doesn't seem to happen in Europe.
GB has the BBC. Nuff said.
Luckily most of my kin in England are immune to the BBC.
My cousin is a social worker in Manchester. He's been giving me updates on the rise of Islamic gangs since the early nineties.
I hope and pray that you are right and I'm wrong about what's in store for us here, but like I said- I've experienced it first-hand in Holland, and the writing is on the wall if you know how to decipher it.
We may be a more practical people than the Europeans, but we are in the same process of being brainwashed into political correctness. Organizations like C.A.I.R. have the ear of the president for god's sake! Our schools are modifying their history books to depict Islam in a politically correct light, and anyone who dares say anything negative about Muslims is immediately branded as a "racist"- a term that is widely regarded as more hateful than "pedophile" in our Brave New Society.
As for your second point- I think it is precisely BECAUSE we are a more religious society that we're even MORE tolerant of anything "religious" in nature. How else to explain the sheer INSANITY of regarding even SATANISM as a constitutionally protected "religion" (not to mention all manner of evil cults!). No my friend, followers of radical Islam will be fully protected under our constitution- even more so than in Eurabia.
As for "integrating" the Jihadis- good luck with that, because it is THEIR stated intention to integrate US- or ELSE!
Don't forget how our media rushed to self-censor images of hundreds of Arab-Americans dancing and cheering and laughing right across the river from the Twin Towers on that fateful day- as well as THOUSANDS of Palestinians gleefully celebrating in the West Bank and Gaza! The exact same Palestinians, incidentally, to whom Obama is giving 950 MILLION dollars of our tax money to rebuld (e.g., rerarm) those murderous America-hating vermin.
I love it when Brits move here to avoid taxes and then vote for idiots like Obama. That I have seen happen. My attitude is this: If you come here leave your politics and stupid stuff wherever you came from. As in there is a reason why my ancestors left Europe and Britain. To get away from European stupidity. We don't want to be like them. How hard is that to understand? I forget European education is pretty flimsy. But man they do speak a lot of languages. Whhooooowhoooo.
I've tried watching the BBC a couple of times — what garbage!! From what I've read, Britain is in a lot of trouble in the next 20 or so years.
I agree with your editorial in broad terms, but the initial premise, that the phrase "War on Terror" was meaningless, is incorrect. During WWII, the equivalent term was "war against fascism" "war against inhumanity", or "crusade for freedom". These terms were used regularly and freely by our leaders and our people, and no one was confused about what they meant. Everyone in America darn well knows what the "war on terror" is. It's an effort to seek out and destroy those who would use terror tactics to kill, maim, and destroy Americans and American interests to further their own radical and hateful agenda. By stating that this term needs to be revised or eliminated, we give more power to the revisionists and those who would use euphemisms and platitudes.
maybe if we put it in the most diluted terms possible, the lefties will get it. i'll take a swing at it: who among you (hey obamaites, talking to you), when faced with someone trying to kill you by any means possible (who ever imagined planes into buildings?), who will never listen to your reason (love, not war!! veggies not double-meat cheese burgers!!)), no matter how brilliant you think it is (they don't care that you went to an elite college where you learned to "think"), would offer the lives of their children and grandchildren as ransom when all civilized actions failed? YOU LIBERALS, that's who. you are eagerly willing to hand over the future of this country based on the premise that everyone can get along. your naive ideology is the true enemy within.
I agree that this whole thing will get worse before it gets better, but I think it will get better for the reasons mentioned.
I don't think we can intergrate the jihadists, but I think we can integrate the people who would report them — the same people who would have too much to lose if terrorism became a real concern to the average American. I don't see that happening in Europe.
On the religious tolerance issue, we are very tolerant of different views, but we are not tolerant of actions. It is because we are a religous people, that we recognize the difference — unlike the Europeans who I think don't understand how to deal with religion at all.
I agree that the left is mushy on this, but "the left" is really only about 40% of the population (the politically correct less is probably even smaller). The other 60% get it.
Finally, it's people like you who will be key. You've seen what's happened over there and you are helping us understand the problem. Americans listen and learn better than any people on the planet — our reputation for being loud notwithstanding.
You are so right. Instead of appearing on "Face the Nation", our new president chose to take his case to the people on a frivolous, late-night comedy show. He ensured there would be no tough questions, and that he would have the floor. He has diminished the status of the office of President of the United States. I think he does have some guts but, like FDR, he won't find his "stride" (pardon the pun) until really tested.
LOL!! Oh wait, you're reading out of the EU's Big Book of War Policy. Now I feel sad.
Did you all see Obama's "Nowruz Message" on Ace of Spades?
