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

Skip to comments.

We Fight Now Because We Didn't Fight Then
Boston Globe | 9/20/01 | Jeff Jacoby

Posted on 10/07/2001 7:34:50 AM PDT by Northpaw

We fight now because we didn't fight then

By Jeff Jacoby, 9/20/2001

THIS WAS George Bush's warning to the international terrorists and their sponsors:

''The United States will be firm with terrorists. We will not make concessions.... If we find states supplying money, weapons, training, identification, documents, travel, or safe haven for terrorists, we will respond. Our aim is to demonstrate to these countries that supporting terrorism is not cost-free .... We will bring terrorists to justice. We will ... identify, track, apprehend, prosecute, and punish terrorists. Terrorism is crime, and terrorists must be treated as criminals.''

That muscular vow wasn't uttered after last week's atrocities. It was made in November 1988 by then-Vice President George H. W. Bush, who put it in writing, over his signature, on the first page of the Defense Department compendium ''Terrorist Group Profiles.'' Two months later, he was sworn in as the 41st president, and if anything seemed clear, it was that he would bring to the Oval Office a cold view of terrorism and a steely commitment to fight it.

He didn't. Like Ronald Reagan before him and Bill Clinton after, Bush did little to stop international terror. The result of that failure was to convince Islamist fanatics that America was weak and gutless, and to feed the audacity that led to the most devastating terrorist attack in US history.

As vice president, Bush had seen terror's effects: He went to Beirut in October 1983, a few days after a car bomb blew up the US military barracks there, murdering 241 Marines. The Reagan administration, he said, was ''not going to let a bunch of insidious terrorist cowards shape the foreign policy of the United States.'' But that was exactly what the Reagan administration did do. Soon after the bombing, American forces quit Lebanon. And 18 years later, we have yet to ''identify, track, apprehend, prosecute, and punish'' the killers who butchered those Marines.

Or the ones who had earlier butchered 49 Americans at the US embassy in Beirut. Or the ones who hijacked TWA 847 in 1985 and killed US Navy diver Robbie Stethem. Or the ones who kidnapped CIA Officer William Buckley that same year and tortured him to death. Or the ones who hanged Marine Lieutenant Colonel William Higgins in 1989. Or the ones who seized one US citizen after another - Terry Anderson, Thomas Sutherland, Alann Steen, Frank Reed, and Joseph Cicippio, among others - and held them hostage under brutal conditions.

None of these outrages aroused the fury of the US government. Despite all the American blood on their hands, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah were allowed to operate without hindrance, while the regimes in Damascus and Tehran that financed and sheltered them were never forced to pay a price for their hostile behavior.

Even when the United States did retaliate for terrorist attacks, its response was mild and ineffective. To avenge the destruction of Pan Am 103 and the slaughter of 259 innocents in December 1988, the United States was content to prosecute two Libyan operatives who had been involved in the bombing. More hirelings were put on trial after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. When terrorists blew up the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Washington lobbed a few cruise missiles at training camps in Afghanistan and a chemical plant in Sudan.

What the US government should have done was root out and destroy the terrorist groups mounting these attacks. It should have leveled economic, diplomatic, and military penalties against the dictatorial states backing them. It should have behaved like a great power enraged by the murder of its citizens. Instead it did next to nothing. And vicious men saw and drew the obvious conclusion.

That wasn't all they saw.

They saw the United States label Saddam Hussein ''worse than Hitler'' and assemble a vast army to fight him - only to stop the war when his troops were on the run, leaving him as ruthless and dangerous as ever. They saw how Saddam violated the terms of the cease-fire and resumed his quest for nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons - and how the United States drew line after line in the sand, then failed to defend any of them.

They saw Americans cut and run from Somalia because some of their soldiers were killed there. They saw Washington dither for years about how or whether to stop the bloodshed in the Balkans. They saw how easy it was for the Chinese to acquire military secrets, and how surprised Americans were when India and Pakistan went nuclear. They saw that nothing bad happened to nations on the State Department's list of terror-sponsors. They saw a government so unwilling to give offense that it scrapped the term ''rogue states'' in favor of ''states of concern.''

