Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We Shouldn't Be Alone in Fighting Terrorists
Real Clear Politics ^ | April 10, 2007 | Ed Koch

Posted on 04/10/2007 8:23:45 AM PDT by NoneOfTheAbove

I still believe there is no greater danger facing the world today than Islamic terrorism. ...

In pursuit of such a decision, I urge the President to issue an ultimatum to our allies, both regional -- Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Kuwait, the Gulf States -- and our 25 NATO allies, that unless a significant number reply affirmatively in 30 days to our ultimatum, we will begin immediately the process of withdrawal. At the same time, we should require the Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to call a special session of the Iraqi legislature to vote on a resolution stating their request of the U.S. and others to remain in Iraq, specifying the rules of engagement and the goals being sought by the Iraqi government and its allies. If the Iraqi government fails to do so within 30 days, then irrespective of the actions taken by our allies, we should leave. Americans and most of the people of the Western world appear not to know that the United Nations Security Council has approved the U.S. waging war in support of the Iraqi government. Indeed, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, supposedly our ally, recently referred to the U.S. presence in Iraq as "an illegal foreign occupation." ...

If on receiving the ultimatum, our allies recognize that they risk losing the future protection of their ally, the U.S., and its armed forces, which saved them from both German and Soviet occupation and protected them for so many years, they may have an epiphany. ...

Either they come in, or we get out.

(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: dhimmis; dhimmitude; iraq; islam; muhammadsminions; nato; waronterror; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 04/10/2007 8:23:47 AM PDT by NoneOfTheAbove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

“..I urge the President to issue an ultimatum to our allies..”

Urge him to either control or close the borders. We are at war, so he says.


2 posted on 04/10/2007 8:33:42 AM PDT by 353FMG (I never met a liberal I didn't dislike.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

A great idea, too bad it will never happen.


3 posted on 04/10/2007 8:33:49 AM PDT by mikethevike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

I personally agree with this thought. I think we need to make more of our Arab countries responsible for bringing the terrorist to heel. There is not enough pressure from our supposed Arab allies on the terrorist and homicide bombers to stop what they are doing and deal in a civilized manner. If they take away their silent approval and funding, the terrorists would lose face and support.


4 posted on 04/10/2007 8:33:54 AM PDT by beachn4fun (Do not think our patience has no end. (beachy 3/22/07))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

He is right. We are doing it for everyone. We are surrounded by surrender monkies - even the Brits. And as long as we do this, they will take advantage.


5 posted on 04/10/2007 8:34:57 AM PDT by twonie (RUDY FOR PRESIDENT '08. THERE - A COMMITMENT OUT LOUD.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

I favor a different approach.

Hold an election in Iraq.

“Do you want the United States to withdraw immediately?”

Yes or No.

If Iraqis vote No, we leave, and the consequences are their problem.

If they vote Yes, we can legitimately tell the Democrats and the EU to go p*ss up a rope.


6 posted on 04/10/2007 8:37:36 AM PDT by Sherman Logan (I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

it would appear that everyone on this thread has forgotten why we are in Iraq. The liberation of Iraq, as great as that was, was merely setting the stage to lure terrorists into iraq and kill them. This has been working remarkably well. The more we kill there, the less there are to attack us here. THAT was always the policy, and the intent. the hell with the rest of the world, and the hell with the democrats. stay there and keep on killin’ ‘em...OBL and the other a-holes in iran continue to say the war on terror will be won or lost in iraq. are you people saying you support the terrorists? if so, then go post over at du....


7 posted on 04/10/2007 8:43:07 AM PDT by joe fonebone (Nothin' from Nothin' leaves Nothin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove
Whatever our ‘allies’ do or don’t do, we are on our own. In leaving without final resolution, we will be on our own... If we stay without resolution... we are on our own... If we succeed (even minimally) the success is ignored or degraded in the MSM. A final success (which I do NOT doubt) is far ahead and costly... will be represented to the world as anything but a US success and will be something the MSM will as far as possible, disassociate from US efforts, US fortitude, US policy or US sacrifice...
8 posted on 04/10/2007 8:46:54 AM PDT by SMARTY ("Stay together, pay the soldiers and forget everything else". Lucius Septimus Serverus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

I like the idea, but we won’t do it. We know what the answer would be.

We have very few allies in this fight, and we know it.

Personally, it would be fine with me if every single one of the cowardly nations that refuse to stand up and defend themselves is taken over by Islamofascism. It would, truly, serve them right.

But we would be weakened too, and we will not willingly allow this to happen.

It may happen anyway.


9 posted on 04/10/2007 8:48:56 AM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

Shhhh!! We’re not supposed to be talking about terrorist threats. We’re supposed to be wringing our hands over something Don Imus said, or who’s the daddy of Anna Nicole’s baby, or whether Britney has truly been been “rehabbed.”


10 posted on 04/10/2007 8:53:03 AM PDT by MizSterious (Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope

Hard to take Ed seriously when he remains a Democrat, and says he wants HRC to be president.


11 posted on 04/10/2007 8:55:32 AM PDT by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove
I still believe there is no greater danger facing the world today than Islamic terrorism. ...

Not a solution Ed. Issue an ultimatum to terrorists.

