I couldn't disagree more with this line of thinking...
...as we approach the five-year anniversary of Sept. 11, it's worth noting that we haven't see another attack of anywhere near he same scope and magnitude of that awful day. Even the bombings in London, Madrid, and Bali, while certainly horrifying and tragic, caused nowhere near the panic, devastation, and sense of doom that gripped the world five years ago.An emerging group of thinkers, scholars, and security experts have begun to take the provocative position that it's time for America to declare victory over terrorism. I think they make a convincing case.
I have three problems with this argument:
First, just because we haven't had another 9/11 in five years doesn't mean another one won't happen. Al Qaeda bombed the World Trade Center for the first time in 1993. It took eight years for the group to plan, organize and execute a second attack on that target which, as we're all aware, resulted in the total destruction of the twin towers. Eight years.
The Islamic fascists may be crazy religious zealots, but they're not stupid. They are patient, and they have what it takes to develop and organize an attack and then wait years for the perfect moment to execute it.
Second, labeling the bombings in London, Madrid and Bali (not to mention the myriad of terror attacks not mentioned like the hundreds massacred in Beslan) as though they were somehow acceptable because their body counts weren't as high as 9/11's is not only foolhardy it is blatantly disgusting. As long as the west is at risk from Islamic terrorism then we have a duty to wage the war on terror.
Third, saying that the war on terror has been won because there hasn't been another 9/11 is just plain naive. Let's remember that the anti-terror initiatives we've enacted since 9/11 - like NSA call monitoring and terror finance tracking - were instrumental in thwarting the recent British terror plot which many described as possibly being another 9/11. We stopped that plot because we are fighting the war on terror. We stopped it by doing the very things the people making this argument want to stop because we've "won."
Radley Balko (the author of the piece quoted above) wants to declare victory in the war on terror so we can do away with some of the authority the President has been granted to fight terrorism all in the name of civil liberties. The argument he's using is "there hasn't been another 9/11 so we've won." Someone should maybe tell Balko that there maybe hasn't been another 9/11 because the President has broad authority to gather intelligence and wage the war on terror.
As the threat from the middle east grows (see: Iran) not the time to be returning to 9/10 sensibilities.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 8
Balko is neither a Democrat nor a liberal. He writes of what others have told him. The threat of terrorism is that we repond to it by being even more oppressive on rights and liberties that we ourselves thought were important (under our Constitution) than any act the terrorists might commit.
Seems like that is "mission accomplished."
Btw, the illegal wiretap program had NOTHING to do with the British rounding up ANYBODY. Bush had the FISA courts available to him long before 9/11 even came along. There was absolutely no cause for him to violate the constitution, and that federal law by illegally spying on American citizens.
As for terror finance tracking, it's interesting that a wingnut would pose that, since it was Bush who refused to track the 9/11 funding from Saudi Arabia. Ooopsie. I'm guessing ol' Robbie plum forgot that pesky little factoid.
You cannot declare victory on a war that has never been begun. It makes as much sense to launch a military war against terrorism as it does to launch a military war against sadness. It's idiotic, and anybody that falls for the BS is sorely lacking in critical thought processing ability.
The very fact that global terror attacks and terrorist ranks have risen exponentially since Bush launched his BS "war" should be all the proof that anyone needs that this is nothing short of idiotic and pointless.
You silly fools can keep surrendering the very freedoms that your scary boogieman Osama supposedly hates you for. I suppose your thinking is that if you no longer have any freedoms, the big, bad boogieman will just go away and leave you alone. Sorry, I can't go there. I'm an American, and damn proud of it, and I REFUSE to allow the terrorists to win by surrendering MY freedoms.
What did Iraq have to do with 9/11?
I prefer to be polite but I will put my preference aside and ask you what kind of crap is: "I'm glad to see that you aren't a bleeding heart and want "peace" at any cost. " You have to have a bleeding heart to believe peace is better then war? You have to believe the false intelligence and complete nonsense that our President has spouted or you're a peace-at-any-cost-bleeding-heart? Well, sign me up to be one of those. You go on to say
"When we're attacked like 9-11 we need to go after them and continue till we have eradicated the terrorists for good."
And what makes you think our war in Iraq will eradicate terrorists for good? Even the Bush administration is not alleging that the terrorists are in Iraq. And given the world's history combating terrorism, how successful has ANY COUNTRY ever been at eliminating ALL terrorists? What cost in billions/trillions in debt, lost US lives, and lost allies/goodwill worldwide are we willing to pay for a war that will not even dent the terrorist threat?
Lastly, let's not get cocky about Bush being "elected" twice. I am glad you have the utmost confidence in the integrity of our voting system. I wish I shared that confidence. Let's just say I am not convinced he won both elections. I certainly have not seen enough evidence to testify under oath that he won EITHER election.
Like many American's you seem to have fallen for a bunch of bait and switch tactics. Osama's the bad guy. Whoops, can't find him, I mean Saddam's the bad guy, got him, evidence is weak, hey look, same sex couples are getting married while burning flags and bleeding heart liberals are complaining we are illegally tapping their phones!
I look forward to the day when I can be proud of our conduct around the world and our constitutional rights are respected and upheld by the government. I look forward to the day when pro-life applies to military age men and woman too and pro-choice stands for accurate counting of the votes after an election. If that makes me a bleeding heart "peace-at-all-costs" liberal, so be it. What does that make you, a "war-at-all-cost" heartless person?
How about we urge our President to stop chasing flag burners and same sex couples and deliver on his promise to catch those responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Hopefully he will use real "intelligence" this time instead of disinformation (the form of "intelligence" he apparently used last time).
Let us never forget that dissent is one of the fundamental rights granted to American citizens under the constitution. You remember the constitution right? You know, the document that requires due process of law and all that other stuff.
You have the right to free speech, as long as you're dumb enough to actually try it!