Look - no matter where it comes from there is an Islamic driven war against the West.
The real question is: What are we going to do about it?
Please support [The Fourth Rail - Bill Roggio] Public Multimedia
Iran: Unprecedented Nationwide Survey
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
In the aftermath of the next mass casualty event on US soil, the Jacksonians who kept their powder dry and prepared themselves and their loved ones for the ensuing societal meltdown will not be kind to the proponents of Perception #2.
Always a dangerous path. It's what happened with Vietnam, and it's what's happening here. But the writer is somewhat mistaken--history can be as slanted as a NYT article, and I have no doubt that today's liberal historians will decimate President Bush, while singing the praises of the traitorous, womanizing, lying President Clinton.
“Yet he hasn’t done things that a president who truly believes that we’re at war should have done. For instance, in the aftermath of 9-11 he didn’t ask Congress for a declaration of war, didn’t bring back the draft, and didn’t put the US economy on a wartime footing. A president at war would have taken out Iran’s government after overthrowing the Taliban in Afghanistan — and then sent 500,000 troops into Iraq, rather than just enough troops to remove Saddam Hussein but not enough to stabilize that country. And a president at war would have long since disposed of Syria’s murderous regime and helped the Israelis wipe out Hezbollah.
Study history, and you quickly learn that oftentimes events and the responses they generate look different a hundred years after they happen than they look at the time. It may be that history will judge that President Bush performed heroically, doing the very best that anyone could do given the two incompatible perceptions about the conflict that have divided public opinion and raised the level of partisanship in Washington to such a poisonous level. Or, it may be that history will judge the President to have been a failure because he responded to 9-11 as a politician rather than as a leader.”
I have said this for years and years ... one of my biggest complaints was that in the aftermath of 9/11 we dod not have a serious enough debate about who the enemy was and what we were going to fight and that we didn’t declare war and prepare the country.
Using the “middle ground” approach sent the American public back into the “all is well pop culture” mode instead of stealing them for the fight ahead. We, as a culture, have short memories and because the government did not “mobilize” the coountry, as it were, the government is paying the price. Back in the 1940’s, the government did a good job preparring the people ... and kept reminding them over and over and over what the fight was about. Heck, they even used Hollywood to keep up the reminders ... look at war time Warner Brothers cartoons and wartime movies. The governemnt and war department was heavily involved in these projects.
I wholeheartedly believe we are in the first case, a real war with an enemy that wants to kill us ... and God help us if they obtain the means to do so in mass.
But, we have not been prepared for such a fight.
