The Long War: Rethinking American Options in the War on Terror

Re: # 56


heck no,

...... th painting has aesthetic value and sometimes when you are drunk you can talk to it ! .......... also, nice paintings appreciate in value and making money is a good thing because you can spend it for the greater good only if you have it in the first place ............. however, if it one of those eyesores with meaningless squiggles in arabic or pictures of the grand mosque, a shoe might be a better replacement .........

...... zeemax, i find all this hand wringing over iraq rather pointless because the deed is done and it was a good deed indeed ......... the iraqi people, that is the vast majority other than the jihadis and the baathist dead-enders, will be much better off in the long run and in fifty years or so we should see statues of george bush all over baghdad and basra ....... however, knowing the twisted muslim psyche, they will probably tear down the statues in another ten just as they removed queen victoria`s statue from the mall in pindi ............ i would like to get inside a real muslim`s head to see what goes on inside - it is baffling !............ many many years ago a friend of mine at uet under the influence of bhang and mandies declared, `` jo kaum zameen par baeth kar payshab karti hay, woh kabhi taraki nahin kar sakti !`` ........... maybe he was right ....

tahmed in #50 <<< in the 19th century , the west ended human slavery .....in the 18th and 20th centuries , the west ended the Rule of Kings and introduced democracy to the world. >>>

We expect a supporter of colonization, wholesale enslavement of people, to come up with this prepostrous reading of history. The West did not end human slavery, they merely changed its form when it was economically feasible for them. They were the ones that perfected the trade in human flesh to levels that no mullah could match, with barbarism in the treatment of slaves that no Mullah could match. Maybe you have forgotten about the Atlantic Slave Trade. The west were pioneers in linking slavery with race and when they started opposing it, they did not do away with indentured servitude which was just as viscious, or the condition of factory workers, ground to the bone, captured well by Marx and other writers.

Ending rule by kings by wholesale invasion and occupation and that translates as promoting democracy to tahmed. The West has supported tyrannous kings, like the Shah of Iran when it suited them and when it didn`t they have supported your mullah friends while using democracy as slogan. The hypocisy of these Western elite is unsurpassed in global history. The ideals coming out of the enlightenment, by virtue of the intellectuals were abandoned by the West itself very early on. If you have to praise the West, praise the intellectuals not the thugs and the elite that perverted all ideals of freedom, democracy and rationality for their perverse ends. The Mullah and the US elite (and older colonial elite) have followed the same path in the abandonment of those ideals, which were espoused in the Quran long before these A.H`s perverted them and the Western intellectuals ``invented`` them.

Hamidm writes <<< .......... all you have to do is compile masadi`s posts and you will realize the truth in the statement that these people are truly driven by their hatred of american values .......... >>>

American values are the not the same as ``corporate values`` or the values espoused by the American elite. American ``values`` are not monolithic and they certainly have not chosen either you or the sob Bush as their defender.

Author, this article rests on some highly faulty premises – including the premise that the USA expected a conventional war. Nothing can be further from the reality. Please note the following statement (made by the US President on September 20, 2001 – in his speech to the U.S. Congress.)

“We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the destruction and to the defeat of the global terror network. Now, this war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion. It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat. Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes visible on TV and covert operations secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. Our nation has been put on notice, we`re not immune from attack. We will take defensive measures against terrorism to protect Americans.”

[The political failure of the United States to articulate the reason that the war was against the political terrorism of a militant interpretation/version of Islam…]

The bitter truth is and has always been – is that the articulation of ideas that you refer to –is of limited value in the Middle East and those parts of world where terror has been endemic, including Pakistan – and most people who live there CHOOSE to believe what they choose to believe. Take Mushy for example – an old hand in the game of terror and as late as 2001 fully chock-sure of his terror-based strategy. Would anything other than that call from Mr. Powell work on such individuals and those who prop such individuals? “A war of public relations through the media” is essentially what you seem to be alluding to – but it would only bring on board the few educated folks who open up a bit of their minds. Most such people are already on board – but in fact they carry very little weight one way or other.

[Not only did the United States fail to comprehend the nature of Islam; as a religion; as a political idea; as a sense of a cultural identification and as code of ethics for the vast majority of the Muslims, but it also did not truly grasp the ideological reasons for the attacks of September 11, 2001.]

Forgive me for saying this, but over time immemorial – the Muslim “intelligentsia” has consistently been hypocritical – by covering up the unsavory aspects and more importantly, unsavory ACTS of those who claim to follow its religion (perhaps it is itself driven by fear) – and by placing the blame on the victims instead! The talk of “ideology” makes little sense when all the “ideas” seem to come out of the barrel of a gun – when they are not coming off the sharp blade of knife!

