Oh Really?

US losing war on terror: authors

US terrorism experts Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon have reached a stark conclusion about the war on terrorism: the US is losing.

Despite an early victory over the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the two former Clinton administration officials said President George W Bush's policies have created a new haven for terrorism in Iraq that escalates the potential for Islamic violence against Europe and the US. America's badly damaged image in the Muslim world could take more than a generation to set right.

What a load of old cobblers. Badly damaged reputation? The Great Satan? Get it right, you gabbling fools! It doesn’t matter what the US does. The US could prance about the Middle East like some kind of great, pink fringed, fluffy tooth fairy, and the Jihadis would simply make something up, just as they all make up the notion that our intervention in Iraq is a war on Islam. The US is their galvanising enemy. Their bĂȘte noire. They love to hate it. Nothing, apart from a solid dose of swamp draining, will change that.

A solid clue to the dishonesty of this entire peice firmly resides in this statement, however: '. . .Islamic violence against Europe. . .' Fluffy, wuffy, 'hands off Iraq' Europe? Oh, how can it be so. . .

And Bush's mounting political woes at home have undermined the chance for any bold US initiatives to address the grim social realities that feed Islamic radicalism, they said.
Woes at whose hands, dipsticks? Not the loony Left, who would trash the country for a chance at some political leverage, by any chance? A bunch of sociopaths who would ensure a loss, at great cost to life and limb, if ever they so possibly could, as long as it brought about the right political result? Get a grip, you absolute tossers.

"It's been fairly disastrous," said Mr Benjamin, who worked as a director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council (NSC) from 1994 to 1999.

"We have had some very important successes getting individual terrorists. But I think the broader story is really quite awful. We have done a lot to fuel the fires, and we have done a lot to encourage people to hate us."
Unlike the Clinton years, of course. We know exactly what was earned by that. It was called 9/11. . . The truth is, of course, that the ones doing the most to encourage people to hate the US are people like you, Mr. Benjamin.

Mr Benjamin and Mr Simon, a former US State Department official who was also at the NSC, are co-authors of a new book . . .

Following on from their 2002 book, Benjamin and Simon list what they call US missteps since the September 11, 2001, attacks on America.

The White House described Iraq as a central front in the war on terrorism and has said the building of democracy there would confound militant aims and help to propel the entire Middle East region toward democracy.
And so it will. Just not overnight, as the liberals demand. Of course, they know that, too. Which makes this blather just so much defeatist sabotage, as usual.

"We may be attacked by terrorists who receive their training in Iraq, or attacked by terrorists who were inspired, organised and trained by people who were in Iraq," said Mr Simon, a Rand Corporation analyst who teaches at Georgetown University.
How fellas? How will America be attacked? Oh, of course, that’s right, because we simply must keep our precious multi-culturalism, mustn’t we. Can’t possibly consider stopping that fifth column, can we. Shock, horror – must let them all in, mustn’t we, must let them travel freely about, casing targets and planning strikes, because we couldn’t possibly infringe their precious civil liberties (until such time as they decide to blow up another few hundred people, and even then we’ll jump about like frenzied flies to ensure their rights aren’t infringed).

Two words: PISS OFF.

"(Mr Bush) has given them an excellent American target in Iraq but in the process has energised the jihad and given militants the kind of urban warfare experience that will raise the future threat to the United States exponentially."
Once again, they're only a threat if you let them in (which you will, of course)! And of course we play the ‘Iraq’ card. And everything that’s ever happened is down to that – we know (we’ll just ignore all the terrorist attacks before then, including the very worst: 9/11).

For Mr Benjamin and Mr Simon, the war on terrorism has cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars and failed to counter a deadly global movement responsible for attacks in London, Madrid, Bali, Indonesia, and Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.

And not even al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, they said, could have dreamed the US would stumble so badly in the court of Muslim public opinion.
This has to be the most stupid comment I’ve heard in a good long time. Osama wanted a full blown war, Islam against the rest. He’s failed - so far. But while we’re on the topic, what the hell gave rise to Osama Bin Laden (as a concept) in the first place? The US has been ‘stumbling badly’ forever. It always will and for one simple reason: it's there. That’s enough. Its mere existence is all the jihadis need. It always will be. You can roll about, baring your neck ‘til the cows come home; they’ll always have the trusty rusty knife ready for the lop – count on it. The Liberals certainly do.

"Everyone says there's a war of ideas out there, and I agree. The sad fact is that we're on the wrong side," said Mr Benjamin, now a senior fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

US fortunes could improve, the authors said, if Washington took a number of politically challenging steps, like bolstering public diplomacy with trade pacts aimed at expanding middle-class influence in countries such as Pakistan.
Once again, we get the usual misinformation: terrorism exists because of poverty, ignoring entirely the fact that the terrorists have, so far, largely come from the wealthier, better educated middle-classes. Another little factoid these characters are grimly determined to ignore. This, of course, tells us a very important thing: these men do not have answers. They have rhetoric; they have blatant misinformation.

Washington also needs to do more to ease regional tensions that feed Muslim grievances across the globe, from Thailand and the Philippines to Chechnya and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In a Muslim world of 1.2 billion people, as many as three in four hold negative views of the US.
They always have.

Because anti-US rhetoric often appeals strongly to impressionable youth, Benjamin and Simon believed many of today's young Muslims would harbour grievances against the US for the rest of their lives.

Grievances, sure, most of which are extracted from the febrile fantasy land these little nutters inhabit. So tell us, boys, how do you deal with someone absolutely determined to hate you, no matter what you do, and who will act on that hatred whenever the opportunity arises?

Clue: ‘give up’ is not an acceptable answer.

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them