Is There Writing on the Wall?

...it seems probably inevitable that the correctness or incorrectness of our views will only become persuasive to the multitude when history teaches its cruel, unavoidable lessons. It was ever thus, which is why history is strewed with broken nations and civilizations that couldn't read the writing on the wall.

I have and read Tony Blankley's The West's Last Chance.

Ditto Melanie Phillips' Londonistan and Bruce Bawer's While Europe Slept.

Next: Mark Steyn's America Alone.

Hillary brags she'll surrender January 20, 2009.

Neither side seems remotely capable of persuading the other of the accuracy of our respective foresights.

The first detonation of a rogue Islamic nuke will clear that all up nicely, won't it?

later

Maybe when the Islamicists pull off a “Horoshima “ level event, as they have promised, then there will be a reckoning.

Is that a banana in her hat or...nevermind.

That is the way things usually happen. Today problem more than any time in history it is almost impossible to do what the logical next step is once you have identified a clear threat.

I challenge anyone on the left as to what the correct response given the lesson of 9-11 to Iraq. Even if you don’t believe Iraq had anything to do with it there is no doubt Saddam was aiding terrorists and training terrorist elements within Iraq. He used the Oil for Food program to funnel money into rebuilding his military industrial complex. He had military plans for terrorist attacks in Europe and the US. Russian intelligence said as much though it wasn’t mentioned in the buildup it is still relevant. The whole world even Hans Blix believed Saddam had WMD stockpiles the difference was on how to go about dealing with it. Even Saddam and his military behaved as if they had WMDs and something to hide. We haven’t even gotten into the use of Chemical weapons against his own people, the clear violation of the terms of surrender from Gulf War I. We could go on all day listing undebatable facts that made clear the choice of invading Iraq.

The truth is at the time of the invasion many of the same liberals agreed based upon all available evidence as even now they try to cast ambiguity to even what the definition of a terrorist is. A person who doesn’t understand the clear difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter and a tyrant and leader of a free democracy should have no place in our government. The Democrats have become the politicians of Summer.

“Maybe when the Islamicists pull off a “Horoshima “ level event, as they have promised, then there will be a reckoning.”

Should that happen, let us hope that Harry Reid will be visiting there, wherever there is.

The first detonation of a rogue Islamic nuke will clear that all up nicely, won't it?

I can hear it now. "If you had just been nice to them, you wouldn't have made them do it."

the great divide is between those, such as me, who believe that the rise of radical Islam poses an existential threat to Western Civilization; and those who believe it is a nuisance, if, episodically, a very dangerous nuisance

Tony gives the left too much credit, assuming that they have actually considered the threat, but don't consider it very great. The truth is that they realized we needed the war right after 9/11, and went along grudgingly, but when Bush started doing too well (after the Iraq war was won in a few weeks with few casualties) they got worried. The Mission Accomplished photo op scared hell out of them, it was a great triumph, and they learn from history. They did not want a repeat of the Reagan landslide in 2004, and they did not want the Republican governance to be cemented with another victory over America's enemies to its credit.

So, they fought back. It started right after the Mission Accomplished, with their carping at that instead of joining in the happiness. As everyone knew, it wasn't a statement that the Iraq mission was over, it was just a banner put up by the sailors who had finished their mission successfully and were coming home. Bush announced the successful completion of major ground operations, he didn't say that everything was done.

They know the threat exists and is real, but Bush scared them more. So, ever since, they have calibrated their positions based on how much they can get away with. A few far lefties (Dean, Kucinich) start coming out strong against the war. It gives cover for Dems to talk about it and start bad mouthing the war. It gives a morale boost to the terrorists to continue fighting. They learn that they don't have to win anything, they just have to find a way to kill an American every so often and hang in there, and they will eventually get us to go home.

The truth is, they hate Bush more than they hate Islam. He is the near enemy, they are the far one. They know it exists, and they even will concede that we could lose a city one of these days. They don't care. They want power first and foremost, and they will do whatever it takes to get it. Once they have it, they will look at Islam and come up with something that looks like a change in policy, and may even fight it hard. It may even give them the opportunity to further centralize control of the country if they take the threat seriously. But they have to have control first.

