(Page 7 of 13)
: /p>I have not read John Mueller's book, but based on the title and the quote provided by Mr. Klein, I believe that can safely say that Mr. Mueller is a complete fool.
To equate the threat faced by the radical Islamists with the Cold War is either naive or willfully ignorant. Neither choice is flattering. Despite the many obvious dangers posed by Soviet communism, we could still rely on the Soviets to offer a rational response based to a crisis based on self-preservation. The Soviets wanted to conquer the world for Communism, but they didn't want to die while trying to do so; this cannot be said of our current foes, who have proven time and time again that they are more than happy to kill themselves (and their victims) in the name of their religion.
The fact that Iran possesses a military that is miniscule compared to that of Nazi Germany, as discussed by Fareed Zakaria in Newsweek is also absurd, and utterly irrelevant. A nuclear-armed Iran is far more dangerous than Hitler ever was because Hitler never got the bomb. To imagine that a Iran would ever be a reliable member of "the nuclear club" is a dangerous pipe-dream that must not be allowed to happen.
Yes, these Islamists are pernicious, deadly foes, but they can be defeated. Unfortunately, their complete, utter defeat (and it must be "complete") may not be attainable unless this nation recaptures the character and determination that allowed us to crush the world's two mightiest armies between 1941-1945. If three-thousand dead Americans on 9/11 was not enough to stir our passions and sober our view of this dangerous enemy, what will? Must we suffer a nuclear disaster before people like Mr. Mueller and Mr. Zakaria realize the true nature of our current enemy?
p>I fear the answer. br> -- Gavin Valle br> Peapack, New Jersey /p>Philip Klein notes that, "al-Qaeda may have limited resources, but it still managed to kill 3,000 civilians on American soil -- something neither Nazi Germany, nor the Soviet Union, managed to do." He might have also mentioned that Imperial Japan was likewise unsuccessful.
Of course, when this nation was faced with those threats, it responded with vigorous and effective countermeasures, including, of course, close monitoring of the borders and resident aliens. Indeed, Japanese-Americans were interned. It's worth noting that all of that was accomplished without the need of decimating the Bill of Rights across the board, or in the case of the Soviet Union, mounting an invasion and taking Moscow.
By contrast, at least some of the 9-11 hijackers were known to be here and engaged in suspicious activities, but the Keystone Kops intelligence bureaucracy was dismissive, at best, about that intelligence. Our delicate sensibilities can no longer seem to tolerate hurting the self esteem or bogus "rights" of our millions of illegal alien residents to the point that they can collect government benefits and drivers' licenses without serious fear of consequences.
The merger of political correctness and national security is a schizophrenic thing. We spend enormous amounts of blood and money thrashing around in Iraq, while as much as inviting terrorists to set up shop right here. Mr. Klein seems scornful of our "old defensive strategy of fighting terrorism." He wrongly associates that strategy with "increasing frequency, boldness, and sophistication" of terrorist attacks.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.