One of my favorite interchanges… probably apocryphal… is the one attributed to Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas at Gertrude’s death bed at the moment Stein was about to depart this vail of tears:
Alice: Gertrude, Gertrude… what’s the answer?
Gertrude: What’s the question?
She dies… Well, I know it doesn’t refer exactly to the current world situation, but I always find it amusing and it is close enough to provide some sort of lede to Amir Taheri’s piece in this morning’s NYPost — Wrong 9/11 Questions:
. . . the commission got on the wrong track from the start.
The report assumes that there is a single, readily identifiable enemy. This is the routine way of political thinking, that took shape during the Cold War.
Anyone with knowledge of the Arab countries and the Muslim world in general would know that this is not the case.
The problem with the current War on Terror is that the democracies, and those Muslims who aspire for democracy, are faced with a multi-faceted threat that assumes numerous forms, from the burning of books to the cutting of throats.
This is a war that has to be fought on numerous battlefields and against many enemies that, though united in their efforts to destroy the democratic societies, and first among them the United States, use a bewilderingly wide range of weapons and tactics.
The Bush administration has opened the military theatre of this war by liberating Afghanistan and Iraq and seeking to destroy the terrorists in there.
But this is a war that must also be fought on diplomatic, cultural, religious and political battlefields. In all those theatres the United States would need, and can find, allies, including among a majority of the Muslims who have been the first victims of Islamic fascism and its ideology of terror. The commission has no suggestions about how to engage in those battles, who to choose as allies and who to identify as neutrals.
The commission makes an even bigger mistake. By speaking of “political grievances” it tries to explain the Islamists within the parameters of classical logic. Having accused the administration of lack of imagination, the commission, is itself unable to imagine a conflict that is not political in the normal sense of the term.
The typical politician in a democracy, starting with ancient Athens, is a deal-maker. He practices the art of compromise, not confrontation. He is always ready to understand the other side, to accept part of the blame, and to propose give-and-take. A more cynical version of this type of politics leads to triangulation, a la Bill Clinton. That kind of politics, however, does not work with the kind of enemy the United States now faces.
This enemy does not want to give and take, to compromise, or to triangulate. He wants you to obey him in every detail or he will kill you.
Once you assume some guilt on your own part, the whole thing could go like this: Well, you know, our wealth and power is bound to cause jealousy and humiliation among the poor and powerless; we also have a military presence in all but three of the Arab states, and don’t we support Israel whose destruction is the dream of every Arab worth his salt?
The aims of the “enemy” in question, however, are not solely political.
He will not be happy even if, in the spirit of liberal generosity, you gave him half of your power and wealth. Nor would he settle for a total American withdrawal from the world. Nor would he be satisfied if you helped wipe Israel off the map.
This enemy’s conflict with the United States, and alongside it other democracies, not to mention those Muslims who also aspire after democracy, is not political but existential.
He wants to rule you because he thinks he is the holder of a “the highest form of truth.”
This enemy wants you, the whole world in fact, to convert to Islam because he believes the advent of Islam abrogated all other religions. Anyone who is not a Muslim is not a full human being.
“Our struggle is not about land or water,” the late Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini said in 1980. “It is about bringing, by force if necessary, the whole of mankind onto the right path.”
Last night I watched the co-chairs of the Commission – Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton – on “Meet the Press.” Nice, earnest men. But I wonder if they have ever talked with or even read Taheri whose experience of the situation and understanding of it dwarfs theirs.
(hat tip: Catherine Johnson)
Roger,
This is one of the problems with a liberal background that doesn’t recognize the force and importance of religion. I suspect many think of religion as a superstition that will pass as culture advances. So, the gut level understanding that someone could kill to promote religious views, just isn’t there. It is even more remote from the NY Times point of view than flyover country.
As the lovable former leader of Hezbollah, Hussein Massawi, once said, “We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you.”
Great ! Finally these square pegs bouncing around my brain are being lined up with square holes. This whole commission stinks of political expediency. I notice the government does 2 things very well: Cover-up and delay.
“… not political but existential.”
Yea, that’s a whole new ball game, entirely different categories of thought, analysis – and action – are needed. I still think of a speech by Lincoln, middle of the Civil War, 1862, message to congress:
“The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise — with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disentrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.
“Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation.”
Michael_B
Good find. I wish we had as elegant a speaker as Lincoln to articulate this in the present. But then, I seem to recall that Lincoln’s rhetoric was not that respected at the time.
ìHaving accused the administration of lack of imagination, the commission, is itself unable to imagine a conflict that is not political in the normal sense of the term.î
Chuck hits the bullís-eye.
I had conversations with liberals about the importance of religious beliefs for the jihadis. I pointed out that few short centuries ago there were Christians who would rather die on a stake then renounce their particular version of Christianity. All in vain, my interlocutors could never acknowledge that faith is powerful motivator in human affairs. They insisted that there must be some other ìroot causeî (fill in the blank here).
It boils down to this: if they cannot imagine it, then it cannot be true.
Katherine: “They insisted that there must be some other ‘root cause’.”
That’s an article of faith for them.
They don’t know what “faith” means.
What you’re attempting to do is tantamount to religious conversion. That can never be accomplished through rational discourse alone.
Isn’t it possible to think on two tracks? Of course, economic conditions contribute to the situation in the ME. But so do spiritual conditions. Rather than negate each other, they probably feed each other. Both must be addressed.
Both men ask why is it that the terrorists specially hate America? Neither provides an answer.
The answer can be found in hundreds of books, articles and sermons in the Arab world. The United States is an “evil animal” because it can bite back when bitten.
Other, just as likely, if not more likely, answers:
1
Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it’s Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Now it’s Turkish delight on a moonlit night
Every gal in Constantinople
Lives in Istanbul, not Constantinople
So if you’ve a date in Constantinople
She’ll be waiting in Istanbul
Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can’t say
People just liked it better that way
So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can’t go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works?
That’s nobody’s business but the Turks
2
Yes, no, maybe, I don’t know
Can you repeat the question?
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now, and you’re not so big
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now, and you’re not so big
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now, and you’re not so big
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now
You’re not the boss of me now, and you’re not so big
Life is unfair
3
They were a boy and girl. Yellow, meagre, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out, and touched them with its freshest tints, a stale and shrivelled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked, and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dread.
