9-11, Eleven Years Later - The Next Steps

[jordan179]

Eleven years ago, the forces of Islamofascism committed a monstrous crime against America and against all humanity.  They made prisoner the civilian crews and passengers of four airliners and then murdered all their prisoners, in the course of an attack which brought down a civilian target -- the World Trade Center -- and slighly damaged one

Comments

[jordan179]

That's not what I meant by proportionate. It's the same principle that if some guy in a bar shoves you, that doesn't mean it's OK to shoot him. As for proportionate force, since you mentioned it, being the proverbial "firstest with the mostest" doesn't mean easy, rapid victory with modern asymmetrical warfare. So it pays to choose one's fights carefully. Doesn't that make sense?

Pakistan shielded Osama bin Laden from us. The man who was behind the murder of over 100 civilians taken prisoner by his forces on 9-11 and manned missile attacks against New York City and Washington DC (the first was of course necessary for the second, but he was under no obligation to choose that particular attack plan). By shielding Bin Laden, the government of Pakistan essentially announced its support for the 9-11 attacks.

If we do not respond to this as an act of war, how the hell do you expect us to deter anyone from anything? What happens when the next Third World tyrants feel peeved at America and they go "Well, Pakistan signed on to attacks against two of America's major cities, and America did nothing to her, so I guess I can get away with doing 'x'" ...?

Lest you think this extreme, keep in mind that, before 1979, nobody would have dared to attack and occupy the Embassy of a stronger Great Power. Because Carter let Iran get away with that, this has become a standard tactic employed by the barbarians. Norms can degrade if they are not actually enforced.

My point was that these armchair Caesars inside the Beltway are quite enthusiastic about getting the US into another batch of expensive spit-in-your-eye wars, without much personal risk to themselves (beyond being shunned at cocktail parties with lots of Democrats).

And what punishment would you propose for armchair Neville Chamberlains?

I never said that economic competition was a reason to go to war;

No, you said that we should avoid allying with India because India is an economic competitor.

... remember, I'm proposing *not* to go to war except as a last resort.

Oh, you mean if they invade and occupy our territory and capture and kill American citizens on it? That kind of last resort? Of course, Iran and Pakistan are guilty of both, so would you care to explain to me exactly what kind of last resort you mean?