I may be flamed for saying this but Pat is right, this is a internal struggle for us, not an external one. We must of course not let these evil deeds go unpunished, but to declare war against a foe that has no nation, no shore to land on, no one that can surrender, is not winnable by definition. We can only kill those we find, or indiscriminantly kill thousands or millions. That will only breed more hatred for us, and when we bore ourselves with this, and terrorist acts become rare, how do we sustain the will to fight?
Before we undertake this war we must first secure our homeland, our base. We can only do this by making sure there are few terrorist or traitors among us.
First we must secure our borders (Pats way with a fence), make sure the ships and planes coming in are free of danger and enemies, then evict all who are not citizens, ALL of them.
How can we fight a war without first evicting all possible terrorists, and jailing any traitors? We can't. The sight of our troops overseas, fighting battles, while the terrorists poison water, release biologicals, and blow up power lines at home, will be unique in American history. So it is at home the first battles must be fought.
One thing that bugs me about people with your opinions, how is Buchanan at once and war monger, and an isolationist. It seems he has been called both during his public career.
I write to you because your opinions are usually reasoned, so explain a policy that will 1) punish our enemies 2) reduce or get rid of the danger 3) not reduce our rights at home 4) not bring into effect a southern fence, or tighter restrictions on immigration [Pats main push I believe.]
I'm not advocating "establishing" anything -- I said that it's in our interest to promote democracy. that means 1) supporting the few democratic states that do exist in the region, like Israel; 2) NOT supporting Islamic fundamentalist states, unless we do so temporarily as an expedient to some greater end; and 3) actively opposing terrorist-harboring states, viz., Afganistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc.
First we must secure our borders (Pats way with a fence), make sure the ships and planes coming in are free of danger and enemies, then evict all who are not citizens, ALL of them. How can we fight a war without first evicting all possible terrorists, and jailing any traitors?
We live in a porous, free society and illegal immigration, and the potential problems that entails, will always be something we will have to struggle against. Pat's "strategy" is a non-strategy -- he would basically eliminate immigration, which hurts us in the long run.
One thing that bugs me about people with your opinions, how is Buchanan at once and war monger, and an isolationist. It seems he has been called both during his public career.
I have never called Pat a "warmonger." I can and do call him an isolationist, because that's what he is. I also think that he's largely destroyed his political credibility with some of his loopier opinions. None of this is personal with me -- I don't hate the guy; I just think that he's full of it.
explain a policy that will 1) punish our enemies 2) reduce or get rid of the danger 3) not reduce our rights at home 4) not bring into effect a southern fence, or tighter restrictions on immigration [Pats main push I believe.]
Basically, it all comes down to a willingness to do what's necessary. Our objective should be to root out the terror network, root and branch. No doubt to the dismay of the Patsies, this will involve more international cooperation and entanglement, not less. Good intelligence is our overriding, principal need right now -- intelligence on where the camps are, who runs them, where they get their money, and how they operate. We are in some deep crap right now because thanks to Clinton and his evisceration of our intelligence capabilities, we're a little behind the eight-ball in intelligence assets right now. That's one of the reasons we need the Israelis, the Europeans, the Indians, and the Pakistanis -- to help us locate and target our adversaries.
This "war" will not be over soon, so an important need will be for Bush to maintain the coalition. This is a thorny political problem (one that Pat couldn't accomplish in a million years, by the way) and will be Bush's principal challenge after the initial few military strikes. The goals are to strike all terrorist camps, personel, and material, wherever they are, constantly, until they are completely and utterly destroyed.
Illegal immigration is a long-term problem, but I have no problem with the FBI and police taking appropriate measures (and that includes "racial profiling") during wartime. In any event, a consequence of our promting a democratic lifestyle and free markets will ultimately be to reduce immigration -- a lot of immigrants come to the USA for freedom and economic opportunity and if they have that at home, why emmigrate?