Scrooge started back, appalled. Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be a party to a lie of such enormous magnitude.
“Spirit! are they yours?” Scrooge could say no more.
“They are Man’s,” said the Spirit, looking down upon them. “And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased. Deny it!” cried the Spirit, stretching out his hand towards the city. “Slander those who tell it ye! Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse. And bide the end!”
“Have they no refuge or resource?” cried Scrooge.
“Are there no prisons?” said the Spirit, turning on him for the last time with his own words. “Are there no workhouses?”
The bell struck twelve.
Credit to (1) J. Kennedy & N. Simon, (2) They Might Be Giants & (3) Charles Dickens
GoofA,
How about this:
“Horatio, there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy”
“He wants to rule you because he thinks he is the holder of a “the highest form of truth.”
He’s a liberal!
hi all–
For some reason what hit me hardest in Taheri’s piece was the last five words in this line:
The commission has no suggestions about how to engage in those battles, who to choose as allies and who to identify as neutrals.
The idea that we don’t even know who is neutral just blew me away.
I don’t know why.
And now, the real dilemma which we have faced since the beginning. How to name the enemy so the public recognizes it. The War on Terror nonsense does not sink in. As has been said time and time again, “terror” is a tactic, not an enemy. We all know that, but for political expediency, we cannot and will not spell out the enemy as Taheri does.
We need some courageous, highly recognized people to get on TV over and over and speak as Taheri does. Instead of the glossed over niceties and downright avoidance of believing there is an enemy, we need to keep on this one.
Whenever I have a conversation with friends and acquaintances, I never let anyone get away with WOT. And give them the web address for MEMRI too.
MEMRI should be a box on the bottom of page one of every newspaper. It won’t be and it is our loss.
The much maligned Fox News is the only place I see reference to some of the items we all see in the world of blogs.
We have no more ability to ìmake a dealî with the Islamo-fascists to keep them from killing us than the Jews in the ë30s had of making a deal with the Nazis to keep them from the Holocaust. You cannot appease someone whose goal is your death.
It’s always a good idea to study your enemy. They have certainly been studying us for a long time.
“Thousands of men and women in the world, whatever their belief may be, if loving the future, are becoming aware that the Western civilisation has declared its bankruptcy, and that if we give in to its drive, it leads us to a global suicide.
The United States is limiting its wheat production, and the European cold storages cannot accomodate any more the surplus of meat and butter, while in the rest of the world, in 1985, 80 million human beings have died from starvation and malnutrition.
The indebtedness of the so-called “third world” is aggravating year after year, and the burden does not stop increasing : the North is becoming more and more rich and the South more and more poor.”
http://abbc.net/islamj/english/islam.htm
Some of this is perhaps heartfelt, while some of is almost certainly an attempt to enlist the Western left on their side, or at least make them neutral. I’d say they have been rather successful in this.
test post
Chuck’s analysis is the winner today.
We suffer from the vaunted crisis of imagination allright, but not the one that is typically pointed to–that no one coud have imagined planes flying into buildings etc….
the crisis is one that our elites cannot imagine–that religion can be such a large determinant in peoples lives that they would gladly kill for it.
what Chuck didnt note is this–power dynamics. The elite media, academics and upper-level bureaucrats who run society–or at least set its tone–have acute senses of power dynamics that are extremely hierarchical and more than a little racist.
Namely, that the United States is all-powerful, and as such, the only methodology preventing us from becoming…whatever…is international “cooperation.” Palistinians are helpless, Islam is misunderstood, the way to prevent “terrorist incidents” is dialogue…..
yo get the drift.
Roger,
Yes, this is an existential war.
Israel was formed as a response to the annihilation of European Jewry, and no, the Jews in Israel (or Israelis if you must), have not stopped fighting this existential war that since 1948 has been waged against them by the Arabs (foremost) and their Judeophobic (or anti-Semitic) bretheren since 1948.
What is so alarming, but not altogether surprising, is that now the West, or the Anglospheric, or Liberal Democratic world now faces this same threat with the majority of its inhabitants unwilling, unable, or simply too afraid to admit it.
Radical Islam wants to kill you. Yes you, every person reading these words at this time. They want to kill your family, your coworkers, your enemies and friends alike. And they want to kill you now, right now, and they are trying everyday, all over the world to accomplish this fact.
It is far easier to scream “Bush Lied!” or “Haliburton!”, or even “No Blood for Oil”, than it is to internalize this horrifying but absolutely true fact. For what must be done with this information is equally terrible and horrifying. But this latter parallel truth does not mitigate the first.
Chuck, fyi, first read that in Carl Sandberg’s bio of Lincoln. Today, retrieved it from American Digest. And not sure, but believe you’re right, don’t recall Sandberg mentioning it but others have written that Lincoln spoke with something of a strained or high-pitched quality in his voice that was not likely to make an immediately positive impression. If so he’d likely audition terribly in an age of soundbites.
metoothen
Even when we say that it is a small radical wing of them, it is still not palatable to most folks. Read Lee Harrises Civilization and Its Enemies. The thought of an enemy, any enemy, is hard for a rich, guilt ridden society to accept.
I just heard some nice old lady at the DNC say how sad it was that after Sept 11 we had the world with us and now they hate us.She added that we needed friends in the world. That woman will never accept what you wrote. She thinks she is too nice a person for anyone to hate her. She means well and that is enough to bring peace to the world. Kumbayah.
We in the west, by education and religion, always seek the core; the true center of a problem. We learn early on that you can’t solve a problem til you state the problem correctly. Well, folks there ain’t no center. Islam itself has no center with thousands of little tribes sperad all over the world practicing their own brand of it. What we have are hundreds of men seeking power, trying for a classic takeover in that part of the world without the classic takeover tools of an already organized army that will side with them and bureaucrats in power whom they have bribed. So they do the next available thing, terrorize the west. If you will look at what is happening as a hundred or more guys seeking power but not having a core state over which they can overthrow in order to gain power, I think we can sort of get it. We are engaged in a struggle with people who believe with every ounce of their being that to die in battle guarantees paradise. Most of them want to destroy us so the gates will open. But their leadership has no sponsoring country, only sponsoring individuals within countries, including the USA.