Like I said before, we're dealing with some very ethnocentric people (they actually believe that everyone in the world wants the same things!) It was "diplomacy" this and "common humanity" that — he makes the mistake of believing that the base desire of a person is to be good and noble, rather that just take what you want by hook or by crook.
You sound like an optimist, a conservative, and a Republican, the kind of person who actually believes in the future and likes to solve problems. You seem to think that it is all in God's hands, that His will is at work here, and He will give us the tools and resources to solve our problems in due time. Funny thing is, that has been our history, hasn't it? It's a pity the haters and and hard-left liberals are such cynics, nihilists, and pessimists, loudly preaching a gospel of scarcity and vengeance from every corner. It's grown-ups like you that will help get us out of this mess. Thanks.
The lack of unbiased news is not just a problem in America, but a global epidemic.
Keep in mind what her first item of business was upon attaining a federal post — she tried to put Pressure From Above on the most hated man in her home state, Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Keep in mind what her first item of business was upon attaining a federal post — she tried to use it to put Pressure From Above on the most hated man in her home state, Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
i've lived in paris..work in europe. it scares me to think we are turning towards socialism. a lot of americans look across the pond and think – cool. they have 6 weeks vacation, free healthcare, free education, great inner city transportatino and it's all FREE! ha! americans don't see the other side. things we take for granted like getting a driver's license. costs over 1500 Euros in france becuase you have to go to their state driving schools and they can say, "sorry you need more and more lessons." no choice. most "well to do" europeans don't use the "free" healthcare system. they buy private insurance and go to more "expensive" dr's. in denmark, the new car tax is 180%. yes! and you wonder why the danish don't drive? what's paying for that metro? taxes! taxes! taxes. on gas. on groceries. when you buy a new TV in france. a special tax for that.
and why are we changing the name "christmas" and our holidays to please the non christians in this country? it's scary!
RIGHT ON, BROTHER!
WE SHALL OVERCOME!
Usually, by the second or third generation, immigrants are completely Americanized.
And faithful little Democrat voters, too.
THANK YOU, Gary. These are my thoughts exactly. This is how the Clinton administration ran its politics. The polls dicated every single decision they made and Nobama is doing the exact same thing. We need to take care of us first, and do whats best for US. If the other countries don't like it SO WHAT!? Do you think THEY think about US when making decisions…..H@LL NO!!
The similarities between the Clintons and Obamas is frightening. Clinton refused OBL when the Saudis had him, shrunk our military to almost nothing and we were attacked how many times? World Trade Center, USS Cole, Kenyan embassy….the list goes on and on because they didn't think these were a treat to America….we're in for a BIG ONE with this Obamanation because they want to "give the terrorists a big hug" and make it all go away.
As horrible as it sounds, I'm afraid that the ONLY way we Americans will possibly "get it" in time will be in the blood-soaked aftermath of the next horrific terrorist attack. Obama and his minions are busy furiously dismantling every single safeguard that Bush erected to defend the homeland from these murderous lunatics, and it is only a matter of time before the lunatic Islamists succeed in slaughtering another (and probably much greater) batch of American "infidels".
I wish I could subscribe to your belief that the so-called "moderate" Muslims will eventually be integrated enough to report on their lunatic radicalized co-religionists, but aside from a few brave souls, I fear the majority of the sane ones will be terrified into inaction (as they are in Eurabia).
I'm sorry if this sounds so pessimistic, but it's precisely because I've already seen this movie that I'm so filled with dread and trepidation at what's in store for us- unless there's a 180 change in attitudes and tactics with regards to radical Islam and its left-wing apologists.
Thanks, I'm flattered!
"an optimist, a conservative, and a Republican, the kind of person who actually believes in the future and likes to solve problems" — I hope that's me. Frankly, I hope that's all of us?
I understand where you're coming from, John, but I disagree that no one is confused about what "the war on terror" is. The difference between that and the example you used is that "fascism" is an enemy or at least an enemy ideology, but "terror" is a tactic. We are not at war with the ETA in Spain, who also use terrorism, or the Tamil Tigers, or other localized terror groups. We are specifically at war with Islamists, and our politically corret refusal to NAME the enemy hamstrings us.
Ben, in my opinion you're spot on!!
I heard someone say he was interviewing some of those in the miles long line to get into Leno to see their messiah, and he said he didn't think anyone was over 25 years old!! Our president wants to be a celebrity, and you're right, NEEDS to be loved by everyone, so he continues to campaign to keep his numbers up instead of stepping up to the plate, acting like a MAN and govern the mess he continues to drown us all in! Like THAT'S gonna happen. Wonder if we'll see him on Sesame Street next week!!
That doesn't have to be true.
