Friday, December 09, 2005

Revealing Statement of the Week

"For most Americans, the truth is that the war on terrorism hardly touches their lives. For the few that have friends or relatives in the armed services, there may be some personal connection. But it isn't like there is a draft or the prospect of significant American military casualties, even in a full-fledged war with Iraq. The economy may be in the toilet, but it is not because of war shortages or changes in industrial production driven by war needs. It is not like there is going to be rationing. Travel has been inconvenienced and tourism disrupted. But in no way are these the dark days of either World War II or the nuclear arms race during the Cold War, when the survival of America was at stake."
--William Arkin, Los Angeles Times military affairs specialist and frequent columnist, in a speech he delivered on Sept. 25, 2002, to the U.S. Naval War College (emphasis added). (HT: Hugh Hewitt.)

That is the core of the debate between honest liberals and conservatives: Does the GWOT really matter? Is anything really important at stake?

Take a look at the video here. Then ask yourself: Just how sure can we really be that al Quaeda or a similar organization is not planning an attack along those lines?

How do honest liberals feel about such concerns? I think they agree with John Kerry:

[Kerry stated that] the threat of terrorism had been "exaggerated" by the Bush administration. Terrorism, he asserted, was "primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world — the very thing this [Bush] administration is worst at."
Not many Democrats are willing to say that publicly; Kerry probably lost the 2004 election because of such statements. At the time I could not be sure whether Kerry emitted such jaw-droppers because he really believed them, or he was just dumb politically. I now think he really believes what he's saying. I don't think voting Americans believe it, however, which is why the Democrats aren't going to win many national elections in the foreseeable future.


Anonymous DL said...

Liberalism's core beliefs are founded upon the Noble Savage of Rousseau and forged in the Enlightenment that man is basically good and it is the institutions and applications (conservatism-religion) that are the problem. If we just trust and understand them, all will turn out good. This is why they want to negotiate with the non-negotiable (terrorists), release hardened criminals as victims, not go to war as it must always be our fault! Their basic view of man is that he is not capabable of evil -with the exceptions of anyone who doesn't agree with them.  

Posted by DL

Friday, December 09, 2005 10:41:00 AM  
Blogger prairie biker said...

Philosophically, the survival of the entire planet, possibly even the 'human' in human being, is what is at stake. How could this not be worth fighting for? 

Posted by matthew peek

Saturday, December 10, 2005 8:02:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home