Friday, July 02, 2004

Here is an interesting take on Europe's (and the American Left's) approach to fighting terrorism.

Today the war is everywhere. And yet the European Union and the states which comprise it, have denied that war’s reality, right up to the terrorist attack in Madrid of March 11, 2004. If there is a danger as Europe proclaims urbi et orbi, that danger can only come from America and Israel. What should one understand? For can anyone seriously maintain that it is the American and Israeli forces that threaten us in Europe? No, what must be understood is that American and Israeli policies of resistance to jihadist terror provoke reprisals against a Europe that has long ago ceased to defend itself. So that peace can prevail throughout the world, those two countries, America and Israel, need only adopt the European strategy of constant surrender, based on the denial of aggression. How simple it all is.

The Left thinks that we overreacted to September 11. I've quoted Ed Koch's column before but it bears repeating:

During the warm-up before the studio audience, Moore said something along the lines of, "I don't know why we are making so much of an act of terror. It is three times more likely that you will be struck by lightening than die from an act of terror."

Moore is not alone in this sentiment. Internationally syndicated columnist Gwynne Dyer wrote a column on the second anniversary of the attack:

And that's it. In two years, a total of 348 people have died in seven countries in attacks that could be loosely linked with al-Qaida or its many affiliates and emulators -- far fewer than have been killed by bolts of lightning in the same period. Global terrorism is a highly overrated threat.

Even during the conflict with Afghanistan, groups such as "Not in Our Name". protested that September 11 should be treated as a civil crime instead of an act of war (they never did explain how the NYPD was supposed to arrest someone who had been given asylum by a foreign goverment).

To these people, the US was at fault. We should have changed our ways, forced Israel to make peace with the Palistinians and everything would be fine.

Never mind that, to the Islamic fanatics, Israel's very existence is an afront. Consider this current story about the truce that bin Laden proposed with Europe.

The new statement said attacks would continue until the United States freed Muslim prisoners, ended its war on Islam and until "all Muslim land, including Jerusalem and Kashmir, is cleansed of the stain of Jews, Americans and Hindus".

There are no reasonable compromises that we can make. Bin Laden and company do not want to co-exist with anyone else.

The anti-war people don't get this. Their assumptions start with America being to blame for everything but we are in a conflict with a foe who does not care if Bush or Kerry wins the election. September 11 began during the Clinton admistration when a Palestinian settlement seemed likely.

No comments: