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

Skip to comments.

Now's Not the Time for Bush to Go Soft
Chicago Sun-Times | May 18, 2004 | Mark Steyn

Posted on 05/18/2004 5:43:45 AM PDT by LavaDog

In his column last week, Robert Novak talked to a big bunch of Beltway insiders about Donald Rumsfeld's future, or his lack thereof. Among my colleague's sources was ''one senior official of a coalition partner,'' who, apropos the Defense secretary, put it this way: ''There must be a neck cut, and there is only one neck of choice.''

Lovely line.

Unknown to the big shot diplomat, 'round about that exact moment halfway across the world, Nick Berg's captors were cutting his head off -- or, to be more precise, feverishly hacking it off while raving ''God is great!''

So Bob Novak's ''senior official'' -- some languid upper-class Brit? a cynical Continental? -- usefully reminds us of the difference between the participants in this war. On one side, references to decapitation are purely metaphorical; on the other, they mean it.

One way to measure the softness of a society is to look at how hitherto robust language becomes drained of all literal meaning. Take Novak's own CNN show ''Crossfire,'' and a testy exchange on the subject from Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign. Contemplating Pat Buchanan's experience as a TV host, Dole muttered, ''I was in the real crossfire. It wasn't on television. It was over in Italy somewhere, a long time ago.''

Just so. Back before 9/11, real crossfire was long ago and far away. Not anymore. And that's the problem: We still have a ''Crossfire'' culture in an age of real crossfire. We have the ersatz warriors, the ham actors of Washington -- Senators Kennedy, Levin, Leahy, Harkin and others too fond of seeing their names in print to mention -- ''calling for Rumsfeld's head'' at a time when America's enemies have already got Nick Berg's, and they're swinging it around on camera for the snuff video they'll be distributing as a recruiting tool.

The American people, no thanks to their media, still understand what's real and what's just cheesy Beltway dinner-theater. That's why the Abu Ghraib scandal is dead, even if the networks don't yet know it. It was dead before Nick Berg. It died because the Democrats and their media groupies overplayed their hand, as usual, and so turned a real scandal into just another fake scandal for senatorial windbags to huff and puff over. In the last few days, the Mirror, a raucous Fleet Street tabloid, has published pictures of British troops urinating on Iraqi prisoners, and the Boston Globe, a somnolent New England broadsheet, has published pictures of American troops sexually abusing Iraqi women. In both cases, the pictures turned out to be fake. From a cursory glance at the details in the London snaps and the provenance of the Boston ones, it should have been obvious to editors at both papers that they were almost certainly false.

Yet they published them. Because they wanted them to be true. Because it would bring them a little closer to the head they really want to roll -- George W. Bush's. If you want to see what the Islamists did to Nick Berg or Daniel Pearl or to those guys in Fallujah or even to the victims of Sept. 11, you'll have to ferret it out on the Internet. The media aren't interested in showing you images that might rouse the American people to righteous anger, only images that will shame and demoralize them.

Goh Chok Tong, the prime minister of Singapore, was in Washington the other day and summed it up very well: ''The key issue is no longer WMD or even the role of the U.N. The central issue is America's credibility and will to prevail.'' In Britain, they used to say that the Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton -- i.e., it was thanks to the fierce resolve inculcated by an English education. The war on terror will be lost in the talking shops of Washington -- i.e., it will be thanks to the lack of resolve inculcated by excessive exposure to blow-dried pundits and Senate hearings. The war now has two fronts. In Iraq, the glass is half-full. In Washington, it's half-empty, and draining fast.

The administration, in trying to see its way through both the phony crossfire and the real one, has been rattled by the fake war. Someone in the White House needs seriously to stiffen the Bush rhetoric. When the president talks about ''staying the course'' and ''bringing to justice'' the killers, he sounds like Bill Clinton, who pledged to stay the course in Somalia and bring to justice the terrorists, and did neither. Bush has to go back to speaking Rumsfeldian, not Powellite: He has to talk about winning total victory, hunting down the enemy and killing them.