That was my point about minority outreach — from so many weeks ago. I think our party needs to find ways to reach out to the portions of the minority community that are innately conservative and show them that we want them on our side of the isle. I'm not talking about dropping our values or pandering. I'm talking about reaching out to their small business community, their church communities, and those who want to be average Americans with the same concerns as the rest of us — home ownership, price of food and gas, crime, etc.
I don't think we do that right now. I think when we do "minority outreach" — it involves photo ops and hand-wringing about how rotten our views are. That's counter-productive. It's superficial and it's self defeating.
Well said, as usual.
Most on the Left don't value freedom from tyranny in their (our) own country. That's why they don't see the value in bringing freedom to 50 million people in other countries. To my daughters: Hi Lucy & Ellen, Daddy loves you and misses you!
Actually they do think of us. They think about how they can screw us.
Talk about a chip on your shoulder.
I only hope and pray that I'm NOT spot on.
I would like nothing better than to be proven wrong!
Ben, I don't think, even after another attack-God forbid- that the Left will finally get it. On the contrary, the next time-God forbid- the cry that 'we've brought this on ourselves" will be geometrically louder than post-9/11. And it will start, of course, with words to the effect of "…this is what the policies of GWB has gotten us…"
Noble effort to speak idiot, however, the unfortunate thing is that liberal myrmidons have to be slapped again and again, unfortunately this time will be deadly.
another useless phrase: President Obama
The problem is not that we're not reaching out. It's that there's nothing left to reach out to. The Democrats have the minorities securely under their thumb, and everybody who isn't under their thumb thinks like this anyway. We don't have anything we can offer to people like that.
We’re crusin-for-a-brusin! When the strike comes sit still and let our high minded liberals armed with warrants make the arrest, it could be fun watching these nit-wits read bloodthirsty Islamic savages their Miranda rights.
The possibility that you're right about that is almost too chilling to contemplate.
(and I thought that I was a pessimist when it comes to the collective stupidity of liberals…!).
Unfortunately, I agree with you.
Things are exactly the same in Holland regarding sky-high taxes on everything (you forgot to mention that gas in Eurabia costs about $7 or $8 a gallon)!
Michael Moore (purposefully) neglected to mention that "little" fact when trumpeting the virtues of the European health-care system.
Not necessarily. My wife is a first generation immigrant. She became an American in June last year. Her family turned me on to conservatism before they could even vote. Her family came from South Africa, where the government has guaranteed every citizen a house, healthcare, a job, and several other things. In theory, it sounds ideal. In practice, most people have none of these. Having seen it the results firsthand, they know what lies down that road, and they don't want America to become like the place they fled. My wife's family also happens to be really smart, and they don't care one whit what other people think. That is not true about most immigrants, I think, legal or otherwise.
I'm a child of immigrants, and one of 3 strong conservative voters that my parents produced…So, I stand as disagreement. :p
*MissQuinn*
By that time, it will probably be called reading someone their "Mohammed rights"…
Ben and Dom, a couple points.
First, we don't need the left's support to win this fight.
Second, don't believe the left won't fight them. The left supports anyone we oppose. But if there is an attack during Obama's presidency, I assure you they will suddenly discover the evil of these jihadists.
Third, I'm not one to talk about revolutions and race wars. I think that's pure fantasy and its incredibly counter-productive, so it is unusual for me to discuss such a point. BUT I think that if the jihadists keep pushing, the left (and moderate Muslims in the US) will take action because they are AFRAID that average Americans (who are armed and much more prone to self-help than Europeans) will start purging their communities of Muslims. To avoid that, they will take action against the jihadists.
Jake, Republicans already reach about 40% of hispanics. They also reach large numbers of Asians (Vietnamese and Koreans), Indians, and Arabs. And as people move into the middle classes, their interests allign with Republican thinking. There is a real opportunity there to expand the Republican base and maginalize the democrats.
Also, I know LOTS of immigrants who come here and find themselves right at home in the Republican Party because they view the democrats as offering what they fled from.
Indeed.
One of the things that liberals who speak about "winning Muslim hearts and minds" have to understand is that in Islam there is no such thing as the Golden Rule (do unto others as you'd have them do unto you) and many of the tenants of their religion are, in fact, directly contrary to the very notion of such a rule. With that being the case it's almost impossible to win the hearts and minds of the hardcore true believers, since their dogma explicitly states what they are obligated to do to non-Muslims.
Another thing that liberals often talk about is that "understanding" your enemy is the best way to work out differences. Jonah Golberg made an interesting (and true IMHO) point when he wrote that Israelis and Palestinians, Greeks and Turks, Indians and Pakistanis, etc. "understand" each other very well and that simply understanding your enemy doesn't mean that you suddenly find common ground with them. But many liberals are convinced otherwise.
From your lips to God's ears!
