Fanatics Who Blow Up Mosques Deserve Only A Violent End
When terrorists affiliated with the al-Qaeda or other violent organizations in Iraq blow up mosques and kill 47 people by the road, as happened last week, it is not a question of winning their hearts and minds or negotiating with them in hopes of inducing better behavior.
Such people have to be either killed or captured and incarcerated for a long, indefinite period in a remote place, as U.S. and British forces are doing.
What these people are doing is so bad, they have put themselves beyond the pale and the war we are fighting is, I believe, the only appropriate response.
I think that all too many people have become so hardened to these unspeakable acts, suicide bombings and all the rest, attempts to create a world religious war, that they have lost their bearings and are looking for an easy way out that does not, in fact, exist.
So we have the L.A. Times editorial page, and others, who may mean well, but they don't see things in a realistic way.
Now, there is talk of a new, even bigger series of attacks. What these might be we can only imagine, but it is certainly not beyond possibility that exotic weapons could be used in the Iraqi theatre or elsewhere.
Would we we bound in such a case to continue to fight only with the conventional weapons we are using today? No we would not. Already, French President Jacques Chirac has said that a terror attack against France with nuclear weapons would bring a nuclear attack in return.
This ia grim threat, but it could come to that if out enemies raise the ante to a certain point.
That is why the U.S. must take steps to be as certain as possible that such an attack does not occur. That's why more than three quarters of those polled oppose letting Dubai Arabs take over American port security. They are aware of the potential for unspeakably evil attacks against the U.S.
This is not what a foolish L.A. Times editorial suggests today -- "globalization hesitation." This is a prudent policy that seeks to avert being forced into acts we do not wish to undertake.
It would be a tragedy if the U.S. was forced to destroy its enemies beyond any violence we ever hope to initiate. But the enemies we face today may be capable of pushing us that far. They are beginning to show their potential in Iraq.
Such people have to be either killed or captured and incarcerated for a long, indefinite period in a remote place, as U.S. and British forces are doing.
What these people are doing is so bad, they have put themselves beyond the pale and the war we are fighting is, I believe, the only appropriate response.
I think that all too many people have become so hardened to these unspeakable acts, suicide bombings and all the rest, attempts to create a world religious war, that they have lost their bearings and are looking for an easy way out that does not, in fact, exist.
So we have the L.A. Times editorial page, and others, who may mean well, but they don't see things in a realistic way.
Now, there is talk of a new, even bigger series of attacks. What these might be we can only imagine, but it is certainly not beyond possibility that exotic weapons could be used in the Iraqi theatre or elsewhere.
Would we we bound in such a case to continue to fight only with the conventional weapons we are using today? No we would not. Already, French President Jacques Chirac has said that a terror attack against France with nuclear weapons would bring a nuclear attack in return.
This ia grim threat, but it could come to that if out enemies raise the ante to a certain point.
That is why the U.S. must take steps to be as certain as possible that such an attack does not occur. That's why more than three quarters of those polled oppose letting Dubai Arabs take over American port security. They are aware of the potential for unspeakably evil attacks against the U.S.
This is not what a foolish L.A. Times editorial suggests today -- "globalization hesitation." This is a prudent policy that seeks to avert being forced into acts we do not wish to undertake.
It would be a tragedy if the U.S. was forced to destroy its enemies beyond any violence we ever hope to initiate. But the enemies we face today may be capable of pushing us that far. They are beginning to show their potential in Iraq.
posted by Ken Reich at 8:32 AM
1 Comments:
Oh, you muat mean "The Freedom Fighters", or "Foreign Fighters" or "Resistance" or "Insurgents".
That is what the Los Angeles Yimes chooses to call these wanton murderers, these cold-blooded assassins of women and little children, the fanatic suicide bombing crazies.
How many more people will need to cawncel their subscriptions before the idiots that run the Times get it?
"Moral equivalency" has no place in the War on Terror reporting. Just call 'em the way you see 'em.
Post a Comment
<< Home