Some people like Jeff Jarvis, I think, will never get it. Being in Iraq, having our soldiers picked off by insurgents, has let Al Qaeda thrive. The bombing this morning could have just as easily happened on the DC Metro red line that myself and thousands of other people take in to work every day. We responded to Al Qaeda by attacking Iraq and not finishing the job in Afghanistan. The right lectures about not showing weakness to our enemies — but the best way to do that has been to do exactly what they want us to without truly taking the fight to them. At least 33 people are dead, several hundred injured – do we need that violence to come to Main St., USA before we act?
Andrew Sullivan endorsing the so-called “flypaper” strategy:
If the terrorists leave us alone in Iraq, fine, he said. But if they come and get us, even better. Far more advantageous to fight terror using trained soldiers in Iraq than trying to defend civilians in New York or London.
They’re fighting us in London, fighting us in New York, and going to hit us again in Washington and beyond if we refuse to strike them down with vengeance.
Related
Keep It Up, Newt
Seriously.
Detachment From Reality Syndrome
O-Dub wrote:
Really, the question should be: Do we need that violence to come to Main St., USA AGAIN before we act?
Because, you know, there was that little thing in New York and Washington a few years back. I seem to remember it was kinda bad.
Well, I’m glad he’s spent as much time talking about his remorse for the loss of life in London as he has about how shitty Fox News is, how Iraq “diverted” us from the War on Terror, and how lame Jeff Jarvis is.
Why don’t we round it out with a lengthy screed against Glenn Reynolds? I stand by my assessment: sad and pathetic.
How is it “dancing on graves” to point out that I’m pissed off that these asses want to kill us and our allies and we keep doing exactly the opposite of what we should be doing?
Well, Oliver, you got the terrorist attack you’ve been hoping for since 9-11. I’m sure you’re disappointed it didn’t happen here, but you can’t have your cake and all that. I mean, you DO throw in that it COULD HAVE happened here. Well, it didn’t.
The way you constantly dance on graves is disgusting.
And i say this as someone who didn’t think we should’ve gone into Iraq. The difference between you and I is, I’m not so insecure and hell-bent on scoring points that I root for terrorist attacks.
Oliver’s first response to terror attacks in London? Blame the Bush Administration. You’re the flip side of Fox News, dude.
Fucking sad.
At any rate, I’m going to end with this quote from Andrew Sullivan. It’s a bit repulsive, I think, to sit around and bicker about this shit today. Maybe another time. But not today.
[The] enemy is not our own flawed, fallible but elected governments. It is the people who would remove our ability to elect anyone.
I just wanted to say thank you for pointing out that Bush is showing weakness to our enemies. This is a point that cannot be made often enough. I often think about the Soviet Union, and how it lasted much longer than it should have because the world didn’t realize it was a paper tiger. But Bush not only broke our military (ironically, the thing the wingnuts were always accusing Clinton of doing), he did it on international TV for the whole world to see. A bogged down, undermanned military is not much of a deterrent to anyone I’m afraid.
Vincent:
So what Fox News is saying is okay with you? You’re just upset with OW that he’s mentioned the particular news network, and not concentrating on the victims and their families? Riiiight.
You’re not exactly leading by example here, Vinnie. Musta gotten yer Reich Wing marching orders to hit the OW site, eh?
So Vincent,
are all those people (that want to remove our ability to elect our govn’t) in Iraq?
Do you really believe in a flypaper strategy?
Do unicorns wake you up in the morning by blowing gently on your face?
Ever since the news about London came out this morning, posters on this blog and others that I have read have been sniping at eachother regarding perceived slights that have so little to do with the magnitude of this tragedy that it’s obvious, we’re all in shock.
I think many people had grown a wee bit complacent because there have been no major attacks since 2001; Spain somehow didn’t count because the CW was that they had brought it on themselves by capitulating to the terrorists. This is rubbish of course, but denial being what it is, it seemed like a reasonable idea at the time for some.
But London is horse of a different colour, especially considering that the Brits have been America’s staunchest allies in Iraq. A hit at them is in a way, a hit against Americans. It just seems so much closer, doesn’t it? The Brits have followed the same path as Americans in Iraq as a way of fighting terrorism–and it hasn’t worked for them.
