Thursday, September 12, 2002

Bits on War

The Iraqis promise to fight us with kitchen knives, sticks, and stones. That’s fine. We’ll use satellite-guided bombs, Abrams tanks, and a bunch of highly skilled killers from the Army and Marine Corps. But hey, give those sticks a shot. Couldn’t do worse than you did with your T-72s last time, eh? And you still don’t have chemicals and bio weapons, right? You proclaim you have none. Talk about “chicken hawks.” The Tikriti mafia is willing to fight to the last conscript Iraqi soldier. We’re coming. Soon.

The world has sympathy for us still, for what happened a year ago. I do appreciate that. I really do. But sympathy is not enough. We will not pretend that our enemies are not trying to kill us. We will not develop a sophistication that accepts attacks on our people as normal. We will not be the perpetual victim for the world to shed tears over. “Tsk. Tsk. The poor Americans. Now the Golden Gate Bridge is gone. And so soon after after Kansas City was evacuated and quarantined because of the nerve gas attack. I shall light two candles this time…”

We won’t stand for a world like that. I am not even angry with Europe at the moment. Their sympathy is real—for what it is worth. But our determination is real too. And our determination will make us secure, not your tears. Cry for us today. And rally against us tomorrow. For we have picked ourselves up and now we are the hunters. Stay out of our way. And the excellent Foreign Media Reaction shows trends going our way. Enough of the world will accept what we do even though they would not approve of it beforehand.

Our President’s speech to the UN concluded thus:

We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in the country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take.

Delegates to the General Assembly: We have been more than patient. We have tried sanctions. We have tried the carrot of "oil for food" and the stick of coalition military strikes. But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be completely certain he has nuclear weapons is when, God forbid, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming.

We are coming for Saddam and his minions.

Typically, because we fight and others continue to abuse their citizens—we are at fault for not stopping them. Good riddance to that horrible person, Mary Robinson. The so-called champion of human rights for the UN. Her term has ended. She saves special ire for America. Others she commends for their progress because they no longer pull all of a prisoner’s fingernails out during torture. She complains, "Now the United States is more focused on getting coalition partners against terrorism and is not necessarily raising human rights." Well, I guess she doesn’t accuse us of unilateralism at least! Imagine, a proper UN type complaining that we spend too much time looking for partners! Not to worry, Mrs. Robinson, we love human rights more than you can know. We’ll carry human rights to Baghdad very soon.

Mr. Viorst says we do not imagine the worst when we say we will invade Iraq. Oh, but we do. We imagine a September 11 with a nuke, or a dirty bomb, or nerve gas, or anthrax, or small pox. One major advantage proponents of invasion have against opponents is our worst case scenarios. Their worst case scenarios envision disasters striking overseas. Ours happen here at home. Try another line of attack, guys. This one doesn’t cut it either.

One year after the September 11 attacks, it strikes me that al Qaeda made the same mistake they mocked us for doing. The Islamist terrorists said all we could work up was an occasional drive by shooting—lob a few cruise missiles and call it a day. They had a point. Now we hunt them down with everything from cruise missiles to soldiers on the ground—every day. What did bin Laden do? He hit us with his version of cruise missiles, those hijacked planes. He killed a lot of us. But he could never defeat us that way. We will wipe his group out doing it our way.

One last thing. I recently saw the “I am an American” public service announcement. In contrast to the horrible “Stop the Hate” PSA by the same people, this simple ad speaks volumes about what is right about America and Americans. Americans of varying hues take turns looking at the camera and proclaiming, “I am an American.” All these people, whether they were born here or not, whether or not their parents or grandparents were born here, proclaimed their citizenship. From whatever culture that birthed them, our culture made them the most free, most productive people on the planet. Our culture accepted them (in time, granted, for our greatness does not mean perfection), and gave them a greater chance to succeed here than their own land ever could—that is why they (we, my grandparents were not born here after all) came here. That is why the Islamists hate us. We transform people into free, thinking, loyal Americans who will go back to the Old World and carry our banner—not their birth country's flag—to victory when we are attacked. It is a beautiful ad. It should be shown overseas. Our enemies will tremble at its implications.