Hillary and Bill and most of the Dem leaders are smart enough to know that we have to defeat Islamic fascism. They know it threatens Israel and oil and is a danger in Europe, and could attack us at home. They just want to be the ones to win it, like FDR in WW2. Give them that chance, and the DBM will be making good socialist soldier hero stories out the wazoo, and you'll get puff pieces about the SecDef and what a brilliant strategist he is, and behind the scenes reports from the oval office showing the President at work protecting us and crying over our losses.

In fact, I think Hillary's goal is to win the war. That's why she's so cagey on it.

There are a few true believers on the Dem side, but they will fall in line once they win power and get what they want on things like socialized medicine, abortion, homosexual issues, Supreme Court nominees, the environment, etc. The propaganda machine will drown them out.

So, anyway, Tony gives them too much credit. They have made an evil calculus that they are taking a risk with their positions, but they are ok with it, because the progress of socialism worldwide depends on it.

I can hear it now. "If you had just been nice to them, you wouldn't have made them do it."

I hear "Bush's fault".

I always believed that Iraq was the correct next step in the war, after Afghanistan. Bush's mistake was listening to Tony Blair and Colin Powell. I wanted it to start in the fall of 2002. Those months made the war much more difficult, and forced Bush to use all kinds of excuses to try to justify it, instead of just using all the violations of the Gulf War treaty.

The lesson of 9-11 was that not that Saddam had done it so we needed retribution(I believe he knew about it and had ties to AQ), it was that we could not take a chance with any nation that was a threat to pull off a large scale operation, and/or support terrorists who would do that. It would also send a great signal to other nations, like Libya, Syria, Egypt and Pakistan. It would also be the second strategic step in causing the fall of the Iranian fascist regime. They needed to be encircled, and then a full scale campaign to destabilize and eventually defeat them needed to take place, preferably during 2003-2004.

Next stage would involve Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and take longer.

Iraq was the right move, but only as part of a larger plan to win the WOT by going to the sources. It is unfortunate that Bush has not done all those other things, and has become so weak politically, because now, instead of being afraid, the rogue nations are emboldened. Before 2003, they at least would have been worried about our reaction to things like attacks on our troops. Now they know they can do it and we won't come after them directly.

If there are nuclear attacks on our cities, the response of the MSM and the left will depend on who is in charge at the time.

Bill clinton would have LOVED to have been president in such a case. He annually renewed an Executive Order that would have suspended congress and the courts and put his cronies in FEMA in charge of the country. He would have been President for Life!

So, if hillary is in office, she will be delighted! She will be the new Give-’em-Hell Harry, an invention of the left wing press that still lingers even among conservatives, even though HST was a total screwup who supervised the loss of China to the Communists and fired General MacArthur when it looked as if he might win in Korea.

But if the Republicans are in office, then it will be all their fault for offending those nice Muslims, and the peaceniks will be out in force.

Study Roman history and you’ll see the same thing. Their downfall was because they couldn’t see what was coming and their politicians thought only of themselves and not their country. They also tried to “micro-manage” their military.......interesting that our politicians are following the same route. The people of this country are the only ones that can change this. The next Presidential election is key for this country. The new President has to be one that works to get rid of communism, socialist views, and radical muslim beliefs. He cannot be one that sways to other countrys beliefs. He has to be one that promotes Americans beliefs. I believe, he also has to pay our debt to China and then cut them off. Remove them from Most Favored Nation status. He needs to be one that puts unrelenting pressure on Congress to actually run this country the way the American people want it run. Cut taxes and take control away from Congress until they start acting responsible.

Wow! The most succinct, well-reasoned summary of the Left’s strategy I’ve read to-date. Congratulations!

I agree with your assessment. Bush did take far to long which is ironic because today the left says he “rushed into war”. Sometimes I think they remember things exactly the way they wish them.

Nope.

I think Blankley hits it on the head.

Now they know they can do it and we won't come after them directly.

Almost exclusively because of treasous Democrats.