It’s a bitch. BTW there is a super interesting movie on cable right now called “The Road to Kandahar” without Bob Hope. This has been peddled by the American feminist dopes as some kind of mantra. See it anyway and you will see how “street” or desert Muslims actually live. There is a scene where a doctor examines a woman who is placed behind a thik curtain with one small hole in it the size of a silver dollar. The doctor (who can’t talk to women, I guess) issues orders to a boy who sits in the entrance who then relays the orders to the woman. Really, it’s slightly above student film level but holy shit, as they say.
Roger:
Your post this morning gets to the heart of the matter.You can negotiate or understand someone who has at least some shared ideas or values.This does not mean you will agree on all things but you have to share some common basic principles. A large section of the Muslim world has certain beliefs that at their core are uncompatible with the rest of the world.The case of the murdered journalist in Iran is a perfect example of incompatible differences.
Iran is not the first government in the world to cover up a crime and have a justice system that has produced a unjust result. We only have to look at our own system to find examples.And the Iranian system of “blood money” where the family of the accused pays the family of the victim is not in principle that different then our own civil court system.But what is truly vile is that a non-muslim victim is paid half of what a muslim victim is paid.The country of Iran has codefied a definition of humanity where a Muslim is fully human and a non- Muslim is sub human. This is a system not based on judgement of acts but judgement on the core of what a person is. Unless you are a Muslim you are not fully human.
This system is not some secret conspiracy. They proclaim it openly and with pride.This is what allows them to embrace the activities of terror.Human nail bombs, the specific targeting of non-combatant civilians,The slaughterhouse technique of beheading ,these are all justified by the belief that non-muslim are infidels. Much as many Americans have no qualms about slaughtering animals for consumption because we judge them as less then human, the Muslim is allowed to slowly carve the head off of a non-muslim with the same type of thinking.
Not all Muslims hold these beliefs.But many of the current governments in the middle east do.If you go to MEMRI you will statement after statement by prominent government officials stating these exact beliefs.They openly state that any middle East governmemnts that do not follow the sharia law system is invalid. They openly proclaim that it is their duty to God to overthrow these governmemnts and that any tactic is acceptable.they also believe that it is there duty to put the world, eventually, under sharia law.
When a government openly and proudly states what they believe, states how they are going to achieve it you have to take it seriously.There is nothing to understand or relate to.There is nothing to negotiate. There is no ‘middle ground” This isn’t a trade bill.
The event that is recquired before America will resolve to fight an all out no holds barred war of survival against Islam is too terrible to contemplate, but almost certainly will happen: the nuclear destruction of New York or Washington or Los Angeles or all three.
It almost certainly will happen, because America is not willing to do the things recquired to shutdown the Islamofascists NOW! At some point they will get their hands on these weapons. Does anyone doubt they will use them? Time is on their side.
TedM,
Some years ago whilst listrening to a phone in programme I heard a woman Ask,”Are sharks like they are because we are not kind enough to them?” I knew then that we were in trouble,although of what kind I did not know.
We have raised the Dodo generation,people so docile and stupid that they don’t realise that something will kill and eat them simply because it can.
The great socialist multiculturalist society is predicated on a docile population,it is an evolutionary dead end.
I am afraid that I disagree rather sharply with Mr. Taheri’s conclusions. The true purpose of the comission has been served. We now know for sure that Mistakes Were Made. The CYA effort was successful in that no politicians were actually named, the damage done to the intelligence community from ’76 to ’99 by our elected representatives was not even mentioned and a few bureaucrats and agencies got their hands slapped. Oh, and new lipstick was bought and applied to a few tired old sows of ideas to give them a fresh appearance. I really don’t think any better could ever have been expected.
I suppose my happiest thoughts concerning the commission concern the futures that Clarke, Wilson and Berger no longer have. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer group of preening asses. Hope they hang on to the memories of those politician’s promises of undying support for a long time to come.
As to proper identification of our enemy, those who care enough to find out, know. The Axis of Evil has become the Axle of Evil and a few spare tires have bounced out of the trunk along the way. Come late Novemeber I anticipate hearing some rather jarring ultimatums out of Washington. We’ll just have to be patient ’til then.
Yes Peter. If you want to get really upset, just tune into CSPAN for the Democrat view of the world.
A man I like to read and listen to has said that Western Civilization is made up of countries which are then subdivided into religions. Islam is a religion which subdivides itself into countries. And that is why we see this knee jerk reaction of support for any islamic group throughout the moslem world. To them it is almost a heresy to criticize another moslem to infidels. It is why we always here the “yes, BUT” rationale from western moslems.
The man I listen to also says that one of the problems we have is that there is no Pope in Islam. There is no center of interpretation of the Quran. Each area has its own leading imams who interpret religion. And to question that interpretation is heresy. Look at the professor in Iran who was under a death sentence for questioning the authority of Iranian mullahs to issue fatwas.
Most of the commentors here read other blogs and websites like MEMRI and Dhimmi Watch and Front Page and LGF for a constant barrage of the reality of the islamic world. And, if you talk to your friends and neighbors, they have no inkling of what is going on. It is so much easier to think of them as just people like “us”.
They aren’t.
“We have raised the Dodo generation,people so docile and stupid that they don’t realise that something will kill and eat them simply because it can.
The great socialist multiculturalist society is predicated on a docile population,it is an evolutionary dead end.”
Bingo, PeterUK.
The question now is what will replace it. The leading candidates seem to be: 1) a revived Western liberalism willing to defend itself a la Winston
Churchill, 2) the Islamicization of the West a la Hamtramck, MI, 3) worldwide communism/capitalism courtesy of the Chinese government.
Ladies and Gentlemen, place your bets.
WichitaBoy:
Or a West split between Options 1 and 2.
Chuck -
I think your observation is vital. The tendency of adherents of what has become accepted as “liberal thought” to define reality by what they wish it was is a crippling defect for a philosophy demanding to not just participate in, but rule, public debate.
JK Ribera said -
“Isn’t it possible to think on two tracks? Of course, economic conditions contribute to the situation in the ME. But so do spiritual conditions. Rather than negate each other, they probably feed each other. Both must be addressed.”
