For anyone who has argued that liberals have no idea how to fight the war on terror, they’ve recently given you six more steel girders upon which to frame your argument.
The first was Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid’s plan for America’s new direction. It completely lacked elements vital to the future of our nation. Specifically, there was absolutely no mention of a foreign policy perspective, national security position, or a plan to fight the war on terror.
Most who didn’t understand at the beginning of September, 2001 that national security was an integral part of the American way of life understood the concept by the end of September, 2001. Most of us did, but I guess Pelosi and Reid would have to be excluded from the group which comprehends the relationship between national security, our livelihood, and our freedom.
Or maybe their plan for the Global War on Terror came with the second of their six actions designed to build the case for our weakness and eventual demise in this war. Were the resolutions submitted by John Kerry and friends calling for an immediate surrender and pullout from Iraq or surrender with a 2007 drop dead date the liberal plan for national security?
Someone needs to take John Kerry back to “Warfare 101” and explain to him that the principle of not providing the enemy with your plan still applies. And then walk him down the hall to “Jihadist Philosophy 102” and go through history’s examples which prove that a lack of American resolve (as he proposes) emboldens Islamic extremists to attack us with confidence.
The left’s inability to view Zarqawi’s death as a success, the plethora of intelligence we received from that operation and resultant actions against other terrorists is the third item. What we got from Reid, et al. were lots of “but monkeys” (as Laura Ingraham describes them) where all the negative implications for our troops and country were attached to this successful operation. Their comments were a public relations “win” for the enemy because the defeatists from within America worked fervently to find flaws with and minimize the importance of eliminating Zarqawi.
Fourth, the liberal poster boy for defeat, John Murtha, called for redeployment of our troops to Okinawa so they could better handle the situation in Iraq. He proposed that our troops sit in Okinawa waiting for something bad to happen in Iraq and then fly there as a quick reaction force to handle the trouble. Now I know for certain he has been away from the Corps too long. No one with any sort of military mind left at all would ever propose such a thing. Even though you can’t strip him of the title “Marine” because he’s earned it, it’s time to start taking it off his list of credentials.
I understand the role of the press in a democracy, but the champion and purveyor of all causes liberal, the New York Times, decided their newspaper sales and hatred for the Bush administration were more important than our national security. Their “tell-all” story of yet another legal, but top secret program designed to find, track, and stop terrorists is the fifth item which portrays a lack of comprehension by the left on how to fight terrorists. Legal language may say what they’ve done is not illegal or treasonous, but their penchant for giving away our national security secrets raises questions about the spirit of their intent.
Lastly, and worst of all, is the lack of outrage or condemnation from the left for the torture and beheading of our soldiers by the terrorists. Dick Durbin, the leading liberal anti-torture champion, has been quite vocal about our treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, likening our soldiers to Nazi’s and their actions to those of the concentration camps or killing fields of Cambodia. Yet when two of our fine young men are “brutally tortured,” the best he can do is insult the President.
Our soldiers handle GiTMO terrorists with kid gloves and feed them so well they gain weight. But we sometimes put them into 50 degree rooms, make them listen to Britney Spears, and sit in uncomfortable positions for long periods of time. This “torture” is worthy of Dick Durbin’s ire. However, as military reports note, our captured soldiers were subject to “severe trauma” and “brutally tortured” to such an extent it was classified as “something unnatural” before they were beheaded. This prompted no derogatory remarks or condemnation of the enemy by Durbin or any of his cohorts who are always so eager to insult our own troops.
Is it any wonder then that even though they bear the burden of this war, suffer deeply at the loss of their brothers in arms, and personally experience the cost of freedom our troops shy away from the left and vote in excess of 70% for conservatives?
In the end, all plans have flaws. But following a good plan from the right with some flaws is superior to stumbling around in the dark with the left, without a plan or a clue as to how to fight terrorists.