April 26, 2007
War On Terror Important As Ever
National Review Online: Despite Critics' Ease, Islamic Terrorists Still Threaten The U.S.
-
Play CBS Video Video Al Qaeda: The Next Generation The face of Osama bin Laden is known worldwide, but new terrorist leaders such as Egyptian Khalid Habib are rising in al Qaeda's ranks and make bin Laden "look moderate." Armen Keteyian reports.
-
Video Preview: Jihad.com The most important recruitment tool for Al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups is the Internet, where Scott Pelley finds sites devoted to terror and cyber warriors out to shut them down.
-
Video Face The Nation: Dick Cheney Vice President Dick Cheney joins Bob Schieffer on "Face The Nation" to discuss the Democrats' Iraq war spending bill, whether the war on terror has changed him and his former aide Scooter Libby.
-
An Iraqi army soldier blindfolds terrorist suspects in an Iraqi army compound in Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of Baghdad, on March 12, 2007. (AP Photo/Talal M. al-Dean)
-
Interactive Global Terror Major terrorist organizations, the FBI's most wanted and facts and photos from recent attacks.
-
Special Report War On Terror Complete coverage of the military's battle against terrorism.
Do we still need to fight a war on terror?
The answer seems to be "no" for an increasing number in the West who are weary over Afghanistan and Iraq or complacent from the absence of a major attack on the scale of 9/11.
The British Foreign Office has scrapped the phrase "war on terror" as inexact, inflammatory and counterproductive. U.S. Central Command has just dropped the term "long war" to describe the fight against radical Islam.
An influential book making the rounds — “Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats, and Why We Believe Them” — argues that the threat from al Qaeda is vastly exaggerated.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser, goes further, assuring us that we are terrorized mostly by the false idea of a war on terror — not the jihadists themselves.
Even onetime neoconservative Francis Fukuyama, who in 1998 called for the preemptive removal of Saddam Hussein, believes "war" is the "wrong metaphor" for our struggle against the terrorists. Others point out that motley Islamic terrorists lack the resources of the Nazi Wehrmacht or the Soviet Union.
This thinking may seem understandable given the ineffectiveness of al Qaeda to kill many Americans after 9/11. Or it may also reflect hopes that if we only leave Iraq, radical Islam will wither away. But it is dead wrong for a number of reasons.
First, Islamic terrorists plotting attacks are arrested periodically in both Europe and the United States. Just last week, a leaked British report detailed al Qaeda's plans for future "large-scale" operations. We shouldn't be blamed for being alarmist when our alarmism has resulted in our safety at home for the past five years.
Second, have we forgotten that Nazi Germany was never able to kill 3,000 Americans on our homeland? Did Japan ever destroy 16 acres in Manhattan or hit the nerve center of the U.S. military? Even the Soviet Union couldn't inflict billions of dollars in damage to the U.S. economy in a single day.
Third, in some ways stateless terrorists can be more dangerous than past conventional threats. Autocrats in some Middle East countries allow indirect financial and psychological support for al Qaeda terrorists without leaving footprints of their intent. They must assume that a single terrorist strike could kill thousands of Americans without our ability to strike back at their capitals. This inability to tie a state to its support for terrorism is our greatest obstacle in this war — and our enemies' greatest advantage.
Fourth, jihadists have already scored successes in all sorts of ways beyond altering the very nature of air travel. Cartoonists now lampoon everyone and everything — except Muslims. The pope must weigh his words carefully. Otherwise, priests and nuns are attacked abroad. A single false Newsweek story about one flushed Koran led to riot and death.
The net result is that terrified millions in Western societies silently accept that for the first time in centuries they cannot talk or write honestly about what they think of Islam and the Koran.
Fifth, everything from our 401(k) plans to municipal water plants depend on sophisticated computers and communications. And you don't need a missile to take them down. Two oceans no longer protect the United States — not when the Internet knows no boundaries, our borders are relatively wide open and dozens of ships dock and hundreds of flights arrive daily.
A germ, some spent nuclear fuel or a vial of nerve gas could cause as much mayhem and calamity as an armored division in Hitler's army. The Soviets were considered rational enemies who accepted the bleak laws of nuclear deterrence. But the jihadists claim that they welcome death if their martyrdom results in thousands of dead Americans.
Finally, radical Islamists largely arise from the oil-rich Middle East. Since 9/11, the price of oil has skyrocketed, transferring trillions of dollars from successful Western, Indian, and Chinese economies to unsuccessful Arab and Iranian autocracies.