There aren’t two tracks. Individual liberty and economic prosperity as reflected in living standards are inextricably linked. Imagine a ten foot diameter pipe gushing one hundred dollar bills into a resevoir in Saudi Arabia. Then inspect the fence, guards, and valve system that keeps the citizenry…oops, sorry, subjects, out and the government in charge of every dime heading to the streets.
35% unemployment in Saudi is just the official figure. What is rarely mentioned is that even the college educated ‘professional’ class of Saudi subjects is comprised of figureheads backed up by foreigners in almost every case.
The Saudis have more dollars per head to spend on keeping their subjects happy than any western social engineer could ever dream of…and Saudi Arabia is the cradle of Wahabbism, the font of luddite mystic barbarism. What grounds for surprise or confusion can exist for this situation? The subjects of Saudi as individuals are locked out of any hope of personal expression or achievement that crosses the Royal’s interests; why not embrace the only avenue for becoming something greater than one’s self?
We in America have done ourselves a lot of damage by allowing the study of history, citizenship, and hard science to be deemphasized. We are so stinking rich that we now support a sizable political minority whose platform is in fact an attack on the bedrock strengths that have made our prosperity possible.
We’ve had over two hundred years of experience through social, economic, and technological upheavals to see what works and what doesn’t. I’d love to see cause and effect returned to our public debate…instead of the political correctness and moral relativism that hijacked the podium beginning in the sixties.
I believe that a corallary to denying the value of faith is an obvious inability to believe in anything. Is that too extreme?
Our enemy has many odious character traits but at least they have a clear idea of where they come from and what they intend to do. They have siezed upon the writings of a medieval religious figure as their guide. They seek to rewind the calendar back eight hundred years in order to attain a state of grace that no living man can attest as ever having truly existed. Yet they believe fervently enough that they kill without hesitation or thought of self-preservation. What should we believe in? I believe in what makes it possible for me to participate in choosing my government. I believe in a body of law based on the acceptance of the rights of individuals to pursue their dreams without arbitrary or dictatorial restrictions beyond respecting the same rights as applying to all men.
Maybe we will find it in ourselves to reembrace conscious acknowledgement of our belief in individual freedoms and the responsiblities incumbent to those freedoms in time to minimize the bloodshed that will be unavoidable in resolving this conflict. We take so much for granted; we face the same quandry as fish do…we don’t notice the water until the hook is well and truly set.
Well said TMJ
And as the resident book reviewer i want to recommend again Sam Huntingtons, Who Are We. He expresses a lot of what you just said. He traces the development of the American Creed. And you are right, as if he, that our transnationalists are teaching our children anything but what made us great.
TmJUtah,
Wow.
Me too then.
Man you can write.
Rick,
“Clarke, Wilson and Berger”,I like to think of them as Wilson Kepple and Betty. An image to conjure with.
The earlier comments in this thread referring to Lincoln make a great point. Lincoln invented a new language, or a new use of language, for the unprecedented times of the 1860′s. The 9/11 Commissioners, unfortunately, were wedded to the language of an era already in our rear view mirror, and that is why Roger’s “they are asking the wrong question” point hits the mark.
Anybody interested in Lincoln’s use of language in this way might want to take a look at Gary Will’s “Lincoln At Gettysberg.”
As banal as it sounds, what this country needs is another Lincoln.
“Maybe we will find it in ourselves to reembrace conscious acknowledgement of our belief in individual freedoms and the responsiblities incumbent to those freedoms in time to minimize the bloodshed that will be unavoidable in resolving this conflict.”
I’m pretty sure that there is a sizable plurality that retains the concepts of duty and responsibility. As to the minimization of bloodshed, I think anyone with a minimal understanding of warfare would have nothing but admiration for our conduct thus far. The President, Sec. Def. and Gen. Franks did a fantastic job.
BTW – You can order Gen. Franks’ memoire here. Supposed to be a few revelations concerning WMD that will be interesting to read.
Catherine,
The Commissioners can’t name the neutrals; because they can’t be identified.
As their religion encourages lying to non-Muslims, how can we ever expect to identify the non-neutrals?
1.4 billion Muslims are willing to stand by and let this atrocity continue on a global scale, and if we strike back after each new attack, we will enrage ever more of them?
Wrecking the world economy, causing massive starvation is okay with them, because most Muslims face starvation in the course of everyday life, and their true reward is in the afterlife.
How can free people tolerate a religion of pre-determination, wherein the will of Allah is interpreted by thousands of uneducated imams?
I believe this situation is far, far more serious than the honorable 9/11 Commission has lead the Americans to believe.
Roger;
Since Lincoln was brought up I want to state an interesting idea I heard today.When Lincoln started the Civil War he stated that his only goal was to preserve the Union and not to free the slaves. In the middle of the war he freed the slaves. Using the logic of todays democrats Lincoln obiviously lied to the american people and the civil war was unjust.
Kevin P.,
A close reading of Lincoln’s Second Inaugural gives a rather strong indication of the depth of his feelings concerning slavery. One might contrast his First Inaugural and Second Inaugural and then give some thought to what a declaration that Islam is a “RoP” might actually mean.
Rick, -ìI suppose my happiest thoughts concerning the commission concern the futures that Clarke, Wilson and Berger no longer have.î
Yes, but what about all the others? From what seeps from Washington, the State Department is allegedly in Kerry pre-inauguration mood. I donít think that CIA is any different. These bureaucracies are in a very critical need for total overhaul, but I donít see it happening even if we sustain another 5 hits on a scale of 9/11.
TedM: you are so right about Lee Harris and his Civilization and its Enemies. It is a book that everybody should read; it is a pity that it remains relatively unknown.
Re: the dodo generation (I love this expression!): let us not forget that their attitude is nothing new. People with limited imagination, or too cowardly to recognize and face the danger, were with us throughout the history. Usually, they paid the price in blood. However, I have no intention of allowing them to determine my future. Therefore I MUST speak up.
