Probably not, but Bob Poole has some suggestions, just in case we want to.
Category Archives: War Commentary
The Misogyny
…of terrorism.
The Arab culture is very, very sick. Which would be simply sad, if it weren’t for the fact that it generates so much violence across the world. Ultimately, this is what we are at war with, no matter how much we (and particularly the people presently with the levers of power) want to fantasize that we are not.
Where Is Hillary?
This seems to have been a massive Charlie Foxtrot of the State Department as well. Just for example, how did this guy get a multiple-entry visa?
Yet Her Highness is nowhere to be seen. In fact, the last time I recall seeing her was when she was berating a middle-school student somewhere near Timbuktu for asking a badly interpreted question about her husband.
At least Janet Incompetano has been out taking fire, making a fool of herself on an hourly basis, even though her department actually had not that much control over what happened. Do we need to put the Secretary of State’s picture on a milk carton?
Disconnect From Reality
Ron Radosh, with thoughts on the president’s (and his minions’) continuing state of denial about the war we are in, whether we want to be or not.
Did He Say Why He Waited?
I’d like to know what they got out of the guy before he lawyered up. There seems to be an assumption that he waited until the end of the flight in the hope that he would scatter airplane parts and jet fuel (not that there would be that much at the end of a flight) over the southeast Michigan landscape, or perhaps the airport itself. Call it the poor man’s hijacking. I assume that this is the thinking (to use a generous word) behind the rule about sitting with an empty lap for the last hour of flight.
But the chances of a bomb taking down an aircraft by blowing a hole in the fuselage are much higher when it’s at altitude, and more likely to pop like a balloon. Even if it had worked as designed (again, to use a generous word) it might not have brought down the plane at the lower altitude.
What if the lateness of the attempt was just that it took him that long to work up the gumption to do the deed? He had the whole flight to think about it, and it was almost over, and he finally realized that if he was going to do it, he had to do it now, and procrastination time was over? If so, it’s just one more reason to think the new rules imbecilic.
How Much Demand…?
…would there be for an airline that flew planes with only pigskin seats?
Change!
If the president is so big on change (and hope) here, why is he so seemingly averse to it in Iran? And why was he so quick to declare the Honduran regime illegitimate, but remains unwilling to do so for the Tehran tyrants?
Does anyone imagine that regime change in Iran would give us something worse? Other than, of course, the president won’t get to continue to futilely show his diplomatic chops by naively negotiating with this one?
“Because We Can”
Why do we fail to detect or defeat the guilty, and why do we do so well at collective punishment of the innocent? The answer to the first question is: Because we can’t—or won’t. The answer to the second question is: Because we can. The fault here is not just with our endlessly incompetent security services, who give the benefit of the doubt to people who should have been arrested long ago or at least had their visas and travel rights revoked. It is also with a public opinion that sheepishly bleats to be made to “feel safe.” The demand to satisfy that sad illusion can be met with relative ease if you pay enough people to stand around and stare significantly at the citizens’ toothpaste. My impression as a frequent traveler is that intelligent Americans fail to protest at this inanity in case it is they who attract attention and end up on a no-fly list instead. Perfect.
It will continue until we demand our rights again. And unfortunately, this is a bi-partisan problem. This idiotic philosophy applied in the last administration as well. It’s a natural tendency of bureaucrats of any stripe.
Also, I was listening to some talk radio today in the car (Prager) and it occurred to me that people have this strange notion that “safe” is a binary condition. Something is safe or it is not. But it’s not. As I’ve said in other contexts (what a mess the human spaceflight program is), there is no safety this side of the dirt. Every decision you make, every action you take, carries some level of risk. Each one must be balanced against the expected benefit. When someone asks the president if it’s “safe to fly,” he should use it as a teachable moment. But he won’t.
On The Horizon
Some New Year’s predictions from Victor Davis Hanson. He’s lot more optimistic than I am on the ability of this administration to correct course, or learn from mistakes.
He also takes Matthew Yglesias to school. Though that’s not hard — a typical eighth grader could do it.
The Folly Continues
…no thanks to the government, the plane was not destroyed, and we won’t get to the bottom of the larger conspiracy (enabling the likes of Napolitano to say there’s no indication of a larger plot — much less one launched by an international jihadist enterprise) because the guy got to lawyer up rather than be treated like a combatant and subjected to lengthy interrogation. But the terrorist will be convicted at trial (this “case” tees up like a slam-dunk), so the administration will put it in the books as a success … just like the Clinton folks did after the ’93 WTC bombers and the embassy bombers were convicted. In their minds, litigation success equals national security success.
Stooge Gibbs said today that the administration takes the war seriously, but you wouldn’t know it by their behavior. Attempting to blow up a civilian airliner while being Muslim is not a civilian crime — it is an act of war, by an illegal combatant.
[Update a few minutes later]
More thoughts from Victor Davis Hanson:
I think the year-long mantra of “Bush destroyed the Constitution” is now almost over, and we will begin again worrying about our collective safety rather than scoring partisan points by citing supposed excesses in our anti-terrorism efforts. With the delay in closing Guantanamo (from the promised shuttering on Jan. 20, 2010 to . . . sometime in 2011?), Obama’s quiet copy-catting of Bush security protocols (such as wiretaps, intercepts, tribunals, and renditions), and the popular outcry against the upcoming show trial of KSM in New York, a public consensus is growing that radical Muslims like Hasan and Mutallab will continue to attempt to kill Americans. Citizens increasingly understand that the last eight years of relative safety following 9/11 were due only to heightened security at home and proactive use of force abroad, that we should cease trying to appease radical Islam by dreaming up new euphemisms (“overseas contingency operations,” “man made disasters,” etc.), and that it is time to stop the apologetics and kowtowing, and grudgingly accept that thousands of radical Islamic fundamentalists worldwide want to kill Americans — and dozens of governments, at least on the sly, hope that they do. Such venom has nothing to do with past American behavior or George Bush’s strut, nor can it be ameliorated on the cheap by Barack Obama’s Nobel Prize, middle name, or reset-button diplomacy.
Even if he starts now, though, people will remember the naivety of the first year of office, and the left will remain angry at him that he’s acting just like the BusHitler. He’s in a no-win situation, politically. And I have no sympathy. He asked for the job, and lied his way into it.