[lit-ideas] Re: After August 22
- From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:02:26 -0400
Another surprise, anti-American ambassadors to the M.E. who write books aren't
allowed in Lawrence's bunker. Don't read him, Lawrence. You don't want to
know what the other side is saying. Come to think of it, that's why we're
doing so well in Iraq, because we invaded without a clue as to what the other
side was saying. Carry on that tradition, and shoo Galbraith and Suskind and
Ricks away from your door.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Helm
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 8/23/2006 12:45:54 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: After August 22
I didn?t see or read the Peter Galbraith reference and inasmuch as I have a
policy against responding to notes I haven?t read, I guess I?m just going to
have to forego arguing ?with Peter Galbraith.?
And one of the things I mean was in the earlier Walter Williams article I
posted. Perhaps it didn?t make it all the way through the Lit-Ideas mail
system. It was as follows:
Lawrence
There?s no denying it. The Left has had a tremendous influence on the US since
WWII. Leftists do ?peace at any price? with straight faces and no signs of
shame. They root for the enemy. If it were up to them Saddam Hussein would
still be in power. If it were up to them, Iran would get their nukes [I wrote
this before reading the latest MEMRI report]. Walter Williams doesn?t use the
term ?Left? so that should meet the approval of those who don?t like pigeon
holes, but can there be any doubt? He even has a special message for Irene in
his last paragraph -- gotta like the guy.
Lawrence
Will the West defend itself?
By Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Does the United States have the power to eliminate terrorists and the states
that support them? In terms of capacity, as opposed to will, the answer is a
clear yes.
Think about it. Currently, the U.S. has an arsenal of 18 Ohio class submarines.
Just one submarine is loaded with 24 Trident nuclear missiles. Each Trident
missile has eight nuclear warheads capable of being independently targeted.
That means the U.S. alone has the capacity to wipe out Iran, Syria or any other
state that supports terrorist groups or engages in terrorism -- without risking
the life of a single soldier.
Terrorist supporters know we have this capacity, but because of worldwide
public opinion, which often appears to be on their side, coupled with our weak
will, we'll never use it. Today's Americans are vastly different from those of
my generation who fought the life-and-death struggle of World War II. Any
attempt to annihilate our Middle East enemies would create all sorts of
handwringing about the innocent lives lost, so-called collateral damage.
Such an argument would have fallen on deaf ears during World War II when we
firebombed cities in Germany and Japan. The loss of lives through saturation
bombing far exceeded those lost through the dropping of atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
After the battle of Midway, and the long string of Japanese defeats in the
Pacific, including Guam, Okinawa and the Philippines, had today's Americans
been around, they'd be willing to negotiate with Japan for peace, pointing to
the additional loss of lives if we continued the war. More than likely they
would have made the same argument in 1945, when German defeat was imminent. Of
course, had there been a peace agreement with Japan and Germany, all it would
have achieved would have been to give them time to recoup their losses and
resume their aggression at a later time, possibly equipped with nuclear
weapons.
We might also note that the occupation of Germany and Japan didn't pose the
occupation problems we face in Iraq. The reason is we completely demoralized
our enemies, leaving them with neither the will nor the means to resist.
Our adversaries in the Middle East have advantages that the axis powers didn't
have -- the Western press and public opinion. We've seen widespread
condemnation of alleged atrocities and prisoner mistreatment by the U.S., but
how much media condemnation have you seen of beheadings and other gross
atrocities by Islamists?
Terrorists must be pleased by statements of some members of Congress, such as
those by Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who recently said, "I don't take sides for
or against Hezbollah." Hezbollah, backed by Iran, is responsible for the 1983
bombing of Beirut barracks killing 241 U.S. service members.
I'm not suggesting that we rush to use our nuclear capacity to crush states
that support terrorism. I'm sure there are other less drastic military options.
What I am suggesting is that I know of no instances where appeasement, such as
the current Western modus operandi, has borne fruit.
What Europeans say about what should be done about terrorist states should fall
on deaf ears. Their history of weakness and cowardice during the 1930s goes a
long way toward accounting for the 60 million lives lost during World War II.
During the mid-'30s, when Hitler started violating the arms limitations of the
Versailles Treaty, France and Britain alone could have handily defeated him,
but they pursued the appeasement route.
Anyone who thinks current Western appeasement efforts will get Iran to end its
nuclear weapons program and end its desire to eliminate Israel is dumber than
dumb. Appeasement will strengthen Iran's hand, and it looks as if the West,
including the United States, is willing to be complicit in that strengthening.
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Andy Amago
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:24 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: After August 22
In other words, it's okay for us to redesign the Middle East, and the countries
in the area have to take what we dish out. Is that what you mean?
How do you respond to the fact - the fact, Lawrence, or argue with Peter
Galbraith that he's wrong - that Iran made friendly overtures and we rebuffed
them at every turn? Why are you not focusing on our warlike rhetoric? It's
our right to be belligerent without push back? Do you think that's feasible?
Other related posts:
