Posted on 06/06/2004 1:34:22 PM PDT by wagglebee
It is a testament to the perverse priorities of our politicians and journalists that the biggest American outcry over Abu Ghraib has been not about the gruesome decapitation of American Nicholas Berg by terrorists, but about the fact that many Arabs and Europeans are mad at us.
"We are the most hated nation in the world," laments Ted Kennedy, "as a result of this disastrous policy in the prisons."
The alleged solution to this alleged crisis of "world opinion" is to show more deference toward the rest of the world. Otherwise, we are told, the world's anger will bring more terrorist attacks and less "international cooperation" against terrorism.
All of this evades one blatant truth: the hatred being heaped on America over Abu Ghraib is undeserved. Throughout the Middle East, torturereal torture, with electric drills and vats of acidis official policy and daily practice. Yet there are no worldwide condemnations of the dictatorships that practice such atrocitieslet alone the Arab-Islamic culture that produces so many torturers. But when, during a war, a handful of American prison guards subject a handful of Iraqi POWs to comparatively mild humiliationwhich the U.S. government denounces and promptly investigates"world opinion" proclaims itself offended and condemns America.
Abu Ghraib is just the latest example of the injustice of "world opinion." Since September 11, the United Statesthe freest nation on Earthhas been ceaselessly denounced for any step in the direction of self-defense against terrorism, while terrorist regimes Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinian Authority get a moral free pass.
So-called "world opinion" is not the unanimous and just consensus that its seekers pretend. (Observe that the phrase never includes the many pro-American foreigners, such as freedom-fighters in Iran.) It is the irrational and unjust opinion of the world's worst people: the Islamists who seek to subjugate the world to Islamic rule, the socialists and pacifists who seek to subjugate U.S. sovereignty to U.N. rule, and the legions of "moderate" followers who support or sympathize with these goals. These people oppose us not because of any legitimate grievances against America, but because they are steeped in irrational doctrines like Islamic fundamentalism, collectivism, and pacifismwhich lead them to oppose and resent American freedom and individualism, and our resulting wealth and power.
The proper response to the anti-American voicers of "world opinion" is to identify them as our ideological and political enemiesand dispense justice accordingly. In the case of our militant enemies, we must kill and demoralize themespecially the Arab and Islamic regimes that support terrorism and fuel the Islamist movement; as for the rest, we must politically ignore them and intellectually discredit them, while proudly arguing for the superiority of Americanism. Such a policy would make us safe, expose anti-Americanism as irrational and immoral, and embolden the world's best elements to support our ideals and emulate our ways.
President Bush, like most politicians and intellectuals, has taken the opposite approach to "world opinion": he has tried to appease it. Instead of identifying anti-American Muslims as ideological enemies to be discredited, he has appealed to their sensibilities and met their demandse.g., sacrificing American soldiers to save Iraqi civilians and mosques, and striving to make the Iraqi occupation not look "too American." Instead of seeking to crush the Islamists by defeating the causes they fight forsuch as Islamic world domination and the destruction of Israelhe has appeased those causes, declaring Islam a "great religion" and rewarding the Palestinian terrorist Jihad with a promised Palestinian state. Instead of destroying the terrorist regimes that wage war against the Westincluding Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinian Authorityhe has sought their "cooperation" and even cast some as "coalition partners."
Such measures have taught the enemies they appease a deadly lesson: anti-Americanism pays. "Denounce and oppose America," they have learned, "no matter how irrationally and hypocritically, and American leaders will praise your ideals and meet your demands." "Attack America via terrorist proxy," terrorist states and movements have been taught, "and America will neither blame you nor destroy you, but redouble its efforts to buy your love." Is it any wonder that anti-Americanism is gaining prominence, and that the "War on Terrorism" has no end in sight?
Every attempt to appease "world opinion" preserves, promotes, and emboldens our enemies. Every concession to angry Muslim mobs, every denunciation of Israel, every consultation with Prince Bandar or dictator Assad gives hope to the Islamist cause. Every day we allow terrorist regimes to exist gives their minions time to execute the next September 11. America needs honest leadership with the courage to identify and defeat our enemiesworld opinion be damned.
If world opinion is horribly wrong and we act in conformance are we acting correctly or are we following illegal orders?
Twain could have added it is a prison for the resolute applied by the weak.
Twain could have added it is a prison for the resolute applied by the weak.
BAAAWWAAAAAA.....go back to DU......or at least go and get yourself a DECENT education, because if you have ANY education....you got CHEATED!
I don't think the author was speaking in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan.
He was speaking, among other things, about the Mohammedan hordes here in the US which Bush is (has) appeasing.
Why should we lose that status? You sound like the typical democrap, love everyone. Well, I don't-destroy the enemy and put fear in all the others. I don't want or need friends like the UN or France. To me, they are the enemy.
If I had the talent to write like that-that is exactly what I would write.
So you think Bush should come out and say Islam is the enemy?
Then what? We go burn down any Mohammedan's homes we can find?
There lies the problem.
I understand what you're saying.
I think the best course of action Bush could have taken was to remain silent, and remain neutral over whether Mohammedanism is peaceful or not.
Of course, coming out and saying "All Mohammedans are terrosists" would not have been the wisest course of action, but to go from Mosque to Mosque, shoeless, proclaiming Islam is peaceful and celebrating Ramadan in the White House was way over the top, imo.
We have to look out for our own best interests, what other nations think is completely irrelevent. Countries like France love to watch us clean up the world and then criticize us for doing it because they know they can't do it, so instead of acknowledging that they are impotent they act like they are superior.
After 9-11, this administration had two choices to secure the country from further terrorist attacks:
Bush chose the latter plan.
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.