I can sit here in my little house in Canada and smugly assume that because I’m Canadian (and our country isn’t in Iraq) I’m somehow safe. But I know better; one way or another, we are all in this together.
The fact is that the world did change on September 11, 2001, not because the attacks awoke the “sleeping giant” as I’ve heard said. But because suddenly, it became apparent that previously powerless people were able to bring war, destruction and death to the front door of the most powerful, well-armed country and disappear into the crowd. No amount of shopping buying SUVs will change this. We cannot go back to the way things were. Our lives have changed and we will never regain the illusion that we are safe.
And so we snipe at eachother over meaningless slights because that feels safe and familiar.
I think you actually miss the big argument, and that revolves around the legitimacy of the “fly-paper theory”.
The fly-paper theory being that by massing troops in Iraq and trying to bring Democracy to the Middle East, through that action, that those that are against our way of life will flock to Iraq to attack the attempt to bring Democracy to that country.
The continued belief and faith in this theory is an endangerment to everyone involved, from Iraqis to Americans, Australians, British and even the French. Its not a real plan to combat terrorism, its a plan to have a war that has no real end. It ignores the facts that real terrorism will strike where it can make the greatest impact, and that impact just isn’t going to be in Iraq.
The flypaper theory also makes the incorrect assumption that its only those with brown-skin, black hair and face Mecca while they pray that are targetting the US. What happens when those that are so discouraged with their government entities take matters into their own hands, ignorant of where their funding and training comes from, they perpetrate an act of terrorism against their home country?
You can sit there and mourn all you want, the people are dead and our lives are in danger by the obvious willful ignorance of leaders to the pathways and targets of real terrorists.
In short, the flypaper strategy is a losing one in the long run.
Vincent,
We will mourn the loss, and honor those killed in these terrorist acts, and those on 9/11, by refusing to accept the failures of leaders who allow them to continue.
Get out of the way or be trampled. We are bringing accountability to their doorstep.
I think part of the issue is that none of these debates are taking place in the broadcast media. We get flash graphics and death toll updates, but no reflection on how it all fits in to the big picture. Check out iwt.tv – they are trying to build something that will go deeper and do something that doesn’t just have a different opinion than Fox News, but starts from completely different assumptions about journalism actually investigating events. I think we can use some coverage that will actually ask the tougher questions and go into these kind of debates. Their blog on London:
http://www.iwtnews.com/node/1190
It is difficult to discuss the GWOT without distinguishing between terrorism, and assymetric warfare.
What’s going on in Iraq is AW. What happened in London is terrorism.
It’s confusing fire with arson. There will always be accidental and purposeful fires, and fires for murder and money. These are not eliminated by Smokey the Bear — it takes firefighters.
Just as we will always have firefighters, we will now always have anti – terrorist forces, and conventional troops trained in AW.
The fighting in Iraq is like setting up a firebreak , and so is Afghanistan. Support of terrorist operations from those two countries is practically nil.
Theit ability to wage asyummetric warfare is dwindling away to nothing, despite what Kos and DU tell you.
Every time a terrorist blows himself up in Iraq, he can’t blow himself up somewhere else.
And don’t worry about collateral damage. We’re doing our best to avoid civilian casualties, and the Iraqis and the Afghans know it. Are some still angry? Will some still become suicidal terrorists? Sure.
Look at Pays de Basque and Northern Ireland.
[...]
Seriously.
I wasn t just talking for talking s sake here. How many more people have to die until we get it? America was st [...]
So it’s not flypaper anymore now it’s a firebreak? Well that’s helpful. And outside of Wingnuttia, it’s recognized that support of terrorists operations from Afghanistan and Iraq is at an all time high. Failed states breed terrorists. Broken states breed terrorists. Why is that hard to understand?
A Kos fan, are you, Frank? You should check out the post called “The Counterspin.” It was put up yesterday so it’s not on the front page anymore, you have to go to the bottom and click “next 12″ to find it. If you’re too reality-averse to do it for yourself I’ll go ahead and tell you the punchline. International terrorism was on a downward trend until, you guessed it, George Bush came on the scene. After that the trend lines goes way up and stays there.