On 'Michael Scheuer's Bloody Logic' - Thanks, and a Comment from Scheuer

Tech Central Station ^ | 3/18/05 | Michael F. Scheuer

[Valin]

Because the media do not always remember that nothing should be too dangerous to talk about in America, I would first like to thank TCS for allowing Mr. Apostolou to publish his essay on my work and ideas ("Michael Scheuer's Bloody Logic", TCS, 3/17/05).

I am indeed an old-fashioned conservative nationalist, stuck with the quaint belief that U.S. foreign policy should protect Americans first, last, and always. I of course never said anything remotely resembling "America must kill innocent Muslims because of its relationship with Israel" -- although that's a clever way of diverting attention from the arguments of my books. Indeed, there have been a spate of recent articles about my book and comments that follow a very similar tack, pieces that do not seem to recognize that there is any issue at play between the United States and Islam except for Israel. Odd coincidence.

Anyway, the crux of my argument is simply that America is in a war with militant Islamists that it cannot avoid; one that it cannot talk or appease its way out of; one in which our irreconcilable Islamist foes will have to be killed, an act which unavoidably will lead to innocent deaths; and one that is motivated in large measure by the impact of U.S. foreign policies in the Islamic world, one of which is unqualified U.S. support for Israel.

Had Mr. Apostolou quoted me more thoroughly -- or perhaps read my books -- he would have seen that U.S.-Israeli policy was only one of the six policies I mention, and not even the most important. Likewise, if concerned with accuracy, Mr. Apostolou would have noted that I argued that America's alliance with Israel should not be abandoned or even downgraded, only restructured so that America, as the Great Power, and not Israel, as our minor-state partner, is seen to be calling the shots. That's just common sense and sound policy.

So, again, many thanks to TCS for letting Mr. Apostolou write about my work and comments. His essay does not completely reflect the content or arguments of either, but some debate is better than no debate. Also, Mr. Apostolou, to his great credit, did not hurl that most effective debate-closing epithet "anti-semite," which I will take as a sign that there is beginning to be some room for debate among those concerned first and foremost with America's national security.

Michael F. Scheuer is the author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing The War on Terrorism (Brassey's, 2004), and Through Our Enemies' Eyes: Osama bin Laden, Radical Islam and the Future of America (Brassey's, 2002). He is a former intelligence officer.

[Valin]

"Michael Scheuer's Bloody Logic"
http://www.techcentralstation.com/031705E.html

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1364469/posts

[Valin]

ping

[Tolik]

From what I read, the quotes of Scheuer's sayings were damning enough. It was very clear what Scheuer said and what he meant.

Not to be accurate these quotes must be very creatively forged by his critics. So far I did not see any evidence that Apostolou did that.

I respectively disagree with Mr. Scheuer and am happy that he is not longer in the CIA.

[SunkenCiv]

The only innocents being murdered are being murdered by the Moslems. Period.