For reasons both creditable and less creditable, conservatives are reluctant to admit that we've won the war on terror. The time to declare victory has come. There have been no deaths due to hostile fire in Iraq since October 24; Al Qaeda is in disarray and all that's left to us, for the time being, is mopping up operations. It's true that the mopping up will go on for years and around the globe, but we have destroyed Al Qaeda as an effective fighting force. (By "we," I mean George Bush, but that's another blog post.)
This week's election makes clear that Americans have moved past the war. Even the anti-war left has given up complaining about the war. Iraq was supposed to be the big issue that would propel Obama to victory. As it happened, Iraq was barely mentioned and an entirely different big issue propelled Obama to victory.
The obvious rejoinder to this is that this isn't victory; this is a return to September 10. I have some sympathy for that position, but I really don't think that we're about to be attacked. Even if Al Qaeda, or whomever, had the ability to mount another 9/11 attack, I assume they recognize why that's a bad idea. On the other hand, I think we have returned to August 6, 1998. Attacks on our allies, our ships and our embassies will be treated as unfortunate crimes, not acts of war (and blamed on George Bush, but that's another blog post). Ultimately, that might convince whoever hates us at the time that now we can be attacked at home with impunity, but that, I trust, is a couple of decades down the road.
5 comments:
I disagree. It's the Islam. It hasn't given up. You might want to read some of the press releases from the Islamic Conference.
Or headlines from Orissa.
I don't have a link, but a month or so ago the NYT (IIRC) had an article making essentially the same claim.
I think it interesting that liberals do not acknowledge how much simpler things are because Saddam is no longer around.
Anyone prefer to have a nuclear arms race between Iran and an Iraq with Hussein still in power?
Harry:
I hate to resurrect a hoary term, but the correlation of forces is not exactly going Islam's way.
That depends where you sit. I bet most Israelis would say that Islam, having lost on the battlefield, has not accepted the verdict of battle but is demanding do-overs and a return to the status quo ante bellum, and that the Bush administration is supporting that.
Otherwise, what the hell is Rice doing in the Mideast this week?
I bet most Israelis would say that Islam, having lost on the battlefield, has not accepted the verdict of battle but is demanding do-overs ...
Muslims may have taken on the cause of their co-religionists, but I think that the primary source of this conflict is competing claims territorial claims.
After all, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt are all largely Islamic, but are content to peacefully co-exist with Israel.
Post a Comment