| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| W's deputy assistant of Strategic Initiatives writes of The War Against Global Jihadism |
| 2007-01-08 |
| H/T The Corner Long read, but what a history lesson and the position the world finds itself today. Since he works for W, got to mean, W has read this and has an understanding of what we are facing. Well worth the read before Bush's speech Wednesday night. President Bush has said that the war against global jihadism is more than a military conflict; it is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century. We are still in the early years of the struggle. The civilized world will either rise to the challenge and prevail against this latest form of barbarism, or grief and death will visit us and other innocents on a massive scale. Given the stakes involved in this war and how little is known, even now, about what is at the core of this conflict, it is worth reviewing in some detail the nature of our enemy - including disaggregating who they are (Shia and Sunni extremists), what they believe and why they believe it, and the implications of that for America and the West. The sections: Islam in the World Today Shia and Sunni: Different Histories Shia and Sunni: Different Eschatologies Contemporary Sunni Radicalism Contemporary Shia Radicalism Concluding Thoughts It is the fate of the West, and in particular the United States, to have to deal with the combined threat of Shia and Sunni extremists. And for all the differences that exist between them -- and they are significant -- they share some common features. Their brand of radicalism is theocratic, totalitarian, illiberal, expansionist, violent, and deeply anti-Semitic and anti-American. As President Bush has said, both Shia and Sunni militants want to impose their dark vision on the Middle East. And as we have seen with Shia-dominated Iran's support of the Sunni terrorist group Hamas, they can find common ground when they confront what they believe is a common enemy. The war against global jihadism will be long, and we will experience success and setbacks along the way. The temptation of the West will be to grow impatient and, in the face of this long struggle, to grow weary. Some will demand a quick victory and, absent that, they will want to withdraw from the battle. But this is a war from which we cannot withdraw. As we saw on September 11th, there are no safe harbors in which to hide. Our enemies have declared war on us, and their hatreds cannot be sated. We will either defeat them, or they will come after us with the unsheathed sword. All of us would prefer years of repose to years of conflict. But history will not allow it. And so it once again rests with this remarkable republic to do what we have done in the past: our duty. Footnotes follow |
| Posted by:Sherry |
| #5 Bugger. HERE's the link: http://workaround.blogspot.com/2006/12/speech.html |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2007-01-08 16:05 |
| #4 Yes, it's blog pimping (a bit), but here's the speech I think W should make for the SOTU address, or any big speech, for that matter: |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2007-01-08 16:04 |
| #3 What people keep avoiding is that morale problems back home are directly due to the influence of the MSM and the opportunistic Dems. The MSM has shown itself to be corrupt and venal {paying off Saddam by not reporting bad things, hiring known Baathists as stringers, etc}; and a large number of Democrats have proven themselves to be political opportunists of the worst stripe - voting for and against the war, blowing up the guard problem in AG, NOT voting for new body armor when it came up and then screaming at the Bush Admin when questions about body armor came up, etc. As long as certain Dems can ride their anti-American, anti-war, and BDS attitudes into office, they will keep it up. They have demonstrated that the only thing they are concerned with is gaining political office and feathering their nest while in that office. Not that this sort of activity should be a shock to anyone who know history, just look at what the Dems did during the Civil War. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2007-01-08 15:45 |
| #2 " Our enemies have declared war on us, and their hatreds cannot be sated. We will either defeat them, or they will come after us with the unsheathed sword." Finanly someone in Bush's circle that sees the situation. When you are attacked you don't get to choose when the fight stops your only option is victory or accept the enemies terms of surrender. 9-11 was not the first attack but it was the straw that broke the camels back so to say. Their is no path no but victory or accept the Jihadi/radical islamist terms. I think Bush should make it clear to the people in his speech we only have two choices 1) Fight until we win NO MATTER WHAT IT TAKES 2) Accept the enemies terms: that means adobtion of Sharia followed by stoning of all Gays, unwed mothers, aitheist, ect... Dimmini taxes for all Jews & Christians who refuse to convert. Maybe then we will finally win the Radical Islamist "hearts & minds". When the people understand our choices the decision becomes a no brainer. Our goal after 9-11 was to stop the attacks there is only two ways to do that option 1 or 2. Damm I wish I could write just one of Bush's speeches. Bush has the right idea but his lack of ability to communicate to the people is horrific. There is just no reason why a war of survival should have moral problems at home. |
| Posted by: C-Low 2007-01-08 15:05 |
| #1 W and his people can tell the truth until the sun goes down but if the people lack the will to fight it's just words. I'm afraid W has blown his chance to motivate the people; unless he has a drastic change of direction, he and his administration are just going to kick the can down the road and let the next administration pick it up, and hope the people are finally up to the task of supporting a long war. And I'm very, very pessimistic about that. |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2007-01-08 14:42 |