The American Spectator

Bob| 12.2.08 @ 9:29AM

RSM, so what do you propose? Don't we use law enforcement techniques to find the perpetrators? Since they are all Pakistani, should we treat this like a war and invade Pakistan? Your statement, again, is a simplification of reality. In truth, there are elements of both law enforcement and war in the solution. The key to any of these solutions is not to use ideology to decide the course of action, but pragmatism. Hopefully, that's what Obama's team is doing -- using all of the tools available -- law enforcement, war, diplomacy, etc., to determine the best solution. This is one of the things I dislike about extremists on both ends of the spectrum -- you tend to use ideology rather than pragmatism to judge solutions.

WendyG| 12.2.08 @ 9:52AM

Obama sounds more like Bush every day. Talking about India having a right to defend itself against terrorism, etc. Reality set in pretty fast I guess.

Mary| 12.2.08 @ 9:59AM

When you're president the first thing you have to be thinking about (if you're made of anything substantive) is history.

And if you're the first A-A president, history then carries an even greater weight.

I don't think there will ever be a liberal Pope. Once a Pope ascends to the See of St. Peter, history falls upon his shoulders with a weight no president can imagine.

Robert Stacy McCain| 12.2.08 @ 10:05AM

Bob, I don't have to "propose" anything. I'm not a policy wonk. I'm just a journalist, pointing out facts, and the fact is that suicidal terrorist attacks can't be deterred by the prospect of a post-attack investigation.

BD57| 12.2.08 @ 10:14AM

RSM:

Bush has used the "bring them to justice" formulation himself since 9/11.

I agree it's more likely that Obama has criminal prosecutions in mind, but his use of the phrase isn't (in and of itself) evidence of it.

WendyG| 12.2.08 @ 10:19AM

>>>When you're president the first thing you have to be thinking about (if you're made of anything substantive) is history.

And if you're the first A-A president, history then carries an even greater weight.

****
Especially if you hope to be reelected in four years.

RSM - I am pretty sure Bush talked about bringing the perpetrators of 9-11 to justice, but he added that we would bring justice to them as well, i. e. taking an aggressive stance. As this happened in India, our hands are somewhat tied. But if there is an attack on US soil, Americans will rightfully demand action - and Obama will undertake it, you betcha. It's quite amusing, that as Obama makes noises about sending more troops to Afghanistan, the Bush Derangement Syndrome crowd is mute. Bush war - bad / Obama war - good!

What I do expect is for Israel to in some manner respond to the events in India by taking action in the way it often does. We'll hear of some Islamofascist perp involved in this event suddenly meeting a proper ending - via an exploding phone, or car, etc. And the world will wonder who done it...

Bob| 12.2.08 @ 3:43PM

RSM, you said this:

"I'm not a policy wonk. I'm just a journalist, pointing out facts, and the fact is that suicidal terrorist attacks can't be deterred by the prospect of a post-attack investigation."

That is not a "fact" -- it is a "policy statement" that any law enforcement approach should not be conducted. The fact is that good post-attack investigations help to develop effective responses. Those responses could include military action, law enforcement actions, diplomacy, etc. The point is that doing it one way or another is situational. Your statement promotes an ideological approach.

Doing your homework is important. The fact that Patraeus is very effective is partially due to the fact he has a PhD from Princeton and knows how to do proper analysis (i.e., "homework"). This fundamental notion is what I'm trying to say here about anti-intellectualism among conservatives. Personally, I'd like to see Patraeus promoted to CJCS and then eventually SecDef.

ruth| 12.2.08 @ 5:50PM

Bob not only challenges and insults his fellow bloggers, he also aims his verbal arrows at the AmSpec writers. Hubris.

Bob| 12.3.08 @ 8:40AM

Ruth, I am non-discriminatory in my hubris. There have been a few people (not you) to provide an intelligent reply and hopefully, I've responded appropriately. But I when I see a lack of intelligence and forethought in posts, no matter where it comes from, I will respond. You can continue to drink the KoolAid if it makes you feel better, but I don't like big government ideological Democrats in charge and I don't like unknowledgeable ideological Republicans in charge. You can be both intelligent and conservative as much as you personally are trying to discredit that theory.