He also needs to promise himself that he'll never again apologize to some Arab despot -- even relatively benign ones, like the king of Jordan -- for events in Iraq. If he feels the need to apologize, he should apologize to the American people for apologizing to the Arab world. This isn't just because what went on in Abu Ghraib is a picnic -- well, a Paris Hilton video picnic -- compared to what goes on every day in the prisons of our Arab ''allies.'' More important than that, the Bush apology buys into one of the most fetid props of the region's so-called stability -- ''pan-Arabism.'' If U.S. troops ''humiliated'' some Portuguese prisoners, the president wouldn't apologize to the king of Norway or the prime minister of Slovenia. So why, when U.S. troops humiliate Iraqi prisoners, would he apologize to Jordan's King Abdullah or Egypt's thug-for-life? ''Pan-Arabism'' is one reason why the region's a sewer. If Iraq succeeds, it will be by breaking with regional solidarity.

By the way, you might be wondering by now where the great procession of Arab leaders lining up to apologize to America for Nick Berg's murder has gotten to. Only a few Middle Eastern men want to saw the heads of Jews and infidels. But an awful lot more -- the majority in some states -- are either noisily approving or silently accepting of such an act. Winston Churchill wrote of two ''curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries'' -- not only the ''fanatical frenzy,'' which you can see in the orgiastic pleasure Berg's killers take in their clumsy work, but also the ''fearful fatalistic apathy,'' to which many more Arabs are prone. It's the latter that makes them such easy waters for the sharks to swim among.

We always come back to that strong horse/weak horse thing. But the point to remember is that Osama bin Laden talked about who was seen as the strong horse: It's a perception issue. America may be, technically, the strong horse but, thanks to its press and its political class, the administration is showing dangerous signs of climbing into the rear end of the weak-horse burlesque suit. If America retreats into its own fatalistic apathy, there will be many more Nick Bergs in the years ahead.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: levitra; marksteyn; resolve; staythecourse

1 posted on 05/18/2004 5:43:46 AM PDT by LavaDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LavaDog

Wow. As usual, Mark Steyn not only hits the nail on the head, he drives it through the board and on out the window.

Just awesome.


2 posted on 05/18/2004 5:59:53 AM PDT by Poundstone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog

Dang, this is so well said. Let's pray that W doesn't go soft just because this is an election year.


3 posted on 05/18/2004 6:01:22 AM PDT by rj45mis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
"The war on terror will be lost in the talking shops of Washington -- i.e., it will be thanks to the lack of resolve inculcated by excessive exposure to blow-dried pundits and Senate hearings. The war now has two fronts. In Iraq, the glass is half-full. In Washington, it's half-empty, and draining fast. "

The Fourth Estate is a Fifth Column.

4 posted on 05/18/2004 6:03:01 AM PDT by Reo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
If Bush is trying to create a free and democratic Iraq, he shouldn’t be looking to any other Arab country for anything. This was supposed to be groundbreaking, so Iraqi democracy could radiate across Arabia. His goals are to get away from the typical Arab government, so I don’t know why he gives two hoots what any other Arab country says about him. I think his political fears maybe starting to get the better of his judgement.

Good post

5 posted on 05/18/2004 6:06:34 AM PDT by Barney Gumble (Socialism is like a dream. Sooner or later you’ll wake up to reality -Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
"Yet they published them.
Because they wanted them to be true.

Because it would bring them a little closer to the head they really want to roll -- George W. Bush's.

If you want to see what the Islamists did to Nick Berg or Daniel Pearl or to those guys in Fallujah or even to the victims of Sept. 11, you'll have to ferret it out on the Internet.

The media aren't interested in showing you images that might rouse the American people to righteous anger, only images that will shame and demoralize them. '

6 posted on 05/18/2004 6:10:57 AM PDT by prognostigaator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog

No time for Bush to go soft!? To be blunt, I'm still waiting for GWB to get REALLY SERIOUS in fighting the war against Radical Islam and its supporters.


7 posted on 05/18/2004 6:53:11 AM PDT by NCPAC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prognostigaator
" "Yet they published them. Because they wanted them to be true. "

Can any New Englander update us on whether the Globe has apologized yet for spreading slander against our troops and their families?

8 posted on 05/18/2004 6:53:32 AM PDT by cookcounty (LBJ sent him to VN. Nixon expressed him home. And JfK's too dumb to tell them apart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
"Yet they published them. Because they wanted them to be true."

