One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half.
~Winston Churchill
As I survey the various stories in the various newspapers and news-sites of the UK and the US, I keep on bumping into the wild theory that the terrorists main motivation for blowing up the London tube system and it's buses is due to Iraq. It's really amazing that the adults who penned these various pieces espousing the "blame it on Iraq" theory have forgotten that the al Qaeda and its minions have been after the West some ten years before Operation Iraqi Freedom. You'd think that these "journalists" would take the blinders off for a brief second and look at the fact that the modern day terrorists bombed the WTC in 1993, US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzinia in 1998, The USS Cole in 2000 as well as their destructive actions of September 11 well before the most recent war against Saddam. Even with all of this going on around them, these various people within the borders of Europe continue to yell at the top of their lungs "It's all about Bush's War," and think that the terrorists will stop blowing up their fellow countrymen if we leave them alone.
Fortunately, Victor Davis Hanson over at National Review Online has a wonderful piece debunking this "leave em alone and they'll leave us alone," lunacy being promoted in the broadsheets of Europe and the UK. Just look at what VDH has to say about what can basically be described as appeasement on behalf of the Europeans:
But Europe was supposedly different. Unlike the United States, it was correct on the Middle East, and disarmed after the Cold War. Indeed, the European Union was pacifistic, socialist, and guilt-ridden about former colonialism.Instead of warding of the horde of "Islamikaze" bombers from the shores of Europe, this strategy of "It's our fault, we're sorry to offend you, how can we repay you," has actually created an environment that ecourages the bombers to come on in and get started on the launching their horrific acts. While it's understandable that all people prefer safety over the threat of being blown up, history has shown time after time how appeasement or any show of weakness to an aggressor like al Qaeda actually encourages more terrorism than piece. No matter how you reason or analyze the situation at hand, you will always come to the conclusion that these terrorists are on a mission to destroy Western Civilization and replace it with a 7th century caliphate. The only way to deal with these terrorists is to go after them in the Middle East, destroy their ideological hate factories whether that's in mosques or madrassas in Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia or the ones throughout London and Europe. If we can shut down the organizations and filter out the voices of hate, then the world will be free of these deadly terrorists thus allowing us to travel to a from work or take a vacation abroad without the fear of being killed. The only way to achieve this victory over evil is to be ever vigilant and refuse to give in to the weak-kneed ideas of appeasement that has been all the rage throughout Europe. Hopefully 7/7 or 7/21 put some sense into these people but we'll have to see.
Hundreds of thousands of Muslims were left alone in unassimilated European ghettoes and allowed to preach or promulgate any particular hatred of the day they wished. Conspire to kill a Salmon Rushdie, talk of liquidating the "apes and pigs," distribute Mein Kampf and the Protocols, or plot in the cities of France and Germany to blow up the Pentagon and the World Trade Center — all that was about things Âover there and in a strange way was thought to ensure that Europe got a pass at home.
But the trump card was always triangulation against the United States. Most recently anti-Americanism was good street theater in Rome, Paris, London, and the capitals of the "good" West.
But then came Madrid — and the disturbing fact that after the shameful appeasement of its withdrawal from Iraq, further plots were hatched against Spanish justices and passenger trains.
Surely a Holland would be exempt — Holland of wide-open Amsterdam fame where anything goes and Muslim radicals could hate in peace. Then came the butchering of Theo Van Gogh and the death threats against parliamentarian Hirsi Ali — and always defiance and promises of more to come rather than apologies for their hatred.
Yet was not Britain different? After all, its capital was dubbed Londonistan for its hospitality to Muslims across the globe. Radical imams openly preached jihad against the United States to their flock as thanks for being given generous welfare subsidies from her majesty's government. But it was the United States, not liberal Britain, that evoked such understandable hatred.
No comments:
Post a Comment