While we are not at war with Islam, we ARE at war with Radical Islam. That is the tough, hard-to-swallow truth. We should have NEVER been nation-building over there in the first place. What is ironic is Saddam Hussein was one of our best friends over there, bastard that he was. He served as a great check on Iran's power, and kept the fanatics in his own country under control (read: dead). It reminds me of a Tom Clancy book I am reading right now...basically, Iran sends it someone to assassinate Saddam Hussein, and proceeded to take advantage of the power vacuum that results. The same thing is happening now...by eliminating Hussein, the neocons actually made that region MUCH less secure, and much more prone to Iranian takeover.Guinness wrote:We're basically re-enforcing the notion that we're at war with Islam.
Those who attack us should be engaged, I agree. But we're not doing that in Iraq, and we're now nation-building in Afghanistan, too.
I truly do believe that our aggressiveness in attacking the terrorist camps/villages/etc over there HAS had a genuine impact in preventing attacks over here, because they have not been able to get comfortable. However, we should have taken out the Taliban, moved our guys out, and established this policy from the get go. But there is no question that we are in a war (or a ideological battle, whatever you prefer) with radical Islam, and it IS a threat. The reason why this threat is so much scarier than the enemies of old (i.e., the Soviet Union) is that average Americans can be recruited by persuasive imams.