No big emotional tribute to 9/11 today from me. I just want to point out that it has been seven years with no subsequent attacks. That doesn't mean that there is no threat, because there is and always will be.
It means that the threat is being mitigated through intelligence, law enforcement, and military actions in other countries. Have you noticed that there have been no attacks in ANY country from Al-Qaeda in more than a year? The military is bearing the brunt of what is left of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan. Due to their actions, those terrorists have a target in their own backyards instead of new York City or Washington, D.C.
We talk about military members fighting and dying for us, and that is true. But there is no more direct link than one of the dying from a terrorist attack in Iraq, because if that bad guy wasn't bombing military convoys, he would be bombing airports in the U.S.
Say what you will, we have decimated an organization that outgrew its britches. Click HERE for a summary of foiled attacks since 9/11.
You Are Among The Elite!
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Seven Years
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 Posts From Readers:
This Reuters newswire hot off the press:
- - - - -
Five former U.S. state secretaries urge Iran talks (Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:26pm EDT)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Five former U.S. secretaries of state said on Monday the next American administration should talk to Iran, a foe President George W. Bush has generally shunned as part of an "axis of evil."
The five -- Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, Warren Christopher, James Baker and Henry Kissinger -- all said they favored talking to Iran as part of a strategy to stop Tehran's development of a nuclear weapons program …
"I agree with Madeleine, and I suspect my other colleagues, that we should try to talk to them," Powell said during a forum hosted by The George Washington University and taped for broadcast on CNN …
Dealing with Iran has become an issue in the November U.S. presidential election campaign, with Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain sparring over Obama's stated readiness to talk to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other U.S. adversaries if elected president.
McCain has criticized Obama's stand, saying it shows naivete and inexperience.
- - - - -
Indeed. Naivete and inexperience, but not one of the last five Secretaries of State agrees with McCain. Do you still think flag pins, patriotic songs, and knee-jerk nationalism is the most intelligent way to conduct foreign policy. And do you really think a war with Iran, Russia, or anyone else who pisses you off will make America a safer, better nation? Think before you put on your partisan hats.
Eco, this was a positive comment about those hardworking souls who keep us safe...and a government that has been damned good at it.
Who the hell was talking about war with Iran or Russia?
But since you mention it, I know 192,000 Marines who would thump their chests and say "Come Get Some!"
Eco, this was a positive comment about those hardworking [sic] souls who keep us safe...and a government that has been damned good at it.
Those hard-working souls who keep us safe have been betrayed by a government that botched the job in Afghanistan (in case you haven't noticed, the Afghan war is NOT going very well because we took our eye off the ball).
Who the hell was talking about war with Iran or Russia?
McCain: "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran" to the tune of Barbara Ann by the Beach Boys.
Palin: In her Charlie Gibson interview, she acknowledged the terms of NATO membership ... and the U.S. obligation to respond to a Russian attack on Georgia in the event Georgia became a NATO member. Such chest-thumping bravado, ignores the fact that Russia still has a "mutually assured destruction" nuclear capability (and please note the proper phonetic spelling is NOT "new-clear").
But since you mention it, I know 192,000 Marines who would thump their chests and say "Come Get Some!"
Are you on personal terms with those 192,000? I am on personal terms with one U.S. Army officer who is a veteran of the first Gulf War (served in Saudi at KKMC), three times deployed during the Iraq war, and is now Major at the Pentagon. That person is my very own daughter, so don't throw me a superior-than-thou, super-patriot, sanctimonious attitude.
Eco, you have become quite bitter. Super patriot and sanctimonious? I think not. I am aware of your daughter and have expressed my gratitude to her, via you, several times. I am of the opinion, not based on emotion but of the logic of the matter, than we must confront those who seek to do us harm. I prefer to do it in their own hemisphere and not ours.
You would have us NOT stand with NATO and defend a member? The same pre-1914 policy almost led to Europe being conquered in two world wars. Wars that only by our participation saved millions of lives and prevented the takeover of the entier continent. Well, most of it anyway.
What I know is that those 192,000 Marines will not quivwer in fear at the thought of a fight with Russia, Iran, China, or all of them together.
You would have us NOT stand with NATO and defend a member?
I would NOT support Georgia's membership in NATO. What got lost in the hyper-rhetoric surrounding the Georgia-Russia conflict is the fact that Saakashvili staged a preemptive midnight raid on Ossetia thereby sparking the conflict. Diplomatic rule #1: When you cultivate an ally in the region, at least make sure the ally won't go off half-cocked and suck you into a war without mutual consultation and agreement ... and then expect you to rush to their aid after the fact. A casualty of this confrontation is the loss of Russian cooperation on nuclear proliferation (NOT pronounced "new-clear") and the Iran uranium enrichment program ... two vitally important issues that are now dead in the water. No to Georgian membership in NATO; the risk is nuclear war with Russia and "mutually-assured destruction." Is there something you are conveniently forgetting about the Cold War?
The same pre-1914 policy almost led to Europe being conquered in two world wars.
A logical fallacy to equate the state of the world in 2008 with the conditions of Europe in 1914. ... and idiotic in the extreme. You would be on more solid ground comparing apples and oranges.
What I know is that those 192,000 Marines will not quivwer [sic] in fear at the thought of a fight with Russia, Iran, China, or all of them together.
I can't believe you said this: 192,000 Marines against 3 countries comprising 1.5 billion of the world's population. Don't lecture me about the "logic of the matter." Maybe it is time for you to graduate beyond "low information" sloganeering and try reading ...
Andrew J. Bacevich. The limits of power, written by a former Colonel in the U.S. Army, a self-avowed conservative, and now professor of International Relations at Boston University. Methinks you are overdue for new information to inform your thinking and a dose of critical analysis.
Post a Comment