U.S. May Lose War on Terror, Historian Says

The New York Sun ^ | 09/13/2006 | BY DANIEL FREEDMAN

[oxcart]

The victor of the war on terror is far from clear, the historian Bernard Lewis told a Hudson Institute conference.

The British-born professor of Near Eastern studies at Princeton said Monday that he was "more optimistic about the future of our struggle" in the early 1940s — when the French had capitulated to the Germans, when Stalin was Hitler's ally, and when America was still neutral — than he is today.

"Hitler would have won under these conditions," Mr. Lewis said, citing America's inability to clearly define the war on terror and exactly who its enemy is. The professor, whose vision of the future of the Middle East and knowledge of Islam has guided President Bush's foreign policy, also cited as challenges the multilateralism that hamstrings America's ability to fight the war and the strong political opposition to policies designed to defeat the enemy, such as detaining terrorists without trial.

[P-40]

Losing isn't an option.

[Izzy Dunne]

strong political opposition to policies designed to defeat the enemy

Somebody should staple this memo to Howard Dean's forehead.

[JamesP81]

And it just HAS to be Bush's fault...

[Lucky9teen]

blah blah blah - shut up and sit down Mr. Lewis. We don't care what you think.

[BenLurkin]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1700711/posts

[shankbear]

That is if the democrapweasels get in power and gut our intelligence and military.

[cripplecreek]

We have two options. Fight to win or lose.

[AdmSmith]

The key difference, Mr. Lewis said, was that "in the partition of India, the U.N. was not involved. "The United Nations failed to act after the Arab states invaded Palestine, and then treated Jewish and Arab refugees differently, leaving problems that remain today, he said.

This is the problem, if UN was deprived of the money for the refugee camps, the parties involved had to find a sustainable solution.

[Paperdoll]

Unless we take the gloves and rules of engagement off, we absolutely will lose this war. Uhhh, Mr. President????
Are you with us or against us?

[michaelt]

Lewis is on our side on this.

[HEY4QDEMS]

strong political opposition to policies designed to defeat the enemy, such as detaining terrorists without trial.

Unless, of course, there happens to be a Democrat in the Whitehouse.

[Thombo2]

I'm not very positive either.Let's keep in mind that the terrorists/muslims/anarchist's have the dems and msm in their corner.

[Tirian]

read the article, people -- The professor, whose vision of the future of the Middle East and knowledge of Islam has guided President Bush's foreign policy, also cited as challenges the multilateralism that hamstrings America's ability to fight the war ... he's pointing out the problems that the left is causing, not advocating their actions ...

[RightWhale]

The terrorists cannot win. They can hang around for a long time exploding now and then, but there is zero chance they will come out on top anywhere except their home countries. The question is when they will give up.

[AdmSmith]

"We don't care what you think."

on the contrary, he is very good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Lewis

[twigs]

This man is THE authority on the Middle East. He knows the situation better there than any other academic today. If he says this, then we had better sit up and listen.

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Hitler would have won under these conditions," Mr. Lewis said, citing America's inability to clearly define the war on terror and exactly who its enemy is."

Hitler couldn't defeat the French resistance.

[EQAndyBuzz]

"I'm not very positive either.Let's keep in mind that the terrorists/muslims/anarchist's have the dems and msm in their corner."

And the Communists attacking us from another front.

[ansel12]

"blah blah blah - shut up and sit down Mr. Lewis. We don't care what you think."




Reading the article helps.