[Chgogal]

BTTT

[Jim Noble]

From the article:

Still, most in the Middle East wish simply to embrace the human desire for prosperity, freedom, and security...

OK, I understand the theory.

Where's the evidence?

[Jim Noble]

From the article:

Still, most in the Middle East wish simply to embrace the human desire for prosperity, freedom, and security...

OK, I understand the theory.

Where's the evidence?

[expatguy]

LOLO

Oh Lord. VDH is gonna catch Hell for this one!

Imagine VDH trying to come out and say that we are actually at war with Islam!

That is what he said isn't it?

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

[Mr. Jeeves]

VDH's article makes clear two things:

1) The Bush Administration is pursuing the only course they can.

2) The Left will never, ever get it. They are psychologically incapable of understanding Administration strategy in the Middle East, because the actions necessary to carry out that strategy push all of their hot buttons, and they stop thinking the moment those buttons are pushed.

Short of Joe Lieberman delivering a harsh STFU speech to his fellow Democrats (which would get him branded as "another Zell Miller-type crank" by the Kennedy-Clinton Axis, but might convince some of the voting base) nothing is going to stop the Democrats from slandering and misstating Bush Administration policy for the next twenty years, regardless of whatever results are achieved.

[Tolik]

    Victor Davis Hanson Ping ! 

       Let me know if you want in or out

[varon]

BTTT

[varon]

Our dilemma is that we have not sought to defeat and humiliate the enemy as much as wean a people from the thrall of Islamic autocracy. That is our challenge, and explains our exasperating strategy of half-measures and apologies — and the inability to articulate exactly whom we are fighting and why.

IMHO I think the above says it all!

[metesky]

bttt

[nosofar]

This, in my view, would be a disaster and guarantee another mass attack.

IMO, I expect another major attack is what it will come to. Even if Al Qaeda is destroyed, something else will crop up. On the one hand, a policy of war against the terrorists becomes more difficult to sustain as the will of the American people (not just posters on FR) wanes. It's better to not fight a war at all than to go halfway then quit. On the other hand, the policy of appeasement or ignoring reality won't work. It shows the U.S. as weak. Military strength is meaningless without the will to use it, even as a last resort. We need a bipartisan strategy that will be continued even if Democrats regain power. Consistency and perseverence over the long term are probably more important than short term victories.

[Evolution]

In WW2 did we say lets no declare War on Germany, Italy and Japan because we are not at war with all those people just a few Fascist extremists.

The majority of Muslims around the world support terrorism.

We must cut off all immigration from Muslim countries, and become energy independent.

Once we become energy independent, we dont have to support or give aid to any Muslim country and we can just watch them sink back into the $hithole they came from.

Another important step is removing nuclear capability from all Muslim countries such as Iran and Pakistan.

Of course too many American even Freepers this seems extreme, so you all could continue drinking the Kool Aid and thinking that we can actually win the War by not fighting this as a War, and maybe Muslims will be our friends.

The only problem with that is their Holy Koran forbids it and we all know how important that is, we saw Condi Rice tremble before Congress about how much we respect the Holy Koran. A few more 9/11's might wake this country up, and more Americans will have to die unfortunately before we see the enemy of Islam and our own inner enemy of cultural relevatism.

The next 911 I fear will be a nuke, as long as we allow Muslims to harbor and create more of the.