PDA

View Full Version : Aiding Osama



hist2004
06-03-2004, 02:50 PM
Aiding Osama
By: Bill O'Reilly
Thursday, Jun 03, 2004

The anti-Bush zealots are right about one thing--the current mess in Iraq is hindering the war against Al Qaeda but not in the way the far-left envisions. The Iraq situation is so polarizing that it has fogged the terror playing field. In their disgust over how Iraq is being handled, many Americans simply have lost sight of the enemy, but believe me... he has not lost sight of us.
As we discussed last week in this space, Osama bin Laden and his fanatical followers kill at random and will use any method, including nuclear, that becomes available to them. That is the danger we Americans face. Unlike the nuclear threats of the past, there is no doomsday deterrent. Many of these terrorists actually want to die.

There has been far more outcry in the United States over the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib than the video beheading of Nicholas Berg or the civilian executions in Saudi Arabia last week, both reportedly the work of Al Qaeda.

The constant media drumbeat of Abu Ghraib, more than 50 front page stories in The New York Times alone, has taken the high moral ground away from the USA in the war on terror and dimmed the spotlight on the fanatical killers. In some parts of the world and even in the minds of a few misguided Americans, the USA has become villain number one, not Al Qaeda.

While the media is partially to blame for using Abu Ghraib as a hammer to bludgeon the Bush administration, thereby inserting a political agenda in the middle of an important news story, the President is to blame as well.

Clearly, something is very wrong when inexperienced, poorly trained military reservists are allowed to run wild and abuse prisoners. Clearly, something is wrong when enormous mistakes are made in the occupation of a country whose defeat was a foregone conclusion. I mean, everybody knew the USA would defeat Saddam, so why was the aftermath of the war so screwed up? Is this another intelligence failure? Is this a strategic failure on the part of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his team? We don't know, because Mr. Bush rarely holds anyone publicly accountable for doing his or her job poorly.

So now we have lost momentum in the terror war. A furious Al Gore accuses Bush of creating "gulags." A dangerously naïve ACLU demands we treat captured terrorists like Martha Stewart, providing them with defense attorneys and the fifth amendment right to remain silent. Meantime, Al Qaeda plans more mayhem and murder, no doubt enjoying the paralyzing divisions bedeviling its despised target.

I hate to say this, but it looks like it will take another 9/11 attack in order for many of us to understand that we are now in the most dangerous age in America's history. Hitler and Tojo did not have nuclear weapons. Pakistan does. Al Qaeda owns parts of Pakistan. Do the math.

There's a bestselling novel out right now called "Memorial Day" written by Vince Flynn. He knows that the U.S. war on terror is unbelievably screwed up, and tells you how and why in a gripping way. Al Gore and every member of the ACLU should read this book and so should you.

President Bush should also read the book and wise up. The President is right in waging an aggressive war against worldwide terror, but he must get better people to do it. Enough with the chaos and foolish mistakes like Abu Ghraib. Clean house, Mr. President. There are smart, tough and experienced people who realize what's at stake here. Find them and protect us.

Regards,
Hist2004

hist2004
06-03-2004, 04:16 PM
The Iraq situation is so polarizing that it has fogged the terror playing field. In their disgust over how Iraq is being handled, many Americans simply have lost sight of the enemy, but believe me... he has not lost sight of us.

I hate to say this, but it looks like it will take another 9/11 attack in order for many of us to understand that we are now in the most dangerous age in America's history.

Clean house, Mr. President. There are smart, tough and experienced people who realize what's at stake here. Find them and protect us.


This sums it up, no matter what side of the political fence your on. :|

Regards,
Hist2004

pinkeye
06-03-2004, 04:29 PM
The Iraq situation is so polarizing that it has fogged the terror playing field. In their disgust over how Iraq is being handled, many Americans simply have lost sight of the enemy, but believe me... he has not lost sight of us.

I hate to say this, but it looks like it will take another 9/11 attack in order for many of us to understand that we are now in the most dangerous age in America's history.

Clean house, Mr. President. There are smart, tough and experienced people who realize what's at stake here. Find them and protect us.


This sums it up, no matter what side of the political fence your on. :|

Regards,
Hist2004

most dangerous age in american history? civil war? cold war, especially during the 1950s and early to mid-1960s?
however, the author's statement about cleaning house is dead-on, although such calls were made a long time ago. this problem was painfully obvious back in 2001...

cut
06-03-2004, 04:29 PM
great post hist2004

Old300
06-03-2004, 04:43 PM
O'Reilly makes only one substantive argument in that article supporting his assertion that the President should "clean house": that "something is wrong" when reservists were put in charge of a prison.

But is there really anything wrong with that? We've depended on reservists in all of our recent wars. These particular reservists were prison guards back home. It makes as much sense for such people to run prisons in places like Iraq as, say, full-time combat soldiers. Right?

But even if there is indeed something wrong with having reservists man prisons in Iraq, is the President really responsible for their behavior? I mean, is the President responsible when - I don't know - an FBI agent shoots a suspect? Or when a DEA agent sells drugs? Etc.

There is something irresponsible about taking responsibility for something for which you weren't responsible. Think about that. It relieves those who actually were responsible for what happened from facing the consequences of their actions. The president is responsible for those things that he either orders or allows to happen. He's not responsible for the actions of a few white trash sadists who violated both the letter of the law and the spirit of our endeavor in Iraq.

As a more general matter, though, I am tired of people claiming that things are a complete disaster in Iraq. Things are not going as well as I and other supporters of the war had hoped. There's no doubt about that. On the other hand, let's remember what even mainstream critics of the war predicted: a chemical attack on our troops (!!!!); a refugee crisis; massive civilian casualties; a civil war; and regional instability. None of those things has happened.

In the next few days, the UN will approve the Iraqi interim government and, a few weeks later, Iraqis will control their own country for the first time. Ever. We've removed an evil and dangerous dictator with 600 combat deaths and we may very well have created an oasis of democracy in a benighted region of the earth.

Steady on

Old300
06-03-2004, 05:15 PM
One more thing. Victory in Iraq was NOT a "foregone conclusion". An hour or two ago, I tried to remind forum members in another thread that there was a lot of talk in the media - from very well respected journalists, in fact - about how Afghanistan was a "quagmire"... and then the Taliban fell.

However, the "quagmire" talk regarding Afghanistan was nothing compared to what the media had to say during the Iraq war. BBC, CNN and broadcast news programs were full to overflowing with people warning of "Stalingrad" and years of all-out war in the streets of Iraqi cities. The New York Times editorial board almost fainted every day in late March, so convinced were they that we were "bogged down" in a war that "couldn't be won". We've seen pitched battles in several places in Iraq at various periods over the past year; but the pundits March before last were predicting that that would be what faced everywhere all the time.

Let's not forget: even though we've lost good people - may they rest in peace - we've done an extremely difficult thing very quickly and at a comparatively low cost. I apologize ahead of time if I offend anyone by saying that (I can assure you that I am very grateful for the sacrifices made by those we've lost), but it's true and it needs to be said.