I have no doubt about that. Whenever there's a media feeding frenzy, it is because they sense blood, sense that they might be able to re-live their glory days of Watergate and bring down a Republican administration. I forget specifically which Bush crisis it was within the past year (Joseph Wilson?), but CNN's Aaron Brown tipped his hand - and that of his liberal colleagues - when he said, "This is just like the good old days [of Watergate]."
9 posted on 05/18/2004 7:23:01 AM PDT by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
It is not time to go soft, that is for sure. but, it is time to rethink our strategy. Iraq is a bitter, brutal and divided society. It will not be Democratic for a long time. You cannot jam Democracy down the throats of someone who does not value it. It is also impossible to completely pacify Iraq. It never has been pacified, even Saddam with all his cruelty was sitting on a volcano. What we need to do is redefine ur strategy. I think we need to be on our way out of Iraq by the time of the next election which is now less then 6 months away. That is just political reality!right now polls are showing that the people of Iraq have suddenly changed course and do not want us there. Granted they can and probably will change their minds. But, in the mean time we can play our get out of jail card. We can use that to pull back and start reducing our troops. But, we will still have to show resolve in another way. I suggest we consider hitting Iran in retaliation for it's helping the insurgents. A shock and awe over Tehran designed to take out the Guardian council and as many of the military generals and police chiefs as possible, and of course the nuclear reactor facilities. would do more good for the war on terrorism then getting bogged down in Iraq. And with that twist on our action nobody could say we were not strong! best always Bill
10 posted on 05/18/2004 7:24:18 AM PDT by bilhosty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bilhosty
Good point! I think that out of 7,000 Princes there are going to be some bad apples. But, I also think most of the problems that come from Saudi Arabia comes from out of the Royal house. One of the fruits of our war in Iraq is for us to put some fear into them. There were obviously some elements in the royal house who were paying Al-Quada not to to attack the royal house. When we found out who they were and asked to question 3 of them, all 3 of them ended up dead in the next week. Indicating that the Royal House knew what they were doing. After that Saudi Arabia found it self on the receiving end of some terrorist actions. They are obviously more cooperative now.
11 posted on 05/18/2004 7:31:40 AM PDT by bilhosty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
Because it would bring them a little closer to the head they really want to roll -- George W. Bush's

And that is the only campaign issue the Left is running on. This is what unites the Democrat base, their single-issue: even more than Roe v. Wade. Their hatred of the man in the White House.

12 posted on 05/18/2004 7:36:15 AM PDT by Old Sarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bilhosty
Please ignore my second post it got put under the wrong thread it was meant to go to the Michael totten thread>
13 posted on 05/18/2004 7:38:20 AM PDT by bilhosty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Reo
blow-dried pundits and Senate hearings -- Let's hope this election year puts these guys out of work. I think all Americans should see the actual be-heading of Nick Berg, as well as all the footage of 9/11. Truth hurts, but it will keep us alive.
14 posted on 05/18/2004 7:53:25 AM PDT by tioga (Tuesday, vacation memories are beginning to fade.........sigh.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
If anyone's head should roll from here on out, it should be Powell's. He's the squishy one in the middle that neither turns to the right nor the left when on camera. Off camera he hangs heavily to the left in his views of the world and the roll of the US in it. He is the has cause of this administration's flip-flops and has caused a sort of wishy-washy two steps forward and one and a half backward.

Thank God this man is not president... perhaps if Kerry were to offer the VP to Powell, he'd be more at home there and would leave the State Dep. an opening for Condi Rice during the second GW term.
15 posted on 05/18/2004 7:54:52 AM PDT by Godfollow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poundstone
Just finished watching the President speak to an American/Israeli group in D.C. It was really awesome!!!

Sure sounded to me and from the many standing applauses, the audience as well, that President Bush isn't even close to going wobbly - maybe people surrounding him in the WH but definitely not him. I'd strongly advise all to catch a rerun on C-Span.

16 posted on 05/18/2004 8:30:15 AM PDT by zerosix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibertyThug

bump...Steyn is the best thing going right now.


17 posted on 05/18/2004 10:06:46 AM PDT by Akira (The people have spoken.....the bastards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

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