Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "So we should have attacked Saudi Arabia instead?"
No, Saudi Arabia did not attack us either. On the other hand, Afghanistan refused to hand over the criminals who did attack us, and we rightfully attacked them. Saudi Arabia, by distinct comparison, pisses us off only by sometimes executing Al Qaeda people too fast for us to have a chance to obtain intelligence from them. In the fight against Al Qaeda, Saudi Arabia is our buddy.
Re: "Do you think it was legal to invade Vichy N. Africa as a means to "get at" the Nazi Afrika Korps?"
I don't think that the legality matters in wartime. Uh, this is peacetime. No declarations of war are in force. The death rate to US soldiers is minuscule, compared to the rates that would obtain in wartime.
Re: "The turmoil in Iraq will not last forever."
Agreed. It will end some years after we leave with our tails between our legs.
Re: "And 9/11 wasn't?"
9/11 was not an attack by another nation. It was a band of criminals. The criminals involved, unlike Hitler or whoever else you want to compare it to, were not supported by any nation except Afghanistan, and even that was sufficiently iffy that we did not immediately blast the hell out of Afghanistan, but instead gave them a chance at turning over the perpetrators.
Re: "The heart of militant Islam lies within Saudi Arabia."
So? What's your point? The "heart of Judaism" lies within Israel, so does that mean that the Arabs are justified in attacking Israel when Israeli extremists murder Arab civilians? The "heart of Mormonism" lies in Utah, so does that mean that any crimes by Mormons should be responded to with a military attack against Utah? The "heart of Darkness" lies in Africa, so does that mean that when an American of African descent mugs someone we should attack Uganda? The "heart of the Bible Belt" lies in Oklahoma (my opinion), so does that mean that when a preacher has sex with an underage girl that we should sue Oklahoma?
Your "the heart of" argument just doesn't make sense. The fact is that you're afraid of the modern equivalent of the "yellow peril", and you're grasping around at any excuse you can find to start a war. Getting the moron in chief to go into Iraq was a good job, but sorry dude, you're out of a job now. (See the Zogby poll later this post.)
Re: "Do we not need to contain that militantism, and if necessary, directly attack it (or its leadership)?"
No. Most of Europe agrees with me on this. Uh, which was the latest non Arabic country conquered by Arab militants? Would that be Ghana in 1076? Jesus weeps! You compare the Arabs with the Germans, who, even before WW2, had repeatedly marched over Europe.
The basic problem with your logic is that you are going after flies with a sledgehammer. Not only do you do a lot of damage to things other than the flies, the fact is that you never kill very many of them that way, and all the crap you break just breeds even more of them.
The fly in chief, Osama bin Laden, not only is still loose, he's dropped more bombs on us and killed more of us since 9/11 than before. His guys blew up 3 or 4 bombs in Iraq just in the past month. But even if (when) we get him, the flies will just keep coming. If it were possible to eliminate fly problems with sledgehammers, the Israelis would have done it sometime over the past 50 years.
Save the sledgehammer for the problem that happens when we and a real country, like Russia or China, get into a slugging match. What you're doing is abusing the US military. It's not there to go around making peace in countries that are incapable of being peaceful. They're there so that when push comes to shove, we don't have to learn how to speak German. Do you really believe in the motto "make love not war"? The US Army sure as hell ain't making war in Iraq.
I can't decide if what you want is another Crusade, or if you are just insanely fearful of a collection of the least well run, weakest countries in the world.
I'm less worried about our political situation now. Here, take a look at the latest Zogby poll.
Bush Numbers Hit New Low
Zogby, September 6, 2003
President George W. Bush’s job performance ratings have reached the lowest point since his pre-Inauguration days, continuing a steady decline since a post-9/11 peak, according to a new Zogby America poll of 1,013 likely voters conducted September 3-5.
...
A majority (52%) said it’s time for someone new in the White House, while just two in five (40%) said the president deserves to be re-elected. Last month, 45% said re-election was in order, and 48% said it was time for someone new.
...
Just two in five (40%) said they would choose Bush if the election were held today, while 47% said they would elect a Democratic candidate. In August polling, respondents were split (43% each) over President Bush or any Democratic challenger.
...
zogby.com
Like I said before, the American public, as a whole, will not support a policy of guerilla war in Iraq. Especially not when the President clearly lied his ass off to get us into it, and then failed to plan it well.
This means that the other side is going to take over the control of the war. Already the neocons are complaining bitterly about how badly Bush has screwed up the "peace". But all that bitching won't get you the victory in Iraq that you feel is necessary for the survival of the United States.
Just like with Vietnam, your assumption that Iraq is a "necessary" war for us to win is incorrect, a combination of wishful thinking, cowardice, stupidity and fear. This country will win despite the damage that you and Bush have done to it. Not only that, but the Republican party will survive.
And your comments that "we could have won in Vietnam, if only we'd had the political will", are going to be repeated in Iraq. A few years from now you'll be saying "we could have won in Iraq, if only we'd had the political will". Hey, if a real war was going on, with a real (governmental) enemy, the political will would appear. The current crowd of Americans, while not as tough as their granddaddies, are not complete wimps.
But there is no real war, just like there was no real war in Vietnam or is in Palestine. Instead, all there is is an unwanted occupation army getting picked apart by unhappy civilians.
-- Carl |