All this and more the vicious men saw. And they concluded that America was rich but cowardly, mighty in arms but weak in spirit, unwilling to fight for its principles or to risk its sons in battle. America, they decided, had gone soft. And so the time had come to attack.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
This article is somewhat dated. I hope its not a repeated post. Nothing turned up on my keyword search. This article is so on the mark. No one else seems to address this issue. This "War on Terrorism" should have commenced years ago. Our failure to take these people seriously is the reason we have suffered this devastating attack.
1 posted on 10/07/2001 7:34:50 AM PDT by Northpaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Northpaw
do you really believe that this time will be any different? That this is not just a bunch of noise to satisfy the home front? That this will not be allowed to fade away? You are more optimistic than I am. old habits die hard and after all there is money to be made. Hope I am wrong.
2 posted on 10/07/2001 7:45:26 AM PDT by willyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: willyone
I hope you are wrong too. Perhaps the magnitude of this attack and the fact that it was on American soil will finally give us the will to fight and this time, win.
3 posted on 10/07/2001 7:52:42 AM PDT by Northpaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Northpaw
I agree. The parallel to Pearl Harbor is absolute. Back in '41 the people were getting the reports about all the bad guys out there, but just like the boiled frog syndrome, we could not get the momentum to move. That attack condensed the national will and gave us the momentum to get into the war and stop the evil. It's funny, it seems "good" needs a helping push from "evil" in order to stand up to it.
4 posted on 10/07/2001 7:52:52 AM PDT by det dweller too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: det dweller too
It's funny, it seems "good" needs a helping push from "evil" in order to stand up to it.

Good point. America needs a sledgehammer for an alarm clock.

5 posted on 10/07/2001 7:57:23 AM PDT by Northpaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Northpaw
Time to say "ENOUGH!"
6 posted on 10/07/2001 8:07:51 AM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
bump
7 posted on 10/07/2001 8:18:36 AM PDT by Northpaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Northpaw
No wonder there's a "100% chance" of another attack. Duh. We've squandered as a nation our most precious national security asset: deterrence. I'm afraid it's gone forever. It was born from our willingess to use overwhelming brutal violence in World War II, even at the expense of millions of innocent civilians, and the lives of hundreds of thousands of our own brave citizens. It gave us our national inheritance of deterrent capability and generations of peace built upon it. And we have squandered it all, and it ain't coming back. We will never deter attack again, because we will never be able to bring ourselves to use such overwhelming, unrestrained force again. And resources spent on force projection now must be spent on "homeland defense". Which is a waste, because the only 100% effective "homeland defense" was, alas deterrence. At least until the inheritance ran out on 9/11. Now who's going to pick up the tab?
8 posted on 10/07/2001 8:27:06 AM PDT by soxfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soxfan
You're right. In WWII, we didn't worry about 'collateral damage'. The sheer terror of the bombings of civilians as well as military installations, brought our enemies to their kness. There is no such thing as a selective, 'humanitarian' war. If you wage a 'nice' war, your enemies will consider you weak and you WILL lose.
9 posted on 10/07/2001 8:37:47 AM PDT by Northpaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: soxfan; OLDWORD
You make an excellent point about deterrence. The efficiency and thoroughness with which we "flush" Afghanistan of the Talliban and al-Qaeda will go a long way toward convincing those nations which are on the cusp that the safe place to be is on the side of the US. Even some of our current "allies," like Saudi Arabia, need to have this lesson taught by indirection.

The fat-and-happy inertia of the US before Pearl Harbor was repeated again before 911. We had our equivalents of "America First," the group led by Charles Lindberg which sought, prior to Pearl Harbor, to keep us out of that "foreign" war. But once the war came home to American soil, all that was swept aside.

The same thing is happening to the don't-fight crowd today. They won't disapper entirely. But they became marginal on 911, and with proper leadership from President Bush, they will remain marginal.

Congressman Billybob

Click here for Billybob's latest, "Bush is DEAD Wrong." The next, "The ONE Commandment," will be posted after al Qua'da and Taliban are gone, or in about 48 hours.

Click here and go to "ALCU Watch" for "The Law of War," a detailed legal discussion of how the US declares war, both historically and in this instance.

10 posted on 10/07/2001 8:38:49 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
bump
11 posted on 10/07/2001 8:49:41 AM PDT by Northpaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
bttt
12 posted on 11/12/2001 10:38:43 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: Northpaw
bttt
14 posted on 11/13/2001 10:03:17 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyCoyote22
bump to the top for the newbies constantly coming aboard daily!
15 posted on 11/13/2001 10:03:47 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: det dweller too
bttt
16 posted on 11/13/2001 10:04:05 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WileyCoyote22
bttt
17 posted on 11/13/2001 5:01:03 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: willyone
bump to the top
18 posted on 11/13/2001 5:14:04 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Northpaw
bump to the top!
19 posted on 11/16/2001 1:06:30 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Northpaw
Bump for newbies coming aboard daily!!
20 posted on 11/16/2001 1:17:08 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 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