Some time ago I related here in the Rogerís Place my very unpleasant experience of speaking my mind among my liberal/leftist friends. (I made fairly innocuous remark to the effect that I did not think that Bush was stupid, and I liked his tax-cutting scheme-this was before 9/11. The reaction from the ìfriendsî was not pretty). Since then I was evaluating the virtue of speaking up my mind and I came to the conclusion that although I know I will not change a mind of any leftist since he/she elevates their political beliefs to the status of religion, I should speak up to give courage to those who may have doubts about the leftist dogma, but are afraid to admit it. I discovered that there are more individuals who may agree with my POV than I originally suspected. But they all feel so isolated they ìgo wit the flowî to fit in. As a matter of fact I think I myself would go mad if it was not for Roger and all the regular posters here. Before Internet helped to bring people together I felt very lonely indeed.
The stakes are too high to remain silent. I donít give a damn if I lose friends over this, anybody who would be willing to cut me over my political beliefs is not worth to be my friend anyway.
Katherine,
Just tell your friends that you think so much of them that you would hate to see them go in a nuclear fireball.I find this usually concentrates minds somewhat.
Thank you Peter, this is great advice, but my friends have their heads so deeply in the sand that they probably would not even notice if the sand turned to glass on them.
I will try though, for fun of watching their reactions
.
I am so mind-bendingly depressed. Read this article I found over at LGF: Fahrenheit 9/11 and its impact on military morale
Lindenen–
Go visit this site for a refreshing tonic. The definitive anti-Moore film is apparently in final edits and will be arriving soon at a theatre near you!
Katherine
What you are describing is exactly the psychological phenomenon known as groupthink. I know exactly what you’re talking about. I often feel that I’m the only sane person in Boulder County, which often makes me feel that I am completely insane. This blog gives some measure of hope.
Katherine,
Why not take a page from our memebots here? Rather than a “I’m for Bush because the fate of the world hangs in the balance” approach, a “Gosh, I’d sure like to vote for ‘Not a Clue’ and ‘John the Lesser’ but their votes on (glance at laundry list of imbecilities) raise some questions in my mind. “Did you know that neither of them have any experience in running anything but a moderately sized office?” might be a good followup. Or, “I’ve never considered marrying well or bankrupting obstetricians to be qualifications for the Presidency.”, if you want to play a little rougher.
There is no sense in letting the memebots have all the fun.
Geez, that jerk can’t any even get the ball to the batters box. For crying out loud, W can throw a strike in body armor.
Politics is a blood sport but that doesn’t mean you can’t have fun, (vide shotgun thread).
Rick, I love you advice.
Actually, before the CA governor recall I played the ìGray Davis was an evil bastard for dumping dioxides in the Bay in exchange for campaign contributionî and ì The only growth industry under Gray Davis is the prisonsî card. Either statement was usually greeted with dead silence; I suspect that some leftie brains were hitting the ìoverloadî.
But it gets tedious after all. Another group of my friends are very libertarian but they are unrealistic, too. They complain about Bushís spending, which is fair enough, but at the same time do not acknowledge that the JohnJohn would be significantly worse. It does feel very lonely out here.
WichitaBoy, we are siblings in ideological distress.
As long as I know that there are people who think along similar lines that I do, I will retain my sanity.
Thank you all
Katherine-
The advice given to you by Rick Ballard is good advice, but being the fine human being he is, he does not take the bloodsport to actual bloodsport level.
Here is an example of how it is done.
A good friend of mine, Navy vet, Ph.D. in Physics, came over to a dinner party of ours about 8 months ago. After dinner the menfolk congregated in the kitchen and started talking politics, and when the subject turned to G.W. Bush he went off like a hand grenade. Now, he’s about one of five people in the world allow to rag on G.W. without interruption…and he went on for 20 minutes. I just let it go.
A month ago I attended his daughter’s high school graduation party and he and I got to talking again. He asked me how I could support G.W. and I, in turn, asked him the following and then walked away without waiting for an answer:
“Your daughter is going off the college to study journalism. She’s smart as a whip, ambitious, and writes like an angel. What is going to be the first thing that goes through your mind, 4 years from now, when she comes to you and says ‘Dad, I’m going to New York to work at the Times.’ If the first thing that goes through your mind is ‘No, not New York, I don’t want you to die’, then you better fuckin’ A, and I do mean fuckin’ A, rethink who you are going to vote for and why.”
He was white as a sheet for an hour afterwards.
That’s politics as bloodsport.
And my friend, I’m pretty damn sure he’s gonna vote Bush.
DtP,
This is truly a great story. You are my hero.
But your friend apparently had his reasoning powers left in a pretty intact state.
In all those theatres the United States would need, and can find, allies, including among a majority of the Muslims who have been the first victims of Islamic fascism and its ideology of terror.
This is a good point by Taheri. Unfortunately, we’re losing those Muslims as allies, because even though many of them look favorably on American culture and political ideals, Bush’s policies are causing them to see the U.S. as the enemy of Arabs/Muslims.
That’s why, to answer DtP’s question, I wouldn’t choose to risk living in NY or Washington, DC as long as Dubya is president — because his policies are all but begging for the catastrophe that Dennis alludes to. But at least you can be sure that Dubya will go out and give a stern-jawed speech from the ruins the following day. That’s what he’s good at, after all.
Re, Michael Moore impact on some Iraq based troops
A recent fact based antidote in Australia’s Herald Sun by Andrew Bolt.
Also, Dave Kopel’s Fifty-nine Deceits in Farenheit 911.
Overlap between the two, the latter being the most thorough but the Bolt article well done.
Swopa,,
Good points. Now please tell us what corrections you recommend to the ill advised policies of Dubya. many of us have been seeking an answer to that.
TedM,
President Bush ,should stand down so that Kerry can surrender to the French and Bush can be dragged in chains down the Champs d ELysee.The US submits to the rule of the UN, little Kofi places the brand of the UN on Kerry’s scarred but noble buttocks and Michael Moore makes the film of Osama bin Laden’s life and everyone lived happily ever after except the evil Bush who was made to shake hands with Saddam Hussein and enter a madrassa for re-education.
Other than that not much.
Needledick
The helpful site you cite also explains that “Libyans Believe American Citizens are The First Victims of American Empire.”
Do you think that the average man-in-the-souk, when approached by a stranger questioning his political views, feels free to speak his mind? Or is it rather more likely that if a newspaper cites Mohammed Abu as expressing support for America and Isreal, that he will find himself being beaten within an inch of his life? If he is lucky.
