Monday, April 27, 2009

Are We Still at War?

Let me share a couple of essays that really get to the heart of the current debate over interrogations and national security.

Are we really still at war? That's the question William Kristol throws out in his piece, "
'On a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009': Are we still at war?"

Speaking of Dennis Blair, the Director of National Intelligence, who sought to put the administration's release of the "torture" memos in the "perspective" of new bright, sunny and safe day, Kristol notes:

We were once in danger. Now we live in "a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009." Now, in April 2009, Obama's Director of National Intelligence seems to be saying, we're safe.

Good news, if true. And it would be an amazing tribute to the preceding administration's efforts in the war on terror--efforts that Democrats have been saying for years were making us less safe. Apparently, the old policies worked. The threat from al Qaeda has gone. We now have the luxury of "reflection," as President Obama put it in his statement, the luxury of debating and deploring what we did back in the bad old days when there was a war on. After all, "we have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history."

Leave aside how dark and painful the chapter really was. The question is, Is it over? Is the chapter in which we had to focus on preventing further attacks really through? Isn't there still a war against the jihadists on?

Actually, for most of those on the left, and certainly those who visit my blog, it's the U.S. that should be the focus of international attention, not the terrorists. Former Bush administration officials should be in the dock at the Hague, or at least in some courtroom of the U.S. Star Chamber.

But check out as well Mark Theissen's, "
The West Coast Plot: An 'Inconvenient Truth'."

I'll have more later ...


MAS1916 said...

President Obama has bet his entire future on the hope that the US will not be attacked again. Each passing day without an attack means that His ability to blame GWBush declines.

At some point, safety and security of the United States will become the responsibility of the current President.

Sarge Charlie said...

Please, Please, Please, get up to date, Now it is an "Overseas Contingency Operation" so the answer to the question is no.

I suspect the next step will be the issue of flowers to be passed out by our troops......

Dave said...

We are still at war, even though most have apparently chosen to believe otherwise.

Given the fact that our new CIC is in the process of quite literally tying both hands behind our backs, thus impeding our ability to not just fight this war, but to even defend ourselves in it, I expect the war is going to soon come crashing back into the American consciousness in a really big way.

The Obamanistas, along with our duller fellow Americans, may pretend not see it, but the Islamists are still very much at war with us.

That situation will remain unchanged until the Islamists have been rendered incapable of continuing the fight, and I do not see that happening anytime soon, if at all.


Tom the Redhunter said...

MAS1916 has it exactly right

Right now Obama and the liberals are having oh so much fun bashing the Bush Administration over all these allegations of torture and so on.

When President Kennedy first learned of the Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba, feared that he'd be impeached if he didn't get them out. Given the tenor of the times, he was probably right.

Many seem to have forgotten the attitude in this country after 9-11. The public supported just about anything to stop another attack, which we feared may be imminent. Lawmakers gave carte blanche, often with a wink and a nod, to security services to do what they had to do. If there is another attack, you can bet this attitude will return.

So Obama and his liberal supporters had better hope, no, pray, that we do not suffer a terrorist attack on his watch, and certainly not one that can be tied to his policies. If it becomes known that even one of the terrorists was released from Guantanamo, or that we even just might have gotten information to stop the attack had we used aggressive measures, Obama is toast. And if the attack is bad enough and can be tied to his policies, he might well suffer the fate that Kennedy feared.