Terrorists know that blowing up a Saudi oil field or getting control of Iraqi petroleum reserves — and they attempt both all the time — will alter the world economy. Even their mere threats give us psychological fits and their sponsors more cash.
This is a strange war. Our successes in avoiding attack convince some that the real danger has passed. And when we kill jihadists abroad, we are told it is peripheral to the war or only incites more terrorism.
But despite the current efforts at denial, the war against Islamic terrorism remains real and deadly. We can't wish it away until Middle Eastern dictatorships reform — or we end their oil stranglehold over the world economy.
By Victor Davis Hanson
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online.
 | America's Premier Site for Conservative News, Analysis, and Opinion. |
More From Opinion
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 28 CommentsI'd add too that because the war in Iraq is actually increasing the threat of terrorism according to intelligence reports of the past year a lot of us on the left have focused largely on the idea that if we withdraw from Iraq the threat of terrorism will decrease. And the way the political system works, Dems don't really have the incentive to go the extra mile to formulate a more thorough plan because they're probably going to win big in the next election. But perhaps in terms of our safety we really ought to be thinking more about what else can be done to keep us safe.
I'd like to see candidates like Obama give more thought about how they'll use the additional funds freed up if troops are redeployed out of Iraq to fight the war on terror . . . I guess some of those troops will go to Afghanistan. But is he going to try to foster a better working relationship with Iran and Syria? What are his ideas for brokering peace in the West Bank? Would he invest more $ than Bush in research for alternative fuels? What is his view on providing refugee status to displaced Iraqis? What does he think about women being allowed to wear hijabs (those veil thingies) to school versus the safety concern? etc etc
W was responsible for 9/11 which occurred on his watch. Our leader, W, thinks he needs to attack every country in the world that disagrees with him over even trivial matters.
Neocons don't know who the real enemy is. So they attacked and invaded Iraq which had effectively kept Al Qaeda out. Now that Iraq is in W's hands, Al Qaeda blows up bombs every day there. And still W can't find any WMD's.
So who is CBS calling?, Lonely housewives looking for someone to share a boring afternoon, welfare folks, out of work folks, folks too lazy to work in in the first place, retired folks, the list goes on and on.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
1.GENIUS GANG IN ORIENT(SWAT)
2.PRIME MINISTER'SON,DAUGHTER(CIA)
3.LONG TIME LIVED IN ONE VILLAGE(FBI)
4.BACK TO MURDERED PARENT'PREVILLEGE(CROSS WORD)
5.tree IS HUMAN BUDDHA'teacher,murdered parent' do not argue with ,if the son is BUDDHA.(politic)
6.elder is not on the side of older(brother in ***-defficient is not parent'life protection
~son!?)
Never seem to tire of war mongering do they.....the American people are tired of it, however.
"but the #1 terrorist is still showing us the middle finger"
I haven't seen Obama in about three years.
"Bush says he doesn't have time to think about him anymore."
When did he say that?
I find nothing to disagree with you on your post.
I'm just tried of all the negativity, name calling, hateful postings, and endless talking points on each side of the argument.
I am an Independent, I would hope that which ever side is controling the White House will have the best interests of the country at heart.
I also fear that if we leave Iraq before we finish what we have started, we will face a far greater danger in the future.
There is always plenty of blame to go around. What separates those who cherish freedom from those who just use it, is what they do to protect it.
As much as I disagree with some positions on this blog, I do appreciate the opportunity to openly and freely express myself. A virtue that is essentially non-existent in the Arab world.
Regardless of how we got into Iraq, it should be all of our hopes that the price that is being paid result in freedom for a region of humans who deserve the opportunity to become who they WANT to become and NOT be judged by their birth religion or nationality.
1. We are losing the War on terror
2. The Iraq War is why
These guys seem to think if you don't do things Bushs' way you must not think the war on terror is important. LOL.
Somewhere today a child in the US is living in violence. Let's work on that for a change.
Jerks
Posted by tejasdemo at 04:29 PM : Apr 26, 2007
I agree with you, however, this has now become a political issue and the Dems want this war lost.
There is no equitable peace plan in the middle east nor will there be. The primaries have determined this already. The Arabs won't let the Jews stay and the Jews aren't going to leave. No amount of effort and expense will change this.
9/11 is driven by our presence on Saudi soil primarily. Attacks in the U.S. started after our military enter Saudi to defend them against Saddam.
Bush and the criminals who work for him (not US) took their eye off of the real War on Terror, Afghanistan.
Plain and simple- They fuqued up!
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 28 Comments