Is America’s War on Terrorism, Muslims or Evildoers?
One can gauge whether or not Bush meant what he said by what has occurred in the days, months and years since; Osama (the one who “knocked down these buildings”) is still alive, well, un-pursued and… pumping-out occasional videos from his “hide-out” somewhere along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
Bush spent the days after his famous bullhorn speech visiting Islamic mosques, while the ones he bullhorned were digging body parts out of the World Trade Center rubble.
Later, of course, we heard the rhetoric about Islam being “a religion of peace.”
Somehow, somewhere along the way, all of America forgot that it was Muslims who had attacked us. Instead… it had become “evildoers.” Shortly thereafter the United States of America – for the first time in its history – went to war against… a noun, “terrorism.”
We are still at war against this noun called “terrorism” and have yet to address the substance of the problem, the issue (hint: Islam) and the power and support behind what we are pretending to be at war against, much less have we addressed the sources of the “terrorism” problem in Syria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran and elsewhere.
In fact, we’ve buddied-up to most of them.
To be sure… we “hunted down” any Al Qaeda members too stupid to stay directly away from our military. But, that was about it. Bush, instead, turned the whole situation onto daddy’s nemesis Saddam Hussein. And we are quagmired in that horrid place to this very day.
I suppose if a person lives long enough he gets to see everything.
We are so far removed from 911, the Muslims behind the attack, their supporters and the essence of the problem that now we are hearing attacks from Americans against another American who would finally deal with the problem in the only way it can possibly be handled: Directly.
Over the past several weeks the story of Al Qaeda smuggling nuclear bombs into our country, across our porous and unsecured border, has been getting play on Internet sites and on talk radio.
Aside from general hand-wringing over the potential of such a devastating occurrence – next to the flag-waving and blinded supporters of President Bush (who has done nothing about the problem except to encourage, aid and abet it) – we’ve heard any number of Americans either say “nothing can be done,” “it’s inevitable,” or outright suggest that “it’s impossible.”
Along comes one truly patriotic American man to dare suggest that a nuclear attack by Al Qaeda is neither “inevitable” or “impossible,” with a solution to the problem so simple and historical as to beg the question “why isn’t this our policy already?”
For several years, Tom Tancredo has been battling the Bush Administration on immigration policy… or, rather, the total absence of immigration policy. He’s attempted to hold the administration accountable for its negligent lack of regard concerning our border security.
This problem has been especially obvious to many and, one assumes, Tancredo since 911. In fact, to many (myself included), shutting the border tighter than an oil drum was the first thing in mind after the 911 attacks.
The response of the administration, however, was to promote amnesty and attack Iraq… quite possibly the two most illogical responses.
Now we are faced with a wide-open border and an administration promoting the idea of keeping it that way, along with reports that Al Qaeda has smuggled nuclear weapons into the country.
In off-the-cuff remarks on a radio talk show Tancredo responded to the question “what would we do if Al Qaeda used nukes in America.” The congressman said something to the effect of “we can take out their holy sites.”
Tancredo also mentioned that this would be a good policy to announce in advance, in order to help keep the attack from occurring in the first place.
Smart… decisive… appropriate.
The good congressman – the only man among hundreds in Congress who has shown the slightest regard for America’s national security and sovereignty – is being disparaged for these remarks by the administration, his colleagues and… the ones who enjoy blowing us up, the Muslims.
But many Americans are hearing Tancredo’s words and are either remembering how they felt on 911 (and who we are really at war against), or they are agreeing outright that his solution to the on-going problem is the only solution worth considering.
Many like me wonder why President Bullhorn didn’t say something in this vein when he damn well knew who attacked us, what their philosophy was and how to stop them.
Many are attacking Tancredo and treating his statement as an aberration. But it was, in fact, our policy regards the Russians for nearly 50 years: “Mutually-Assured Destruction” (MAD).
It worked.
The Russians never nuked us because they knew we’d nuke’em back. They also knew we’d nuke’em a hell of a lot better than they could nuke us.
There are several things to consider when talking about our response to a nuclear terror attack by Al Qaeda: The fact that Al Qaeda is made up entirely of Muslims, the fact that most Muslims, by their silence and/or outright support, condone what the terrorists do, the fact that most Islamic nations supply the terrorists with funds and suicide bombers, the fact that most Islamic nations still teach the philosophy that terrorizes the civilized world, the fact that the “terrorism” we are at war against includes Muslims from every Islamic nation on Earth and the fact that Muslims seem to be unwilling to reckon with the terrorists and join the rest of the world in not blowing other people into pieces.
The religion of Islam is a boil on the butt of humanity. Nary a day goes by that one of them doesn’t blow themselves and somebody else up. They actually live for the day they can do this and they honor and revere the ones who do.
No country, people, religion or ethnicity has been spared from the death and destruction that Muslims spread; Jews, Gentiles, Buddhists, Hindus… America, Spain, Israel, India, England – they’ve all been hit with Islamic terror attacks at one time or another. The higher the body count, the more revered the suicide lunatics are by their fellow Muslims.
They teach this suicide cult philosophy to their children and are enthralled when their children, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, fathers and mothers carry out the attacks against the “infidels.”
They danced in their streets and passed out candy to children in celebration of the 911 attacks.
There is but one way to deal with a philosophy – a people – who commit these acts of horror against their fellow man and that is to demonstrate the total futility of their actions… even more destructively.
It worked wonders on Nazi Germany and with Imperialist Japan.
It’s a lesson that may be lost on the most ridiculous of them but it sure does have a chance of planting seeds in the minds of the rest…
“Gee, you know what? If we keep doing this… they might just kill us all. Allah be praised!”
We should stop pussy-footing around. Let’s introduce them to our “join us or leave us” policy.
To hell with just the “holy sites,” let’s target Riyadh (the oil will still be there), Tehran, Islamabad and Damascus.
That should cure the nuclear problem at least. The other problems could easily be handled with heavy ordinance and systematic saturation bombing (can you say “Dresden”?).
Let’s make it our nationally-stated policy. The world and, especially, the Muslims will hate us anyway.
We could chase these ghouls around caves and behind and underneath rocks forever and not teach them the only lesson their kind understand.
One can only do that the way Tom Tancredo recommends and the way the wimpy, self-serving and lying Bush Administration will not.
Tom Tancredo has it right. We should tell the bomb-carrying, suicide-loving Muslims EXACTLY what we’ll do to them in advance: Nuke their chant-fest, moon-worshipping gathering places and that we’ll nuke’em back farther than the place in time they already are…
The 8th Century.
