September 08, 2004

Confronting Terrorism III

04.09.08.ConTerrorIII-X.gif

We update this cartoon every year to highlight the latest distractions from the necessity to confront Islamic terrorism head-on, without compromise.

Though President Bush has at least taken the war to the terrorists and to some of their sponsors, as we've noted time again he's done so inconsistently (to put it nicely). Last year it was the push for a Palestinian State with the terrorist-supporting Palestinian Authority. This year it was halting, sensitive battles against Islamists who hid in mosques that our troops were not allowed to bomb. On top of that, the quick handover of sovereignty to Iraq has given the infant Iraqi government ultimate authority over our troops. And three years after 9/11, what are we doing about the world's worst sponsor of terrorism, Iran?

As bad as all that is, it is better than I would expect from presidential candidate John Kerry, who has stressed internationalism and multilateralism even more than Bush, who has condemned taking out Saddam as a "war of choice," as if Saddam and his ilk give us a choice, and who has criticized Bush's mere war of words with Iran as too confrontational.

The passengers of Flight 93 apparently knew there was no such thing as being too confrontational with Islamists bent on your destruction. Their reaction was not a matter of religious sensitivity, or diplomacy, or compromise, or nuance; it was a matter of going on the offensive and fighting for their lives.

Here's to their memory. May they forgive us for not fully living up to it.

UPDATE I -- September 10: This cartoon appears in today's edition of edition of Investor's Business Daily.

UPDATE II: From The Wall Street Journal: Kerry vs. Kerry; The way to attack Mr. Bush on Iraq is from the right.

The great lost Democratic opportunity here is that Mr. Bush's Iraq policy is open to criticism: his under-estimation of the postwar insurgency, preventing the Army and Marines from dealing decisive blows to Moqtada al-Sadr in Najaf and the Baathists in Fallujah, failing to train enough Iraqi allies quickly enough, and prolonging the U.S. occupation. But all of these criticisms come from the prowar right, for not fighting in Iraq with the force and tenacity to win.

Other Democrats -- Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt -- could have made that critique with some credibility, but Mr. Kerry seems incapable of it. Now even if Iraq blows up in October, as it well might, Mr. Kerry will find it just about impossible to convince voters that he would prosecute the war with any more vigor than Mr. Bush.

UPDATE III: More regarding how to handle the Islamist in Iraq from Investor's Business Daily.

[T]he coalition must continue crushing the insurgency. That should not include offering rebels and terrorists a pass, as Maj. Gen. John Batiste did this week. The head of the 1st Infantry Division told insurgents they were free to leave Samarra or could remain inside the city if they stopped fighting a poor idea, since that would let them live to fight another day.

The coalition, under the leadership of the U.S., will win the peace in Iraq only with the persistent application of deadly force.

We wish there were another way. Sadly, there isn't. The insurgents who seek chaos, not peace leave no other option.

Posted by Forkum at September 8, 2004 10:20 PM
CFBooks_ad.gif