|HOME||Jan-Feb 2006 Featured Stories||Background Information||News On The Web|
Nobody wants to tell it like it is.
The Democrats, Joseph Lieberman excluded, focus all their arguments on the need to bring the boys home sooner rather then later. They totally ignore that the seriousness of the challenge to America represented by Islam or radical Islam or the Islamofascists however you describe the enemy. This challenge exists throughout the world, in the Middle East (ME) and on the home front.
President Bush ostensibly was telling it like it is when he outlined US Strategy for Victory in Iraq on Nov 30, 2005. He defined the goal as the creation of "..a democratic Iraq that can defend itself, that will never again be a safe haven for terrorists, and that will serve as a model of freedom for the Middle East." And he uttered some truths; "we do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them." and "there are only two options before our country -- victory or defeat." He advised that progress is being made and that victory will be achieved.
The truth is otherwise. The war has already been lost, though not irretrievably lost.
Originally the goal was to transform the ME as the best means to prevent another terrorist attack on the US similar to or greater than 9/11. The invasion of Iraq was just a stepping stone along the way. The Arab world would have none of it. Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia backed a killing guerilla war to thwart America's plans. So far they have succeeded in getting US to reduce her goal to creating a democratic Iraq. Such an Iraq may serve the purpose of allowing the US to retreat when achieved but it won't last long. The sooner the US withdraws, the sooner a democratic Iraq will disintegrate. In fact as the US draws down its forces, its power to influence will also diminish.
Even now, while there are democratic markers created, such as a successful election and an approved constitution, forces are gathering to fill the power vacuum which will result with the American departure. Already Iraq has two separate armies, the Kurdish one and the Shiite one and they are acting independently. The Shiite army and private militias are already exerting influence under the gun. They are killing Sunnis, secular Shiites and politicians in order to dominate and rule "Shiitestan". They also are making common cause with Iran. The Kurds are solely concerned exercising sovereignty over "Kurdistan" including Kirkup. The Sunnis are the losers and they are doing the most killing. They are backed by Saudi Arabia and Syria. Saudi Arabia has a sizable population of Shiites living predominantly around the southern oil fields and is thus vulnerable to the growing Shiite influence and power.
Stratfor reports "And although Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has exacerbated the nuclear dispute, bringing the back-channel talks almost to a complete standstill, Iran is working to regain leverage in the talks -- with the goal of eventually creating a pro-Iranian, or at least neutral and Iran-friendly, government in Baghdad. And Washington is using that vision as a lever to keep Iran from pushing the nuclear issue too far."
As for the original goal of transforming the Middle East, Iran and Syria have taken the measure of America and now believe that America is in retreat and therefore they need not capitulate. Al Qaeda and other terrorists will be emboldened with their success in routing America. In effect then, America's failed attempt to transform the ME has resulted in strengthening the forces arrayed against them. These forces want America and Israel out of the ME. As America begins its retreat, expect the terrorism to increase many fold. Just look at what happen to the forces of Napoleon and Hitler as they retreated from Moscow. They were decimated.
On another front, both the Democrats and the Administration support the Roadmap. They have both painted a rosy picture of the Arab/Israeli conflict citing a liberated Gaza, great economic prospects and a fledgling democracy. At least they did until the Hamas victory put them in disarray.
The truth is that anarchy and chaos reign supreme.
Terrorists and heavy weapons have been allowed into Gaza and will soon enter the West Bank. Look for a tremendous increase in terrorism. The Palestinians have accepted the Roadmap in name only and have done nothing to end incitement or dismantle terror. Hamas are on record of rejecting the requirements of the Roadmap and they are about to form the government of the PA. They are openly aligning with Iran and have now been invited to speak with Putin with France's blessing. So much for the Quartet abiding by the Roadmap. Mahmoud Abbas is finished and so is the Roadmap and the American hopes for another victory. Once again, no one is telling it like it is.
An American retreat from Iraq will result in a loss of US influence and deterrence -- and an increase in terrorism throughout the world, especially in Israel.
The problem with American policy is that America has been unwilling to identify and vilify the enemy.