Your translator hit the nail on the head. The atomic bombs allowed the Emperor to convince people that winning was completely impossible, the military was prepared to fight to the last man, woman and child on the Home Islands, but the bombs gave the Emperor the political capital to say enough is enough and end the war.
The situation we find ourselves in now has many parallels with the kamikaze mindset of the Japanese in 1945, but unlike with the Japanese there is no central leader of the Islamists who can stand up and say,"It's over, we lost."
It'll need to be more drastic. I'm thinking like "Saw", only not quite as demented. Take your mark somewhere where there aren't authority figures. Somplace where it's just you, and him. Punch him in the face and insult him. Beat the crap out of him if you have too, but don't tie him up–let him fight back if he wants, just don't tell him to fight back. If he threatens you, laugh. If he offers money, take it, then resume the beat down. If he wants to talk, beat him. Maybe "Wanted" is a better comparison than "Saw." As soon as they start fighting back, you don't fight as hard. Eventually, he'll either knock you down or give up. If the latter, resume the beat down. Continue until he wins.
cont'd
cont'd
Then, the lecture. "I represent Islamofascism, terrorism, sharia law, and political correctness. You represent the United States. When you didn't fight back, or tried to buy me off, or tried to talk to me, what happened to you?"
If he answers truthfully, You beat me up.
"And when you started fighting back?"
You continued to beat me up.
"But eventually…"
With growing sense of pride, I knocked you down!
"And that's terrorism for you. They don't care about your money, or your ideals, or that you're on their side. The look at you and they don't see liberal or conservative, Christian or Buddhist or Atheist, black or white–they see enemy. They won't quit until you're dead. We need to make sure they die before we do. That is why we're at war. These people will kill you, given half a chance. You need to support those who protect you, as I do."
Maybe then they'll get some sense?
cont'd
Then, the lecture. "I represent Islamofascism, terrorism, sharia law, and political correctness. You represent the United States. When you didn't fight back, or tried to buy me off, or tried to talk to me, what happened to you?"
If he answers truthfully, You beat me up.
"And when you started fighting back?"
You continued to beat me up.
"But eventually…"
With growing sense of pride, I knocked you down!
"And that's terrorism for you. They don't care about your money, or your ideals, or that you're on their side. The look at you and they don't see liberal or conservative, Christian or Buddhist or Atheist, black or white–they see Enemy. They won't quit until you're dead. We need to make sure they die before we do. That is why we're at war. These people will kill you, given half a chance. You need to support those who protect you, as I do."
Maybe then they'll get some sense?
Are you kidding? They'll be beheaded where they stand. Criminals don't have "rights".
I agree with you on Napolitano. I lived for several months in Arizona a few years ago, almost right on the border with Mexico, Sierra Vista to be precise, and the border situation was a complete mess. Not due in any part to the efforts of the county sheriff's department, Border Patrol, or Guard but because of the political trends coming out of the government's offices in both Phoenix and Washington DC.
When I saw the announcement that she was made director of DHS I had to shake my head and mutter to myself. She did an anemic job at border security as governor, which alone would make her a bad choice for the post, but also having had spoken to many law enforcement people down there about threats and the like they were appalled at her lack of concern over the fact that a significant number of the illegals they were picking up at the time were from places like Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, etc. She and the federal government types, with a few exceptions, preferred to think that didn't mean much of anything. But think about it, why would a Pakistani walk through a dangerous desert, pay an exorbitant fee to the coyotes, breach the border and sneak in if he had good intentions? Were all of the flights into JFK booked that day?
So yeah, I was less than pleased to see her heading up DHS, even before her coming out speech where she barely, and even then opaquely, talked about terrorism at all.
Very good point, they whitewashed the victory celebrations and sweets for the kiddies handouts by the Palestinians, but the major news outlets all made sure that everyone saw Arafat weeping in the general direction of the camera mumbling something about how terrible and anti-Islamic such an act was. And sadly, a lot of people bought it.
To my cynical mind, I think part of the $950 million is just simply "talking point insurance." Netanyahu is going to form the next Israeli government, and he's already said that he wants to deal decisively with Hamas, as he should in my opinion; but by putting US dollars into Gaza then those in the US who are against such action can use it as another bullet in their arguments,"We didn't give them a billion dollars to rebuild things just so you can go blow them up!" or something of the sort. No one likes to see civilians suffering, but at the same time throwing money into Gaza at this time and not expecting a sizable chunk of it to wind up in Hamas' hands is naive to the point of cluelessness.
By "criminals" you also mean us lowly misguided "infidels", right?
; – )
Why not as demented?