God, I’m bored, when playing with trolls seems like a good way to pass the time.
flenser,
Play nice. Any site that features a quote from Miss Molly Ivins must be a thoughtful, well informed purveyor of real answers to real problems.
Swopa hasnt answered my question. Maybe he would like to comment on the Taheri column which is the subject of this thread. In a word Swopa, do you agree with Taheri that we have an enemy?
TedM
I’ll take you up on the topic.
Here is a critique of us by the enemy.
“The profound cause of this Western policy since what is called the “Renaissance”, i.e. since the simultaneous birth in Europe in the 16th century of capitalism and colonialism, is the abandonment of belief in the absolute values.
Once a community stops recognising absolute values as its guide in action, nothing remains but the confrontations of desires for material growth.
It is the war of all against all, and the West is given over to it. Its real religion is the blind belief in a hidden god : growth, i.e. the desire to produce more and more – at an accelerated speed, anything which is the most profitable of industries. This hidden god is a cruel god : it exacts human sacrifices.
What characterises this false god is that it exalts the sufficiency of man against the Transcendence of God, and individualism as against community.
“Sufficiency” has been proclaimed since the “Renaissance” in “Faust” by Marlowe: “Man, by means of your powerful brains, become a god, the master and the lord of all elements”.
Individualism, since the so-called Renaissance, is the return to the sophist maxim of ancient Greece:”Man is the center and the measure of everything”.
This failure of civilisation has engendered a culture of despair.”
Sorry if that’s a long quote. From the link I posted earlier.
Given that we have an enemy, what is his nature? Can we defeat him on the battlegound of ideas? Lets assume that we can defeat him on a real battleground.
flenser,
i have to go to sleep now. I leave it to you to combat the troll if he returns. I think he wont. Seems to be the drive by variety.
I’ve enjoyed reading the comments.
It has always puzzled me that we have had what seems like an insuperable difficulty, trying properly to name the enemy.
Recently reading for the second time Stephen Den Beste’s essay linking the fossils of the Burgess Shale (!) and our current war, I was again convinced that his analysis is persuasive.
I think the Islamofascists are in the process of losing. We have to keep our nerve.
Jamie Irons
And perhaps the enemy has picked this time in history to take up the battle, because they haven’t stood a chance of winning by convnetional means. However, access to WMDs would change the calcualtions drastically.
Roger’s title to the post involves questions and answers. So here goes.
Answer: Somalia
Question: What did I think while changing channels and seeing Clinton speak at the Democratic convention?
Great stories, Dennis and Katherine.
I had an incident similar to Dennis’ recently (but a bit uglier) and have felt a bit funny about it till now.
These are not times to be diplomatic and restrained. Too much is at stake.
Swopa, I read your link and this –Not all of those 85% to 90% will become terrorists … but the one-hundredth of 1% (or less) of the population who do will be able to nurture their resentment and violent fantasies in a fertile, passively supportive environment. Rather than marginalized, they’ll feel encouraged by being part of such a universally popular tide of emotion. They’ll find it easier to proclaim their passions and meet like-minded individuals.–
And I just don’t see the big deal.
You see, after 9/11, the point was made by CW that approx 1% of all muslims were hard-core jihadis. Over 10% were willing to actually fund said hard-cores and it went on to further breakdown.
And it was expected that since we fought back, they wouldn’t be too happy. And since we refused to acknowledge Arafish’s temper tantrums… AJ and al-arabiya certainly fan the flames.
That being said, there is good news out of Iraq and Afghanistan and they will pay attention in spite of the Arab spin.
The funny thing is, no one worries about angering the American street.
Oh, and as to not living in NYC or DC, why such limits?
They’ve already ackowledged the other targets, Vegas, LA, Chicago….
And I’m w/in a 90 mile radius of nuke plants. Sucks if the wind’s blowing the wrong way.
But thems the breaks, I’m not going to stop because I might die. I’m going to die anyway. All this has done is throw a few more variables into it. I lived w/nuke annialation the 1st 20 years of my life. Came to terms w/it in my teens.
I’m also too stubborn to give up to get along.
TMJUtah
I think you read Saudi Arabia incorrectly. The strongest oppressive force is not the royal family, but the Mutawa – the religious police.
Saudi Arabia is a result of a grand bargain between the Wahabis and the royal family. In return for leaving the family alone (not subject to the Mutawa), the Wahabis gained the right to enforce Sharia through the religious police.
Also, I don’t know where all the money goes, but there are plenty of Saudis who are unhappy with their economic plight – a high unemployment rate and the government supplied welfare at not very high levels.
Somewhere above, it suggests that there are 1.4 billion Muslims in the world today.
Presuming that only 1% of them are Jihadists, that still leaves 14 million jihadists.
That’s more than the number of Jews in the world.
Or as Margo Kingston refers to them “the fundamentalist Zionist lobby [who] controls politics and the media in the US and Australia” Link here via Tim Blair/Spleenville.
If the percentage was 1/10 of 1 % that still leaves 1.4 million jihadists, greater than the number of our combat troops.
After listening to the Democrats tonight, especially James Earl Carter, I am left to think, once again, that there is a parallel universe in which the existential threat that is radicalized Islam can be solved by simple making friends with the French, being mature and wise at the same time, and singing War is not the answer (What’s Goin’ On) or Amazing Grace (which by the way, reportedly got Andrew Sullivan choked up).
I despair.
Dearest Ones,
Bad link.
Sorry, can’t fix it.
John Moore -
I disagree with you, but I think we may be talking past each other.
Right this minute the Saudi royals are not the sole power in the Kingdom anymore – but they are soley responsible for the predicament they find themselves in. They are surely riding the tiger and the ride is fast getting impossible to sustain.
They allied with the British when the smart money was with the Empire. The British provided them with the technological edge (best deal the Brits EVER made, empire wise; provided rifles, medicines, and schooling for their surrogates and then got the hell out) to subdue the other tribes in the region. When the economic impact of oil began to really hit, the Royals employed Wahabbism as population control and managed the swamp for their own ends. They exported the movement, and by doing so got rid of their most extreme religious elements.