[…the French statesman, Charles DeGaulle, used refer to as “the strength of the weak”.]

Again, forgive my being blunt – those were cowardly attacks – those were unconscionable attacks – the attackers were evil and their supporters and promoters of the world are heinous creatures – whether you call them “good” Muslims or otherwise – and their wishy-washy apologists, including the French leaders who did so profusely, are utterly beneath contempt!

Let me quote again from GWB:

“On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country. Americans have known wars, but for the past 136 years they have been wars on foreign soil, except for one Sunday in 1941. Americans have known the casualties of war, but not at the center of a great city on a peaceful morning. Americans have known surprise attacks, but never before on thousands of civilians. All of this was brought upon us in a single day, and night fell on a different world, a world where freedom itself is under attack.”

[The United States can be successful in this war if and when it succeeds in convincing the majority of the people in the Muslim and Arab nations of the inherent superiority and universality of its ideas over those espoused by militant Islamic groups ….]

The plain fact is that this war is not about public relations and has never been so.

[This idea of proving the commitment of the United States towards the welfare of the people in Arab and Muslim nations….]

The United States is run by people who are elected by the United States people and they wish the Arab and Muslim nations’ populations well – but we don’t OWE them nothing – and we certainly will never take seriously the attempts to get pinned with blame for the missing welfare and rights of those individuals – when they themselves seem to be least willing to lift a finger to help themselves. Why don’t the vast, teeming masses of Muslims rise and kick out their unsavory characters and claim for themselves their dignity, and human treatment from those who rule their minds? Why, why?

[…. for this policy to be successful, it will require the long term political support of all major United States’ political parties, groups and NGOs and such a policy will have to be consistent, which would suggest that this emerging policy rubric should be guided by considerations of politics and not by the necessity of military ad hocism,….]

This is old game – if the military force is beating up terror then it is advised to withdraw to “win those hearts and minds” – and if it withdraws, well – that becomes a celebration of the “victory of the freedom fighters”!

What really needs to be done is to weaken the forces of terror sufficiently (they will never disappear 100 percent!) so that (1) the general population sees the futility of their approach and they lose the “admiration” that all bullies enjoy among gawking simple-minded kids, (2) the elections can take place without coercion in a free and fair manner, (3) a representative government gets formed and can function without being afraid of a coup or assassination, (4) it can build up the necessary security forces and eventually (5) the necessary infrastructure. We are currently in the third step.

[The asymmetrical military superiority of the United States actually helps to foster a sense of grievance in the Arab and Muslim societies, which groups like Al-Qaeda employ to continually justify their armed struggle against the United States.]

Excuse me – such groups do no such thing! They simply kill those who disagree with them!

[It is hoped that the United States will follow a policy option, which will in the words of President John F. Kennedy prevent the fruits of victory from turning into ashes.]

Isn’t that the guy who gave us the Bay of Pigs?!

Hamidm Mian:

In Hindi there is a saying - ``Tail (oil) nahin, tail ki dhar dekho``. Many people, including Massadi Mian, cannot understand what it means. Why waste time with them?

Anil

F R Khan

Being very busy, I have not gone through the article. But I have read some posts to get the jist.

If you are in any way showing compassion for going after the religious fanatics, please do not.

Religious fanatics could be from any faith. Unfortunately, presently Islam has the dubious distinction of producing the most.

The clear thinking of Bush & Australian PM is admirable. No compromise at all.

They are fighting for decent persons like you. There is no philosophy here. If a snake is not killed, it will kill you.

Zero tolerance is the answer. No arguements and logic. They have a preconceived set agenda for terrorrizing the week and timid.

best wishes

nhk

Re: #62, bjkumar:

Never before in my short time on Chowk have I read such a pathetically meaningless post as bjkumar`s (hamidm & tahmed are tied for a close second). On the other thread he was trying to use the laws of thermodynamics to try to prove that there is no global warming, which produced a lot of and hysterical laughter, and now here he quotes GWB`s old tales, ones that GWB himself is trying to run away from. These lies of this proposed new long protracted ``cold war``, with a new ``pearl harbor`` as starter had nothing to do with Iraq, it was linked with it by a farce; it must be an act of poetic justice that what was constructed for deception purposes has turned into a nightmare for US forces in Iraq because regardless of these official platitutes those that forumlated the Iraq war policy did not expect such massive resistance.

HE writes <<< The bitter truth is and has always been – is that the articulation of ideas that you ref