I can see Pelosi right now, holding a very dull, government-designed saw, chained to a sink, staring at Harry Reid, who is also holding a very, very dull government-designed saw…. Talk about increasing people's interest in policy making!
Exactly, that sort of fuzzy thinking by the liberals is one of the problems. Much like how some people confuse "terror" and "terrorism" many of them also confuse "diplomacy" with "results." Diplomacy is a means to an end, not the end itself, but that fact seems to elude people on the left all over the world.
But they'll say if we just keep negotiating, and keep being diplomatic, everything will be fine. Sometimes that will work, but when the people you're trying to "engage" have no inclination whatsoever of not only not giving an inch, but see you as weak for continuing to think they will year after year, well that brings to mind the Einstein quote about the definition of insanity.
Hmm. Sounds like Republicans right here and now in 'Murrica!
Arafat (may he rot in Hell forever!) was probably "weeping" because he failed to invest his looted billions in shorting airline stocks on 9/11, as his terrorist cronies surely advised him to do.
I also have a cynical (I prefer the term "realist") mind, and ALSO came to that same conclusion about the $950 million being at least partly a form of insurance against another Israeli attack.
I can just imagine how the left-wing media would triumphantly bleat and rant about how Israel (excuse me, I mean the "Criminal Zionist Entity") is callously destroying structures that Americans paid for with their generous gift of almost a BILLION dollars.
I say at least "partly", because the OTHER reason Obama is paying those murderous villains off is called "extortion"- so that they won't hate US enough to start blowing up Americans in malls with their fifth column homicide bombers. This is the same exact reason those vile, hypocritical and cowardly Saudis pay off al Qaeda and fund terrorism the world over- if only they'll leave THEM alone!
They also forget something basic: if you say, straight on, that you will not use force, but the other guy makes no such promises, your "diplomacy" will involve you giving up more and more.
Wow! Republicans making sense and having a debate not based on slogans and talking points. I am impressed.
Valid point, while at the same time I'm not sure they forget it so much as to their minds the desire to use force, anywhere, by anyone, is so against the grain of their thinking that it's almost inconceivable to them. So they're assuming that if they have good intentions, the other party does as well, so even bringing up the notion that force would be used by either side is simply too crass to mention.
Flawed thinking on their part, but I really do believe that many on the left assume that everyone, including people that proudly proclaim them to be enemies, shares their fundamental desire to never use violence as a means to an end. And when the other party does use it, they navel gaze upon what we did to "force" them to use force instead of looking at the underlying truth that violence has been with us since humanity existed, and sometimes a bad weapon still can trump a good idea.
Instead of 17,000 of our brave troops to Afghanistan, we send in Code Pink, Congressional Democrats, ACLU, with warrants, what a reality show, ha…
Indeed, immigrants seem to better understand why they are coming here than many liberals who are so fortunate to live in freedom here. I interviewed around 14,000 visa applicants in just one year when I was in the Foreign Service, and even those who lied, produced false documents, or were prepare to do anything else (including trying to slip into this country without a visa if necessary) were at least clear on why they wanted to come here.
They had already lived under populists and authoritarian rule, and knew that political promises by those seeking more power wouldn't improve their lives. They wanted to improve their own lives, and the lives of their families. They were willing to risk almost anything to do it. Disrespecting our immigration laws was not their priority.
They would have loved to be able to qualify legally to come here, but it was not an option. That's why I had to reject thousands of them face to face, and see their frustration every day as they realized that this potential escape valve from their own miserable challenges in their own country was not available to them.
Indeed, although if the left were being honest and factual they'd call the money they're sending to Gaza what it is, at least in part: Jizyah. That being money paid by the Infidels to bribe the Muslims into letting them keep their heads…so long as the payments keep coming in at least.
Besides if they called it that they would show how multiculturally hip they were, even if the vast bulk of the people had no clue what it means. In fact, even better if they don't as far as they're concerned.
Your best article yet. Thanks. With a son at an FOB in Afghanistan. I have a dog in this fight. He and his men still believe it's a war worth fighting,
Yeah, they can go and give that "moderate Taliban" a great big group hug! That will show alQaeda we mean business!
"Besides if they called it [Jizyah] they would show how multiculturally hip they were, even if the vast bulk of the people had no clue what it means"
I'm sure the spineless Europeans could teach us a LOT about the principle of Jizyah, as well as numerous other ways to toady up to the demands of Islamofacists.
I believe that a group hug from Code Pink, Congressional Democrats and/or the ACLU is a gross violation of the Geneva Conventions.
…that doesn't mean I wouldn't pay see it though, but only if they didn't fade to black before seeing the "moderate Taliban" reaction said group hug. Which I'm guessing would involve a lot of shouting and swordplay.
Moderate Taliban, I get a kick out of that. How stupid can Obama be?!
