Constructive gadfly

Truman was widely criticized for labeling the Korean War a “police action,” which he meant by that was not to equate the criminal incursion over the southern border with a major war, particularly when fresh in the mind was World War II. … Now there is the inference that a more “sensitive” president would turn to policing terrorism throughout the globe, suggesting that he would not unleash total war on terrorism. … Well, I have news for Cheney, without the clear and bold harboring of Al Qaeda by the Taliban, Bush could not have unleashed a “war” on Afghanistan and because of this, dangerously miscalculated that he was free to divert the war to Iraq.

About the only strategy there is short of an all-out war on Islam is to wisely hunt down terrorists with the coöperation of other nations, Muslim regions in particular. For anyone to have thought that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would put to rout the global cells of terrorism would be naïve.

The best one can hope for is to uproot cells through world intelligence, coupled with special forces and Interpol. Unless a nation — as in Afghanistan — openly harbors a terrorist organization, firepower is limited and yes, diplomacy is called on. If, however, we resorted to the fabricated strength of the current administration we would now be at war with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Palestine.

 

Copyright © 2004 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: September 10, 2004.


Comments
on Sep 10, 2004
"For anyone to have thought that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would put to rout the global cells of terrorism would be naïve."

Steve:You are correct. I'm not very sure about Iraq, but Afghanistan was the epicenter of the global terrorist network. And the world is today a safer place without the Al Qaeda having the benefits of an open training ground there.

However in my opinion, this war can only be won with us(the opponents of Al Qaeda and it's allies) realising how much pressure we need to apply and where. Afganistan had to be taken out militarily, but this need not be the case with say, Iran or Syria. And for that matter a military option seems to be impossible when it comes to North Korea.
on Sep 10, 2004
I'm not very sure about Iraq, but Afghanistan was the epicenter of the global terrorist network. And the world is today a safer place without the Al Qaeda having the benefits of an open training ground there.
 I agree with you here; but we don't really know if it was the epicenter since it seems to be spreading even more.
on Sep 10, 2004
If Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, and Libya start seriously moving towards liberal democracy, won't that have a serious effect on terrorism?
on Sep 10, 2004
If Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, and Libya start seriously moving towards liberal democracy, won't that have a serious effect on terrorism?


Yes, Madine, in my opinion that would sound the death knell of terrorism. But not one of these countries seems to be heading there anytime in the near or distant future. Iraq may be an exception though and Kuwait seems to be veering towards a liberal monarchy.
on Sep 10, 2004
If Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, and Libya start seriously moving towards liberal democracy, won't that have a serious effect on terrorism?


Given their cultural history - and the key fact that very few of these nations have a substantial middle class (generally a key component in moving to a liberal democracy) - it's doubtful that most of these nations will be moving in that direction anytime soon. Unfortunately.

JW
on Sep 10, 2004
Madine, we can't even get a "liberal" democracy in our own country.
on Sep 11, 2004
I mean liberal in the classical sense (individual freedoms, minority protections, etc) not the left wing politics sense.

One of the keys to a gradual transition from a totalitarian government to a liberal democracy is giving more freedom to people. Part of that is giving economic freedom which helps create a middle class.
on Sep 11, 2004
Part of that is giving economic freedom which helps create a middle class.


It can. Or a middle class can arise regardless, as it did in the former Soviet Union (basically went from an agrarian society to a modern industrial state) and as its doing now in China. Either way it happens, with an expanded middle class the liberal democracy seems to become more prevalent.

JW
on Sep 12, 2004
Middle class actually springs from the bourgeoisie in a growing industrial state; I believe, much of the Islamic world is against that.