Read sobering thoughts at Belmont Club about the inevitable costs of appeasement and our collective inability to precisely specify our enemies in the War on [Islamic] Terror.
One the most most striking things about the Global War on Terror is how closely it's resolution is linked with the longest standing issues of Western society. For that reason the war intrudes directly and insistently on Western domestic politics. The Madrid bombing of March 11, 2004 and the American Presidential elections in November are cases in point. Both are essentially about the War on Terror. The enemy cannot be named because doing so would overturn the 20th century political and economic foundations to its roots. It would tear down the Big Tent of political correctness; put a prosperity heavily dependent on oil supplies at risk; and replace an entire paradigm of international relations. For that reason naming the enemy will avoided for as long as possible; perhaps even after a mushroom or biological cloud darkens an American city.
Excessively pessimistic? No. For an example, consider how the International Court of Justice recently ruled in favor of Palestinian terrorists and against their civilian targets.
Insanely dfficult? Definitely. Read the whole thing.
Posted by Alan at July 18, 2004 08:08 AM