I know, I know, what was left in place has evolved into their Religious Gestapo…and the infrastructure of the Wahabbist elite is for all intents and purposes the civic government (and judiciary) of the kingdom…but it’s all still just one big failure of tribalism leavened with socialism.
The people trapped in that part of the world have only to spend a holiday ANYWHERE outside the confines of the middle east to sustain a culture shock we could experience only by waking up in the Federal Correctional Institution at Marion, Illinois.
A man serving life in Marion has more potential for self-improvement than the average subject of Saudi Arabia. How’s that for a template for despair?
The print National Geographic had a pretty good article on Saudi last year. They had some sobering figures for unemployment, foreign workers, and such. We must surely dismantle Wahabist influence to win this war. I think that the prudent thing to do is wait for Iraq’s energy production to rise to the extent that the collapse of the Kingdom will have as minimal economic effect as possible; it goes without saying that Iran is probably being considered with the same thoughts in mind.
MeToo–
A jihadist with no weapons and no training and no money is worth less than a Monty Python parrot. I don’t know about 1%, or even 1% of 1% of 1.4 billion.
The only figure I have heard consistently is there were 20,000 Al Qaedans before the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, less 2,000 killed, which gives a total of 18,000 now. Even this number, however, may be wildly inflated, since it is based upon the number of jihadis passing through camps in Afghanistan since 1996–many of whom were affiliated with other terrorist groups or became Taliban foot-soldiers.
The 9/11 Report describes Al Qaeda as a “network of networks,” most of which do not know and will never know anything about each other. Do we count Abu Sawaf? Chechen rebels? Sudanese guerillas? Saddam’s Fedayeen? The numbers fast get very large and very fuzzy.
The truth is no one really knows how many jihadis there are. Of course, it only took 19 to kill 3,000 people. So I guess ultimately all numbers are relative.
Swopa,
Good points. Now please tell us what corrections you recommend to the ill advised policies of Dubya. many of us have been seeking an answer to that.
Since our biggest problem in the Muslim world (well, one of the two biggest) is the perception that we’re in Iraq to serve our own interests rather than Iraq’s, we need to pursue policies that correct that perception — which means giving up control, financially, politically, and militarily.
I’m sure that’s a blasphemous though for many people here, but we don’t have much choice — in fact, we’re already moving that way on a piecemeal basis (handing over nominal political sovereignty, pulling back troops, and revamping our financial aid. I’m just saying, do it faster and more decisively, so we can get PR credit for it instead of being dragged kicking and screaming.
When we can hold up our hands and say, “Look, we’re not trying to rip you guys off, OK?! We’re just trying to help you get to a democracy” … then we can start defusing some of the hatred that’s built up against us. No, it won’t all vanish at once, but as I posted up above, we’re moving in the wrong direction right now, and the first priority has to be to stop that momentum.
Swopa:
And while you’re naively busy making friends and defusing the hatred of people who swore to either eradicate us or enslave us long before we ever set one boot on Iraqi soil, what will you do in the meantime to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons which they could sell or give to al Queda or some other Islamic terrorists group? Or which they could launch at Israel–a promise the mullahs have already made, once they have The Bomb.
The UN has estimated they could well have those nuclear weapons by January, 2006. That’s seventeen months from now.
Feeling lucky, Swopa?
Since our biggest problem in the Muslim world (well, one of the two biggest) is the perception that we’re in Iraq to serve our own interests rather than Iraq’s,
Simpleminded and disingenuous. First of all, that is not even close to our major problems in the region. Second of all, one link to one story does not establish either your credentials or the facts relating to what perceptions the Iraqis or the Arabs may have about us and our mission. This is a variation on the old “Arab Street is angry” bullshit we get out of ‘Middle East Experts’ to justify their own prejudices regarding U.S. foreign policy.
we need to pursue policies that correct that perception — which means giving up control, financially, politically, and militarily.
In other words, abandon the War on Terror and abandon the Middle East…in other words renounce the very idea that the threat we face is indeed an existential threat. Or, to put it even more clearly, in the words of Monty Python’s King Arthur, “Run away! Run away!”
That’s neither analysis nor policy, Swopa, that’s a brainfart.
Dennis,
The swopa troll was set up for your spike.
He really believes his own bull. He has no enemy.In fact, we are the enemy in his naive analysis of the world. And the danger is that he has lots of company.
Shades of the 1930s. Don’t get Hitler mad.
Penwil,
Our current ineffectualness in the face of the Iranian and North Korean nuclear development programs is perhaps the strongest reason why we need to get Bush out of the White House ASAP.
In case you haven’t noticed, Dubya thought it was more important to deal with Iraq, which didn’t have a nuclear program, than two unfriendly nations that did.
I don’t feel lucky enough to go through four more years of that kind of monstrous strategic ineptitude.
DtP and TedM,
Like I said, I know my suggestions above are blasphemy in the “tough-minded” fantasy world of this blog. But in the real world, those things are already happening — Dubya is already running around promising to be the “peace president” and saying that “the next four years will be peaceful years.” So I guess he’s thrown in the towel on your War on Terrorô, too.
Yes, we do have an enemy. But the way we’re fighting that enemy now is handing them victory. Striking a macho pose and denying that is like putting your hand on a hot stove, then leaving it there to show the stove you mean business and won’t back down. It doesn’t impress the stove, and it doesn’t fool anybody else.
But feel free to keep your tough, determined heads in the sand. I’ll be happy to check back with you over the next few months as what I’m saying becomes more obvious.
Swopa:
Find a map of the ME. Find Iran on the map. Then find Afganistan and Iraq. Notice anything?
Then read up on the growing democracy movement in Iran and think about how a free and relatively democratic Iraq could help to foment a revolution against the Iranian mullahs.
Also, Bush in the meanwhile has, in fact, been following the very policy suggested by Kerry and you Leftists, which is to use the UN and the EU to put pressure on Iran to abandon their nuclear program. That has been working so well that France has gone on helping Iran to develop said program under the table, and Iran recently told that august body, the UN, to shove their request to desist where the sun don’t shine. And the UN’s response to that was . . . well, nothing. Not even a official condemnation.