Although the rhetoric has changed somewhat from fighting the "war on terror" to fighting "radical Islam" or "militant Islam" or the "Islamofascists", it has not gone far enough. This war for dominance being waged by Islam against the west is little different then the war for dominance waged by Germany and Japan in WW II. To win that war, the allies waged total war. They vilified and incarcerated the enemy and made no distinction between the "innocent" and the guilty. The US went so far as to use the ultimate weapon against Japan, twice. In the cold war with the USSR (Communism), the US fully engaged their proxies on the battlefield all over the world, banned the Communist party at home and openly took them on in speeches, the press and the UN.
The latest challenge to the West is the cartoon riots. Europe with the exception of the UK, is trying to stand firm in support of its independence. Unfortunately the US and the UK have decided on an ambiguous policy of calling for an end to offense and to riots. Moral equivalence, anybody? This policy has done great harm to the defence of the West.
Islam is waging both a cold war and a hot war. The west is losing both.
Islam is conducting the cold war, by spreading Wahabbism throughout the world including in the US, by buying influence in her media, academia, Congress, and administration and by creating organizations such as CAIR to protect Islam or its terrorists from verbal or legal attack. The US has made little or no attempt to protect itself from these forces and in fact protects them by imposing politically correct speech on all critics of Islam and by emphasizing civil rights over security rights.
It further protects Islam by referring to it as a "religion of peace" even while the Pentagon concludes it is a "religion of war". It also refers to Saudi Arabia as its ally and is constantly protecting it from the force of US law, from the truth coming out about its lack of human or civil rights or from the truth being known about its lack of support for the war on terror.
It is little wonder then that the war in Iraq is losing support. If the US would tell it like it is, there would be much more support. If you don't properly identify the enemy and vilify it how can you muster support for the war?
Islam is also fighting a hot war. They do so through their proxies, the terror organizations. These same proxies receive considerable diplomatic and financial support from the EU, the UN and from Russia, all of whom support the PA, who supports terror, or refuse to identify Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. Even the US supports the PA knowing that it is in cahoots with the terror organizations and also allows US money to go to Hamas through the back door. Rather then supporting Israel in its fight against terror, the US works to weaken Israel thereby rewarding terror and undermining her own war on terror.
The entire Arab world wants Israel out of the ME and in practice rejects the two-state plan. Iran, Syria and the terror groups also want the US out of the ME so that they would be free to dominate it. This would include the overthrow of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. This would be catastrophic for the US.
Like it or not, the US must maintain its troop levels in Iraq to prevent Iraq's disintegration and the extension of Iranian influence and power over it. In the service of this end, it must also act to undermine Syria.
Its position would be vastly strengthened if it were to allow Israel to soundly defeat the terrorist forces, backed by Syria and Iran, who are trying to destroy it. This would really be a contribution to America's war on terror and it would serve to weaken Syria and Iran by reducing their power and leverage. American support for Israel in this way would send a very strong message regarding the US determination to prevent Iran from going nuclear.
The final front involves Saudi Arabia. Because they control the flow of oil and the price of oil, they have a lot of leverage. Add to this the fact that America is indebted to them in the trillions and the fact that there are a huge number of influential Americans who benefit from doing business with Saudi Arabia and you will see just how big the leverage is.
What is needed is a national program similar in scope and urgency to the US program to develop the atomic bomb before Germany did so or to reach the moon before the USSR did. Such a national program would be to reach energy self-sufficiency within ten years. Bush did take on this challenge in the State of the Union address but it remains to be seen how aggressive the US will be in that regard.
Just telling it like it is.
1. "President Outlines Strategy for Victory in Iraq," The White
House, November 30, 2005,
2. Stratfor, "A U.S.-Israeli Policy Rift?" Israpundit,
February 12, 2006,
3. Paul Sperry, "The Pentagon Breaks the Islam Taboo," Front
Page Magazine, December 14, 2005,
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20539 Reproduced with comments at
Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit
website (http://www.israpundit.com), an activist pro-Israel website.
Contact him at email@example.com
This is a update of an article that first appeared on IsraPundit
December 19, 2005.
Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit website (http://www.israpundit.com), an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at firstname.lastname@example.org
This is a update of an article that first appeared on IsraPundit December 19, 2005.
|HOME||Jan-Feb 2006 Featured Stories||Background Information||News On The Web|