Sounds like a win-win, huh!
To borrow from Lo Pan: Indeed!
I'm sure we're only beginning to see the tip of the iceberg on that one.
Well said! Terror is a tactic.
I originally said "not as demented" because that movie gave me the gallopping heeby-jeebies, but I can see where you're going with that.
Let him know that some of us, at least, are rooting for him.
My increasing cynicism is leading me to suspect that you're being a bit optimistic…
It's one of those things that would have to be repeated as necessary. My guess is a lot of these people would stay whimpering in a fetal position long after my steel-toes wore out.
If they are released into our streets, how about they start with Rodeo Drive.
But the problem is with the Democratic leadership. One of my senators is Joe Lieberman. He is a straight-down-the-line leftist, who happens to believe that America needs a muscular foreign policy and should take the fight to the Islamists.
So the Democrats supported Ned Lamont—a crackpot millionaire who thought the only way to appease our enemies was to surrender to them. The only way Democratic hawk Zell Miller could speak to a national audience was at the Republican National Convention.
In other words, it doesn't matter that the majority of people who vote democrat aren't insane if the people they are voting for are.
I thank your son and all of the sons and daughters who are over there.
"In other words, it doesn't matter that the majority of people who vote democrat aren't insane if the people they are voting for [i]are.[/i"
Very true.
Joe Lieberman is a very sore spot for most of the liberals I know, on one hand they denigrate his "militancy" but at the same time they want to cozy up to him for his vote on domestic issues. Of course the same could be said about many Republicans just flipping the issue. But while Republicans can strongly disagree with his domestic agenda and still work constructively and civilly with the man, liberals tend to have a kneejerk scorn for anyone "reactionary" enough not to toe their line on everything, at all times. He may give them his vote on issues, but he'll never get their respect in return. At least that's how I see it.
"In other words, it doesn't matter that the majority of people who vote democrat aren't insane if the people they are voting for [i]are.[/i]"
Very true.
Joe Lieberman is a very sore spot for most of the liberals I know, on one hand they denigrate his "militancy" but at the same time they want to cozy up to him for his vote on domestic issues. Of course the same could be said about many Republicans just flipping the issue. But while Republicans can strongly disagree with his domestic agenda and still work constructively and civilly with the man, liberals tend to have a kneejerk scorn for anyone "reactionary" enough not to toe their line on everything, at all times. He may give them his vote on issues, but he'll never get their respect in return. At least that's how I see it.
"In other words, it doesn't matter that the majority of people who vote democrat aren't insane if the people they are voting for are."
Very true.
Joe Lieberman is a very sore spot for most of the liberals I know, on one hand they denigrate his "militancy" but at the same time they want to cozy up to him for his vote on domestic issues. Of course the same could be said about many Republicans just flipping the issue. But while Republicans can strongly disagree with his domestic agenda and still work constructively and civilly with the man, liberals tend to have a kneejerk scorn for anyone "reactionary" enough not to toe their line on everything, at all times. He may give them his vote on issues, but he'll never get their respect in return. At least that's how I see it.
This past Christmas I worked at a bookstore. I was ringing out an older woman who was purchasing Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States." I made it a point never to make anyone feel uncomfortable with what they were purchasing, but she happened to mention that it was a present for a Polish friend who had just come to this country.
I took a deep breath and asked her, "You know Howard Zinn is a Marxist, right?" No, she knew nothing about him. I quickly told her who he was and what his book was about. I then ordered her a copy of Paul Johnson's "History of the American People" instead. She was very grateful. I can't imagine what someone who grew up in Poland would think of a book that contends that the US "oppresses" people.
"Wow! Republicans making sense and having a debate not based on slogans and talking points. I am impressed."
I had earlier added that to one of the threads. I would now like to officially rescind that comment. You all are some of the most unintelligent buffoons I have ever come across. Good day.
We certainly don't know the same immigrants. I can only imagine that by 'lots' you mean more than one.
You thank your son for his service, real Americans are thankful!
Barry’s stupidity/naiveté knows no bounds! Rodeo Drive would be funny!
Good point. Regarding DHS, Janet Napolitano is the former governor of my state of Arizona. Given her performance here on border security, I don't have the confidence that she can effectively manage a neighborhood block watch program, much less the Department of Homeland Security.
Think about all those after school specials that liberal Hollywood produces. Is it better to be popular or stand up and do what's right? Unanimously, the little kids who watch those shows will say "do what's right," especially right after the show's over. It's sickening how that only seems to apply in grade school. Except… it doesn't! Being moral and good and right is overlooked in schools in favor of "playing nice" No wonder our schools are getting so messed up. The kids are barraged with mixed messages of something so simple as right and wrong.