I hate to burst your rosy bubble, Swopa, but the next four years is not going to be pleasant no matter who is president. Kerry would just piss away the months between his inauguration and Iran’s inauguration of their first nuclear weapon by feeling all warm and fuzzy that we’re back in the UN’s good graces and Fwrance is our fwriend.
And finally, Swopa, you can refrain from the bullshit that you Lefties would have ever favored a war against Iran. If we’d gone into Iran first (a stupid if not impossible idea anyway without a military presence already in Afganistan and Iraq), you’d have whined and howled about it just as much.
swopa
“Since our biggest problem in the Muslim world (well, one of the two biggest) is the perception that we’re in Iraq to serve our own interests rather than Iraq’s, we need to pursue policies that correct that perception — which means giving up control, financially, politically, and militarily.”
We are in Iraq in pursuit of our own interests. There is no misperception here. What the Arabs need to realise is that our interests and theirs coincide.
What, specifically, do you think should be done about Iran and North Korea?
flenser,
As another American once said, “The devil is in the details”
Don’t expect details.
Swopa sez:
“Dubya is already running around promising to be the “peace president” and saying that “the next four years will be peaceful years.” So I guess he’s thrown in the towel on your War on TerrorÔøΩ, too.”
The only one here who is mired in fantasy is you. Bush is no more likely to abandon the war than Condi Rice is to stuff secret documents into her foundation garments.
When you get around to it one of these days take a look at a map of the ME and note that Iran is bordered by Pakistan, Afghanistan, and, um, Iraq. Sometimes smart people know to first take the king’s rook in order to take the king (it’s called military strategy, something that the Donks will never grasp) …rest assured that Bush will be able to deal with Iran in a second term without worrying about reelection. In other words doing the right thing strategically regardless of how unpopular it may become due to the influence of the quisling MSM and the lefty lunatics screaming from the sidelines.
As for the Norks you’re a fool if you don’t think the administration is applying pressure to the Chinese to bring Kim into line. This is the only approach that makes sense, since he already has nukes…THANKS TO THE VERY SAME IDIOTS YOU WANT TO PUT BACK IN POWER. But just keep telling yourself that Bush is cluelessly ignoring the rest of the geo-political equation and is only focusing on Iraq.
I suppose you think we should have invaded N. Korea and Iran? For some reason I think you would have wet yourself had we done either of those things as well. In fact, I’d bet no matter what Bush chose to do it would elicit the same Pavlovian response because you are a textbook example of a party hack.
TedM
It seems to me that swopa is pursuing his own interests here.
What’s needed is for him to give up his attempts to impose his views on others (i.e. us)
Only by doing this can he demonstrate his goodwill. Only then can he defuse some of the hatred
that’s built up against him.
I can’t understand why he cannot see this.
Because he is more intellectual than us, flenser. He understands what the world is about.
Say “Kyoto” to him and he will tremble with angst.
“We fought the wrong war” (subtext: it’s Bush’s fault — even though we can no longer credibly accuse him of “lying” now that the Senate et al. has weighed in) is the new Bush bashing meme.
It’s the new “Bush lied”.
Swopa exemplifies Democrat criticism of the war. It represents a hair-splitting exercise that will soon require a particle accelerator and a team of nuclear scientists to conduct.
The war was fought under false pretenses.
(Evidence of pretenses provided by Senate Intelligence Committee Report.)
Okay, but there was no planning.
(Evidence of extensive planning provided by the DoD.)
Okay, but it was incompetently fought.
You calling the U.S. military incompetent, Bud?
Okay, George Bush is incompetent.
I thought he was a puppet who relied on his advisers for everything.
He is a puppet–in an evil-genius-moron sort of way. Besides, it was the wrong war. We should have invaded Iran first.
You didn’t like it when we invaded Afghanistan. Are you telling me you would have supported attacking a country with an army many times larger and more powerful than the Taliban?
Er, er…..
Ah, now I see….
Swopa is picking up the mantle of content-free Leftist blogging that Tano set aside so he could spend this week reminiscing about the glory of the Carter years.
Charming.
Swopa, with his drooping platitudes, generalizations and assorted other vacuities is like a magician who exclaims “voila!” with much self-assured bravado – yet nothing appears, no rabbit is pulled from his hat, nada, nil, zil, nihilo. He’s ever impressed with himself, yet others are ever and always bewildered as to why that is. A self-enamored, drooping lothario who seduces no one but himself. Mirror, mirror …
Why is NorK our responsibility? now that’s a brilliant idea, send Carter back in. Or even better, Kerry will probably send Bubba.
Don’t the surrounding countries have a stake in it? Why can’t we be “multilateral?” After all, since we’re the big kid on the block, we need to build up their self-esteem. And since a lot of them are so much older and wiser than we are…..
Besides, now that NorK has run whining to Corrupt Kofi to MAKE US STOP and pull out!!! what’s the problem?
—
Now this:
–Our current ineffectualness in the face of the Iranian–???
Our current ineffectualness? All we did was let our “allies” handle it, isn’t that what we’re supposed to do, be “multilateral?” Aren’t we only one of many nations and we must learn our place? No better or no worse than any other country? So why must “we handle” Iran? Seems to me the IAEA (?) is doing a bang-up job.
Oh, wait, we’re trying to avoid a bang.
I have DISH. Channel 9410 has a program roundup of news programs from the ME, usually after midnight, if anyone else is interested.
And guess what – the mullahs got it long before you, like over a year ago. Before the war last year they had a map showing where the US is, will be and where Iran was in relation to our armed forces. Care to take a guess? And I didn’t need a translation of that news blurb to tell me that.
And everything you want us to to in Iraq to gain “street cred” we’re doing. And we’re doing it in Afghanistan and the people are hopeful.
You can’t have it both ways. Kerry wants it both ways and will do almost anything to get the “allies” on board. However, W already let them handle Iran.
“I don’t feel lucky enough to go through four more years of that kind of monstrous strategic ineptitude.”
The argument isn’t this, it is whether or not Swopa has the qualification to evaluate this,
Could be wrong Swopa could be a strategic geniuis, a junior Von Clauswitz.Brilliant thinking, out of a choice of enemies hit the one with the N-U-C-L-E-A-R W-E-A-P-O-N-S.