Newsweek carries a summary of Michael Gerson’s views on the War on Terror, as expressed in his book Heroic Conservatism. Gerson, formerly Bush’s speechwriter, indirectly answers the Euro-Democrats’ laid-back approach to terrorism: do we stand with the flawed democrats of Iraq, or abandon them to overthrow and death? . . . If America abandons Muslim[s] who are risking their lives to fight Islamic radicalism and terror—in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere—the War on Terror cannot be won.
[it’s] false [to assert] the Iraq War has actually been creating the terrorist threat we seek to fight. . .America is not responsible for the existence of Islamist ideology. Yet . . . American success . . . does have an effect on the recruitment of radicals. All "pan movements"—political ideologies that claim historical inevitability—expand or contract based on morale. . . If America were really to retreat in humiliation from Iraq, Islamist radicals would trumpet their victory from North Africa to the islands of the Philippines.
the most dangerous and self-destructive lesson [to] be drawn from Iraq is a hyper-caution indistinguishable from paralysis.
Amen, Mike.
1 comment:
Hi Dad,
Okay, I see that you align yourself with Gerson. Let's see what arguments he has teed up:
If America abandons Muslim[s] who are risking their lives to fight Islamic radicalism and terror — in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — the War on Terror cannot be won.
(1) No one (well, hardly anyone) is suggesting leaving Afghanistan, the invasion of which was a measured response to the attacks of 9-11; (2) I would like to see Gerson's plan for actually saving his "flawed democrats of Iraq," with expected costs, etc., before signing on for an everlasting occupation of their country... which they do not want us occupying; (3) Elsewhere? Where else are we supposed to invade? (4) The "war on terror" can be won every day by vigilant police work, rights-respecting intelligence gathering, maintenance of our open society, and the peaceful spreading of freedom, capitalism, and democracy - your blog title, in short.
[it’s] false [to assert] the Iraq War has actually been creating the terrorist threat we seek to fight...
Wrong. It has and it does. The evidence is overwhelming - from surveys of actual muslims, including jihadists. Gerson's counterargument is evidence-free. Why in the world would you excerpt it?
the most dangerous and self-destructive lesson [to] be drawn from Iraq is a hyper-caution indistinguishable from paralysis.
Straw man - since no one (well, hardly anyone) is advocating paralysis. What about diplomacy? What about solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? What about freeing ourselves from dependence on foreign oil? What about NOT invading countries, even Islamic dictatorships, without the troops and allies and advance planning that would allow us to establish a functioning society in the aftermath?
Aloha,
Derek
Post a Comment