When the next 9/11 attack happens, non-Liberals won't be waiting around for the politicians to start trotting out their excuses. Heads will roll, figuratively (and perhaps literally) speaking.
My entire family is made up immigrants, and most of them are Republicans as well. So Andrew's point stands, insofar as in my experience as well.
So by using your same logic on basing it on who you know, I can only imagine the "immigrants" that you are referring to are of the illegal sort then?
Reid, I'm curious. Where did the immigrants that you know who (I assume) don't identify with conservative values. Also, I would ask, how old are they? I have several young friends who are here just to go to college and they are very liberal. But, the actual adults who want to come and live and work here and desire to be citizens identify themselves as conservatives and, once they made citizenship, registered as republicans.
Reid, I'm curious. Where did the immigrants that you know who (I assume) don't identify with conservative values, come from? Also, I would ask, how old are they? I have several young friends who are here just to go to college and they are very liberal. But, the actual adults who want to come and live and work here and desire to be citizens identify themselves as conservatives and, once they made citizenship, registered as republicans.
I'm so glad you had the guts to do that! Bravo!
reid – another of zerobama's America haters at hand
Nobody (sane) desires to use violence as a means to an end. It's like saying soldiers want to go to war. However, what libs fail to understand is that just because violence is the last thing you should want to do, it doesn't mean it should be the last thing you do. If it is, sorry to say, you're probably long dead.
"Having a debate based on slogans and talking points"? Do you watch any of Obama's speeches? And I can not tell you how many campus debates I participated in included arguments such as "It's time for change" "Change we can believe in" "He gives true hope" "Get our troops out of Iraq." Talking points. Slogans. No facts. No supporting arguments. If I ever said anything remotely challenging, those were be-all, end-all closing statements.
My wife and I were in London a few months after 9/11, walking around the city with my blue jeans and baseball cap on drew animosity from Middle Eastern men. Since then we have been careful in selecting places to go and more conscious about blending in. There are places in the Middle East and around the Mediterranean that we've always wanted to visit as a history junkies, but won't be going anytime soon because of the anti-US sentiment.
My son's over there now. Needless to say I'm worried
Agreed, no one sane likes to use violence especially as a first resort, most especially people who have seen it up close and personal firsthand. Your point about it being the last thing you should want to do, but it shouldn't be the last thing you do sums it up very well indeed.
At the same time those very people that know what violence does to everyone involved are often the derided as "warmongers" by the left when we say there is a point where diplomacy just isn't working and fighting now is better than fighting at the last possible moment, after the other guy has had time to entrench his position both militarily and in the realm of "popular opinion."
Hoo boy, talk about dodging a bullet!
And even at that, he had to apologize for a stupid remark about the Special Olympics. I am afraid he won't find his stride even if really tested. We will have to rely on Jester Joe for his vast foreign policy experience. Lord, help us!
Any attack would be the next big shoe to drop, throwing us into complete economic calamity. Remember what happened to the markets after 9-11? Why some of our "patriots" still vehemently refuse to understand that with Iraq, we took the fight to them in their own backyard, is an anathema to me. I'd like to know how many attacks were thwarted due to battlefield intelligence and interogations? I'll bet more than a few. Do they think it's just luck? NO, it was bushes war for oil – or the truthers inane arguments. I will never forget what a scary time this was – debris from the towers fell in my neighborhood.
And these curs are now making institutional inroads. Prisons are jammed packed with fifth columists and now the AJ wants to release the Gitmo detainees on our streets? I don't know what Barry thinks he's cooking, but it sure looks like a recipe for disaster.
Machiavelli sez:
"There is nothing harder to undertake, nothing more likely of failure, nothing more risky to pull off, than to set one's self up as a leader who plans to found a new system of government. For the founder makes enemies of all those who are doing well under the old system, and only lukewrm support for those who hope to do well under the new one."
It looks as if Obama is trying to do just that by denying any form of any foreign enemies. I'm sorry, but that really doesn't make any sense. To be completely altruistic about every single nation-state screams of harbingering self-destruction. Neville Chamberlain anybody? Forbooooddddde.
Lastly, Machiavelli sez: "When rulers think more about luxuries than about weapons, they fall from power."
The left is party correct. Understanding the enemey is the key… the key to victory. To quote one of my favorite books, Sun Tzu's Art of War:
"It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."
So we should seek to understand our enemy, so that we may better crush them.
Our enemies understand this, they also understand the following
"If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected."
We need to turn the tables, and Obama isn't going to do that. We're winning in Iraq, but we must do more then that to achieve final victory over our foes.
"Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy."