12 posted on 04/10/2007 9:26:12 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
...to lure terrorists into iraq and kill them... The more we kill there, the less there are to attack us here. THAT was always the policy, and the intent.

1) President Bush has said otherwise.
2) The occupation creates enormous anti-American sentiment around the world, which spurs recruitment in terrorist groups. I can leave bread in my cellar to attract mice, then go down once a day to kill them with a stick-- I will kill a lot of mice, but the longer I keep doing this the more mice there will be.
13 posted on 04/10/2007 9:47:01 AM PDT by xenophiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
“Hold an election in Iraq.”

The problem with this approach is that
the Shiite majority will win.

This means that Shiite/Iranian majority
will vote out the coalition.

When the coalition leaves Iran will
easily win the civil war.

This greater Iran will be the most
powerful state in the region.

Not good.

Check mate in the middle east

14 posted on 04/10/2007 10:02:33 AM PDT by Sharkproof
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: xenophiles

To answer your questions
1) President Bush has always said it is better to fight them over there than in our own backyard. Ya gotta go back to when this started.
2) The very fact that you use the word “Occupation” raises my eyebrows about your motivation here. We are currently there at the invitation of the democratically elected government of Iraq. Please explain to me how that even remotely qualifes our presence there as an “ Occupation “. I think you are posting on the wrong forum. Try over at DU. They will be more willing to agree with you over there.
3) As for anti-american sentiment, who the hell cares? We are there to kill terroists for our own protection.
4) If you leave bread on the floor of your cellar, you are either an idiot or lazy. make your choice.


15 posted on 04/10/2007 10:03:27 AM PDT by joe fonebone (Nothin' from Nothin' leaves Nothin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: xenophiles

Ever try to kill a mouse with a stick? Not very easy.

I would rather kill mice in the basement, than in the kitchen.


16 posted on 04/10/2007 10:09:08 AM PDT by Albert Barr (Are we men, or are we Britons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sharkproof

I disagree, and if you are right, I don’t care.

There is good evidence that many, if not most, Iraqi Shiites are not Iranian allies.

It is increasingly difficult to claim that our presence in Iraq is really in the American national security interest. The only reason we’re still there, IMHO, is to prevent what would happen when we leave.

So let the people affected vote on it.

I strongly suspect the Nos would win. Right now everybody can “hate America” and call for us to leave without any consequences.

Give them an actual timetable for leaving and I suspect a lot of Iraqis would have second thoughts.


17 posted on 04/10/2007 10:31:13 AM PDT by Sherman Logan (I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

Good idea. Border security is the biggest of Bush’s failures.


18 posted on 04/10/2007 10:32:44 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued (If the GOP were to stop worshiping Free Trade as if it were a religion, they'd win every election)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

I’ll simply say this which is to maintain my position on the GWOT. It is unwinnable as long as the West remains dependant on foreign oil from the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and Iran control the majority of the worlds supply.

Saudi Arabia needed us and kissed ass for a good many years until China and India can now replace us as customers. Saudi Arabia is lining up with the bad guys. Sure most of King Fahds house and princes are Westernized. But they also fear being overthrown. Our temporary failure in Iraq along with Britain cow-towing to Iran has caused them to reconsider alliances. Between Iran and Russia, the EU will remain totally spineless about the spread of Islam.

Options:

1) Stay in Iraq until 2008, begin a ‘Manhatten Project’ of alternative energy to be completely be independant in five years. Bush could do this and heck, let’s face it, immigration and energy are the only things he could get right with on Congress.

2) Withdraw troops from all areas except for Bagdad and 2-3 other hot spot cities. Apply all the funds spent on the war effort on border patrol, ground intelligence operatives overseas and alternative energy. Increase civilian defense, have every American partake in being the eyes and ears to help prevent a terrorist nuke attack. Present to Congress a compromise in the Iraq funding bill to withdraw XXX % of the troops to provide funding for a limited defense force in Bagdad and Iranian border while Iraqi forces continue to build up.

3) Attack Iran. This will likely happen with Bush’s Presidential powers for airstrike (notice the carriers off Iranian coast) but will only slow Iran down but it will give Iraq some breathing room for a short time, then we withdraw.

If the WOT is a long drawn out conflict that could last decades which I do believe is true, we don’t want to cut and run, rather cut and regroup. Reagan had his hands full with Iran and the Soviet Union. He had to bide his time, rebuild the military and formulate strategy. Bush’s hands are really tied. I would vote for the second option and I only say this, because we can’t attack Iran with a combined forces attack to overthrow the mullahs. The dems made sure this won’t happen. If are energy independant and are our borders are secure, we can project power and policy on Iran and Saudi Arabia and they will then take us seriously.


19 posted on 04/10/2007 1:13:48 PM PDT by quant5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoneOfTheAbove

We Shouldn’t Be Alone in Fighting Terrorists.

I agree with this position.

I propose that the iraqi “government” that we installed and the we are funding immediately draft 500,000 iraqi men to fight for their own country.

We’ll train them and sell them all the guns and ammo they need...........

then they’ll be ready to “step up” as presidente bush says...........

4-6 months


20 posted on 04/10/2007 1:17:14 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (GOP Congress - 16,000 earmarks costing US $50 billion in 2006 - PAUL2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson