War on Terror

Posted on Iraq

iraq = vietnam?

“One of the many negative consequences of America’s defeat in The Vietnam War has been the uncontrolled proliferation of Vietnams since then.”

quote from AINA’s Why Iraq is Not Like Vietnam: A Primer for the Geopolitically Challenged

here in this blog, we try to squash ridiculous hyperbole such as comparing iraq to vietnam (in case you weren’t aware, john kerry served there). the above article points out some blindingly obvious differences between the two conflicts. i’ll add my two cents here, because this is an important distinction to make in trying to argue the case for staying in iraq for the present time.

fighting against communism was an important part of our foreign policy. communists have wrong ideas that keep those under a strict interpretation of their system oppressed and poor. we should absolutely be against people being oppressed and poor, and we are.

the difference is that communists are not even a fraction as dangerous as Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist group. although communists had terrible ideas, none of those ideas included flying planes into buildings. i believe that religious fanatics, no matter what religion they are, are scarier than philosophical/political ideologues. that’s the kind of people we are dealing with here –religious fanatics.

that’s why we need to continue to be on the offensive in this war on terror. i don’t deny some mistakes were made, but leaving iraq now would be an even greater mistake. the stakes are too high for us to surrender iraq to those who oppose their move toward greater freedom and their progress toward democracy.

Technorati : ,

Posted on Democracy, Iraq

the war on terrorism

the terrorists struck again over the weekend in indonesia. there has been a long history of terrorist activity in that country. the fact it took this long for an attack to happen again is neither reassuring nor comforting.

perhaps we are taking the wrong approach in this war on terrorism. i’m not sure that military force will stop the true militant ideologues in the muslim world in al Qaeda from being evil and blowing things up. that said, getting rid of saddam was a good thing, and i’m not sorry he’s not ruler of iraq right now. i also believe that aside from the WMDs, he was complicit in aiding and abetting terrorists. this alone should be a good enough reason to remove him from power. my complaint is not with the iraq project, it is with the PR effort.

throughout our history, we have tried to solve problems by brute force and sometimes even diplomacy. the right approach is a balance of both. we need to come to an understanding that changing hearts and minds in the middle east is an incremental process. even countries with a long history of democracy still struggle with it, so we can’t expect iraq or its neighbors to embrace all the changes right away.

president bush has the right idea in trying to spread the ideals of freedom and democracy around the world. but when he appoints karen hughes to spearhead the effort, it makes one wonder whether he is taking this seriously. we should be able to come up with someone better to share our message and counter the anti-american rhetoric often represented on arab tv/radio. al-jazeera for example. when the voices of anti-american muslims are the only ones heard, what alternative do their listeners have? we have a good case to present to them. we need to do a better job in presenting this case.

even with our best diplomatic argument presented, it is possible that there will still be fanatics with explosives who remain unconvinced of america’s good intentions. there’s nothing we can do about that. the goal should be to convince the arab-speaking world not to support the fringe elements among them. we can achieve this. we just need the right people to represent us to the arab world.

Technorati : , , , ,

Posted on Iraq

saddam’s links to terrorism (long post)

how are saddam and iraq linked to terrorism? even though there was a sunday telegraph article linking iraq and al-Qaeda based on documents provided to them, i am not going to argue their validity here. there is a more obvious connection between saddam and iraq to terrorism, or at least supporters of terrorist activity. i am referring to saddam’s long association with the PLO (palestinian liberation organization). i also contend that the israeli/palestinian struggle is also related in a peripheral manner to 9/11. i will explain why i think the muslims keep referencing that struggle. here are a few articles discussing this.
(most titles are mine… they were changed for clarity) if you want to skip to my summary of all these articles, it’s after all the links. 🙂

saddam pays off palestinian suicide bombers
iraq and terrorism–from national review
terrorism: q & a–council on foreign relations summary also points out saddam’s past use of WMDs
chronology of the first gulf war
THE PERSIAN GULF CRISIS AND THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT –from a senate discussion –an article talking about saddam’s relationship with the PLO and how the PLO supported his invasion of kuwait
israel holds back during the gulf war — suggestion that israel was influenced by the U.S. not to retaliate against iraq during the kuwait conflict so as not to inflame other arab states against the U.S.

what prompted this post was a book called al-jazeera, by mohammad el-nawawy and adel iskandar in which it is noted that the PLO was kicked out of kuwait after its liberation. why? they were kicked out, and rightly so i might add, for supporting saddam’s invasion of kuwait. it would naturally follow that israel would support this, being a sworn enemy of most PLO foreign policies. the opposition to saddam and the general aims of terrorist supporters of the PLO was not helpful to gain support for the U.S. we have always supported israel. in the arab world, some would consider us the enemy because of this. this book even suggests that some arabs/muslims believe that there is a zionist conspiracy at work in our media to unfairly portray palestinians. (wait ’til ted turner hears about this!!)

saddam and the PLO were obviously connected. he paid off some of their suicide bombers. the PLO supported saddam’s invasion of kuwait, and even provided logistical support for it. when the U.S. came in and liberated kuwait, and kicked out the PLO, this annoyed saddam and israel’s main opposition group. that’s the connection to the israel/palestinian conflict. it’s also the seed of muslim resentment toward the U.S. that continues post 9/11.

bin laden and the PLO were also quite chummy, according to this piece. it’s not that much of a stretch to believe that a mutual hatred of the U.S. and Israel and a mutual support of the PLO would bring bin laden and saddam together. an attack on america would hurt israel too, and would no doubt be a motivating factor.

just my opinion.

Technorati : , , , , ,

Posted on Iraq, Moonbats

galloway is a loon…part II

continuing with galloway v. hitchens…and his insistence that the terrorist attacks were our fault.

hitchens responds to this lunacy:

“It’s also I think a bit much to be told that these al-Qaeda chaps, these killers and sadists and nihilists and profuse of indiscriminant explosions wouldn’t be this way if we weren’t so mean to them. “

right. just be nice to the terrorists and they will go away.

hitchens on the WMDs:

“Now, just on this point of weaponry. Um, if you have, as you do have in the case of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, a regime that has used chemical and biological weapons against some of its own inhabitants in Kurdistan, against Iran, several times…On the basis of this, establishable, provable knowledge, who is going to say, well let’s give Saddam Hussein the benefit of the doubt if he says he’s not fooling around with weapons now. What responsible leader of any democracy could face his people later if that bet turned out to be wrong? And say well I had every reason to think he was on the level. Come on! Get real! Be serious on this!”

this is exactly the point we forget when discussing the WMDs…saddam had WMDs. he used them on his own people, against iran, etc. so, to believe that saddam was on the level when he says he wasn’t trying to get WMD, well, that borders on delusional thinking. also, if saddam wasn’t going anything wrong…shouldn’t he allow the inspectors full access to his facilities to prove that the UK and the US were out to lunch with their accusations? hmm….

on his response to colin powell’s comments about his UN speech:

“I don’t give a damn about what Colin Powell thinks about anything. I never have, and I never will. I think he’s, I’ve noticed that he’s, having being for a long time, the most overrated public figure in the United States. He’s running for the nomination to most overrated man in the world. But I don’t really care…and you can’t make me.”

good one. but hitchens is wrong here. there are quite a few candidates for most overrated public figure in the US before we get to colin powell. the first of those would be our former president bill clinton. to listen to liberals talk about him, he appears somewhat similar to a god. if clinton was still our president, there would be no wars. there would be less poverty. more people would have jobs. the government would save us from evil tax cuts for the rich and the windfall into the US treasury from that extra money would find its way magically into the hands of the poor people. send me a postcard from fantasyland, foolish ones. i hear it’s nice there in the fall.

more on this in future posts.

Technorati : , , ,

Posted on Uncategorized

9/11

today is the day to remember the victims and families of the 9/11 terrorist attack. these terrorists don’t deserve tea and sympathy. they deserve death. we can’t bring back those we lost, but we can administer justice to those who are foolish enough to attack us. i really don’t have the words to express how i feel about this, so i’m simply going to link to some great posts by fellow bloggers on this subject.

that’s all i have for today. may God continue to watch over all of us and give us peace in this time of chaos.

Technorati :