Posted on 03/15/2004 6:07:51 AM PST by beaureguard
That perhaps we should precisely define and engage the enemy instead of making oblique attacks that end up making the enemy stronger, more powerful.
Not really. We should be careful in labeling the Spanish people as cowards, which they are not. They have simply made a very bad decision based on emotions.
Zapatero and his new administration are already saying that they will be tough on terror. But here's where the divergence comes, and this is exactly what Kerry and the dems will be doing here:
The socialists say that they will be tough on the real terrorists, and they will do what will really reduce terror, implying that Bush and Blair and Aznar going to Iraq had nothing to do with the real terrorists, and that all we are doing now is misguided or for ulterior motives. Watch Kerry to come out swinging with "If you elect me, I'll do what will really make us safer, not what the 'blood-for-oil Halliburton PNAC neocons' are doing to inflame America's allies and blunder unilaterally into unrelated, unjustified wars."
In other words, Kerry will run to the UN and apologize, run to France, Germany and Belgium and apologize, and then do everything possible to disengage US policy from Israel and make us the neutral, middle of the road superwimp that benevolently hands out food and AIDS money but takes no position on others' affairs. I only hope that enough of us have our head screwed on clearly come November to prevent the ketchup appeaser from coming to power.
Mothers funded by the Tides Foundation or MoveOn, who will tearfully implore "Why did George W Bush kill my son? And for nothing! We had no business in Iraq. It's all about oil! Boo hoo hoo hoooooo!"
I think you're completely wrong in your evaluation of the enemy. This is the first major attack on a western nation since the twin towers and it was nowhere near a deadly. They have been considerably weakened. They will run and morph and we will continue to hunt and kill. Our 'oblique' attacks have kept them off balance having denied them two countries in which to train.
If one were to take a narrow view of the battle of the buldge, one might think the Nazis had grown stronger and more powerful.
We are in a long fight that will have its ebbs and flows and it will be one by the side with the most determination.
How would precisely define the enemy? Is radical/militant islam too vague for you? How would you engage and enemy that runs and morphs?
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.