Liberals don't believe in original sin. They believe, in the same pitiable and misguided way that Anne Frank did, that people are really good at heart. Five minutes of reading the world news ought to be enough to prove that that bellief is a load of $#!+. We are not good at heart, we are hardly even capable of being good at heart. The Left is trying to build a utopia out of balsa wood, in the hopes that it'll turn out to really have been reinforced concrete all the time.
Sun Tzu was right on the money with the understanding of one's enemies maxim, but where the point eludes the left is that they believe that "understanding" has to include "empathy for" said enemies, and that through this mutual "understanding" everyone will agree to get along fine with one another. Which only happens in fairly tales.
In short, the word doesn't mean what they think it means. At least in this context.
Reid, all my former Soviet bloc friends who have immigrated here are Republicans. You do know the former Soviet bloc countries – Poland, Ukraine, Hungary, Latvia, East Germany, and several of the 'Stans.
Exactly, that's why I I said they got it partly correct.
I really think Obama should read The Art of War. He'd learn more in reading that then he did from his ivy league education (well, he'd learn more that will be at use as President)
Charles,
You are so right. (correct). That is precisely why, on that infamous day, I swore that I would never forget.
My icon may be difficult to see in this size, but those are the towers in the lower left corner.
One of the country singers sang about taking the image of the towers off of the TV because it offended people. I have elected to make it my screen saver so that I think about that day and those people every day. Not out of hate, but resolution.
To paraphrase a song from the 60's, This is the dawning of the age of Political Correctness gone wild. All we have to do is "Let the Sunshine In". yech
I have to agree with Andrew. Most immigrants that I know (who came in through the front door) and take the very long and difficult path to citizenship identify with conservative values. That's why they came here. They can get crazy leftist policies anywhere…
I am afraid we are going to find out…no I mean I am really frightened that we are going to find out! I am looking for a hidey-hole right now.
I'd be happy if he read just about *any* book on history or geopolitical theory to be honest, he doesn't seem to have a whole lot of depth with his base of knowledge on it, or how the world really works. Although I'm pretty sure he has his Machiavelli down already.
Well with the provision that they're not books written by Carter on Middle Eastern political theory at least.
"…there is no central leader of the Islamists who can stand up and say,'It's over, we lost.' "
Even if there was a leader who could say that, why would he? If you were an Islamist, would you think that fighting the West was pointless? Hell, America almost gave up in Iraq and we were winning.
Now, there are already rumblings about Afghanistan being unwinnable and "how will Obama get us out?"
The point of war is not to extract and equal and exact amount of vengeance (i.e. "proportional response") on those who have done you wrong. It's not about following rules and conventions and making sure that you do it all properly so that everyone thinks you "fight nicely". Rather, the purpose is to use force on your opponent until he is no longer willing to resist whatever it is you are trying to impose on him. For examples, see Japan, Germany, and the Confederacy.
Bush understood that. Obama does not.
If I were an Islamist right now, far from thinking about giving up, I would think I was winning.
For some reason, reading Mark's excellent post and many of the cogent comments above reminds me of an exchange near the end of Joseph Burger's excellent novel "Little Big Man" (not to be confused with the POS anti-American movie made from it), between the ancient Jack Crabb and the metrosexual narrator on the perfectability of human nature.
The narrator piously expresses the hope that we can "live to see the day when the Lion lies down with the Lamb." Crabb chuckles, "That'll be fine son, so long as you have a steady supply of fresh lambs."
When you reflect that we're Obama's "steady supply," maybe it's not so funny.
"If I were an Islamist right now, far from thinking about giving up, I would think I was winning".
It breaks my heart to admit that I have to agree with you.
It's exactly the same with Dutch TV (and press)- the population is spoon-fed leftist Anti-American pap on a daily basis, and hasn't a clue that this is one-sided.
Ultra left-wing networks like the VARA and VPRO (that have the most popular programs for the youth) poison the minds of the Dutch with their propaganda, and even though the Dutch mostly like Americans (as they have good reason to!), they also think that we're just a bunch of immature, trigger-happy cowboys.
"Liberals believe peace means the absence of conflict. Muslims believe the word peace means they have killed all of their enemies and no one is left to oppose their oppressive theocracy. Guess who their enemies are?"
That hits the nail right on the head!
Nah, they'll probably be appointed as "visiting professors" and take up residence in our finer universities…
That sounds like the definition for most of the "Professors" at Universites, finer or not.
Ben,
An excellent list, and i concur. I would add http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com to the mix.
Where he gets his information I don't know but I will say that I often see things there days before it appears
anywhere else.
Can you just imagine those poor parents who worked hard their whole lives and saved up for their kids' college education only to have them end up in Ward Churchill's class…?
Thanks, I'll check out that one too (forewarned is forearmed!).
You must be logged in to post a comment.