Surprising commentary from the LA Times today. Surprising in that their op-ed illustrates -in the most striking fashion- the dangers of the rise of Islamic barbarism, even more suprising in that it was written by Sam Harris, a noted liberal academic & author.
In their analyses of U.S. and Israeli foreign policy, liberals can be relied on to overlook the most basic moral distinctions. For instance, they ignore the fact that Muslims intentionally murder noncombatants, while we and the Israelis (as a rule) seek to avoid doing so. Muslims routinely use human shields, and this accounts for much of the collateral damage we and the Israelis cause; the political discourse throughout much of the Muslim world, especially with respect to Jews, is explicitly and unabashedly genocidal.Given these distinctions, there is no question that the Israelis now hold the moral high ground in their conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah. And yet liberals in the United States and Europe often speak as though the truth were otherwise.
We are entering an age of unchecked nuclear proliferation and, it seems likely, nuclear terrorism. There is, therefore, no future in which aspiring martyrs will make good neighbors for us. Unless liberals realize that there are tens of millions of people in the Muslim world who are far scarier than Dick Cheney, they will be unable to protect civilization from its genuine enemies.
I am equally frustrated with the Left. I want nothing from them but their support in the war on terror, yet they are absolutely paralyzed by their obsessive hatred of President Bush.
This abandonment of reason is dangerous, as Harris clearly illustrates. Liberals, by their own choice, have given us every indication that they are physically and mentally incapable of fighting the war on terror.
That doesn’t mean I hate them and it doesn’t mean I think they’re bad people. It does mean that I cannot trust them with the national defense, and will continue to vote Republican until they prove otherwise.
Amen Brother
Harris finally has one thing right.
Namely that the liberals do NOT understand that we are at war with “war with those who believe that death in defense of the faith is the highest possible good, that cartoonists should be killed for caricaturing the prophet and that any Muslim who loses his faith should be butchered for apostasy.”
For that he is to receive a major pat on the back and another for saying, “… liberals hate the current administration with such fury that they regularly fail to acknowledge just how dangerous and depraved our enemies in the Muslim world are.”
But that is where it ends for as this quote reveals he sees Christianity as just a great a threat to his liberal-secular world view.
“… Americans will come to believe that the only people hard-headed enough to fight the religious lunatics of the Muslim world are the religious lunatics of the West. Indeed, it is telling that the people who speak with the greatest moral clarity about the current wars in the Middle East are members of the Christian right, whose infatuation with biblical prophecy is nearly as troubling as the ideology of our enemies. Religious dogmatism is now playing both sides of the board in a very dangerous game.”
Interestingly enough, he has not addressed how secular world views caused the greatest slaughers the world has ever known via Germany, Russia, China, and Cambodia in the 20th century.
Still, he deserves his pat on the back as he finally gets it about his liberal breathern and their lack of understanding about an immediate and real threat to their entire world view.
He also still gets a disappointed sigh as he does not get it. He does not understand Christainity threatens only the extremes of his secular faith / belief.
RileyD, nwJ
RileyDriver5x5
It’s cynical to say, but give it two years until the President leaves office and then they’ll be all for combating terrorism.
(well, not “all for”–but moreso than they are now)
hope you’re right man. Although if the prosecuted this war with the same passion that they dedicate towards hating President Bush, this thing would have been over years ago.
I do agree that liberals and the left have very little understanding of the nature of the world or military affairs and know very little of how to conduct this war competently.
However, I cannot say that the Bush administration has been without MAJOR faults, especially in how it has conducted the war in Iraq. Things are not going well there, and they need to be held accountable for this.
why do conservatives always get it wrong? most liberals have absolutely no problem with the war on terror . . . it’s the war in iraq that they hate. Liberals don’t see how the war in iraq, in any possible way, helps with the war on terror.
no problem, john.
so what switch do you have to flip in your brain that turns the war in iraq from a fuck up into something useful?
in fact, the war in iraq seems like iron-clad proof that republicans have no idea how to win the war on terror.
what is it that allows two different people to look at the same info and come to opposing conclusions? i think it’s a little more complicated than simply “understanding the nature of the world”.
I will be the absolute first to admit that Iraq should have been planned, strategized, and executed for more effectively than it was.
If you honestly can’t see the usefulness in killing Al-Qaeda in Iraq, or what a tremendous victory our withdrawal would be for them, then I can’t help you man.
“what is it that allows two different people to look at the same info and come to opposing conclusions?”
Well in my case, it’s military service and experience.
Jay seems limited by what he reads in the papers. Glad he’s turning to milbloggers for answers.
hehehe, debate with a military man on military affairs at your own peril. It is why I keep my arguments with my husband to dishes and taking out the trash.
hey bingo, sarah,
i am definately looking for info beyond the papers and i’ve come to enjoy milblogs a great deal. it’s very cool to access different perspectives, but i fear no debate or peril, sarah!
john, of course i see the usefulness in killing al qaeda in iraq. but i’d rather kill al qaeda everywhere. it’s also kinda obvious to point out that defeat for america means victory for your enemies. soooo, if i can agree to those points, then i think you can help me!
more interesting to me than the strategic value of the war in iraq, is partisan divide. do you think that, without any military experience of my own, that i won’t ever really understand any of this stuff?
A common problem, as I see it, with the anti-Iraq war movement is that they are reliving 2003 over and over again.
That debate is over, for better or for worse, we invaded and occupied.
Now we have to figure out a way to win. Because pulling out early, and thus losing, would be a tremendous victory for foreign terrorists, period.
Military experience helps dictate what is a military disaster, what isn’t, what’s a loss and what’s a victory, what’s a civil war and what isn’t.
Iraq is a tough fight, but liberals exaggerate how bad ground sit actually is.
that’s a good point, about being stuck in 03. i ithnk liberals need some sort of validation before they can gain any sort of closure and move on.
so, how is victory defined, generally? is it measured by goals accomplished, or by denying the enemy their goals? or is victory nothing less than the complete destruction of the enemy?
Tell me, in a US court of law, does it really count for manslaughter if, after dropping a hammer on someone’s head, you say that you understood that it would kill him but did not INTEND to kill him, only the mosquito on his head? No, it doesn’t. It is called willful disregard for life, and is no less justifiable than premeditated murder. (Manslaughter occurs when you either accidentaly kill someone or kill when in an emotional and mental state that paralyzes judgment)
The Jewish state and the Christian state have taken moralism to absurdity and farce,attempting to be more moral than everyone else, while at the same time pursuing the noble ambition of being SUPREME to everyone else! These two don’t coincide. Israeli reservist have sacrificed their blood in Jenine, Bint Jbeil and numerous other insurget strongholds for the lofty policy of peace and minimal force. The best men of America have died in humanitarian missions to Moghadishu and other places. We can be proud of that; we can also be proud in how amaturish Islamic barbarism seems next to the apocalyptic devestation of Lebanon, Afghanistan (one of the poorest countries in the world), Japan (after they tried to surrender) Berlin (another terrorist-free city) and Yugoslavia (where the US employed nuclear-tactical against thousands of civilians).
I meant “no more justifiable”.
vejojuxirecn
nice post