(Page 2 of 3)
We have two problems. First, we haven't killed enough "lunatics," particularly those at the top such as Al Sadr. Secondly, we haven't taken out Syria and Iran.
We can fight now, while we have them surrounded and have the upper hand. Or, we can wait until they attack us on our soil again before we go back and re-fight the same war on the same battlefield.
These "lunatics" are serious about killing us. They say so
everyday, even in this country. But, they are lunatics ruled by
emotion. At the end of the day cold calculating reason defeats
emotion every time.
-- RW
Mr. Tucker leaves out a most salient point in his argument: Victory through an attack on Tehran.
A massive air strike against the nuclear and military facilities in Iran will stop Iranian meddling in Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza while emboldening those in Iran to topple the Mullah government. Persians aren't Arabs. They have a culture different from the Bedouin Sword, Pillage and Camel-breeding. Their culture and lifestyle has evolved far beyond tribalism. They are educated, pragmatic and Westernized.
Recalling Vietnam, as Mr. Tucker does, reminds me that preceding
the "serious" talking in Paris a serious bombing campaign over the
skies of Hanoi and Haiphong took place. Unfortunately, our
president and his advisors have Pelosi-sized cojones.
-- Wolf Terner
Fair Lawn, New Jersey
THE CENTER CAN'T HOLD
Re: Jeffrey Lord's Lincoln and
Reagan: Moving the Center;
Send this article to Fred Barnes. Remind him that Charles de
Gaulle's conservative party was able to prevent a Communist
takeover of France in 1947 by wiping out the middle-of-the-road
party in a three-party election. At some point, the people
occupying the "middle" must make a moral choice. And today, as
then, the choice is between a lukewarm-capitalist, patriotic party
and an increasingly extreme-leftist party with inclinations towards
totalitarianism.
-- Michael G. Novak
Ellicott City, Maryland
Here's a bit of a curve ball for you, Mr. Lord. I know this
probably doesn't appear to measure up to the great issues of
Lincoln's and Reagan's time, though it is in a certain context, but
should we ever have a President with the moral courage to stand for
ending the income tax and replacing it with the Fair Tax, he would
be remembered almost as fondly by some as Lincoln, the Great
Emancipator, and Reagan, the Great Communicator. George W. Bush,
the Great ?. I do wish someone was listening, Mr. Lord.
-- Mike Showalter
Austin, Texas
DIVIDE AND CONQUER
Re: Patrick Hynes's Keeping the
Faith:
Patrick Hynes does a good job of analyzing the 2006 vote, but I
believe he, and many others, ignore an important trend in voting:
many of us are intentionally voting for gridlock. I never voted for
a Democrat in my life, until November 2006. I did so then because I
don't agree with the Republican vision of "big government
conservatism." I'm now convinced that I can't trust either party to
do the right thing for the nation. My only alternative is to keep
them at each other's throats so they pass as little legislation as
possible. From now on, I want one part to hold the Presidency and
the other to hold Congress.
-- Roger D. McKinney
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
KOREAN CONUNDRUM
Re: Doug Bandow's Repairing
the Ravages of War:
When dealing with a regime like North Korea (and Cuba and Venezuela for that matter) one is faced with a government that really isn't. By that I mean a single and, in the case of Korea, mind is the government. A man controls the military and that is monolithic government.
In a democratic form of governance, almost nothing changes even when emergencies happen. Just look at Social Security and Medicare in the U.S. But in these neo Stalinist countries what is there and permitted today is gone and a death penalty offense tomorrow. Thus any "progress'' is likely to be ephemeral.
Only people not closely connected to reality will expect and vow meaningful progress. That's why such rants are heard primarily from politicians like Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, and Hillary Clinton. God help us when we listen to them.