Friday, October 07, 2005

The Friday Furo Questus


Questus Furore: Oh, That War
The President gave an excellent speech on the War on Terror today. It is a speech I was hoping he would make.

But I'm not sure anyone heard. It merited a whole 30 seconds on the news tonight. And the critics wailed, as they have every night.

But some great points were made:
...The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet, in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century. Like the ideology of communism, Islamic radicalism is elitist, led by a self-appointed vanguard that presumes to speak for the Muslim masses. Bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, quote, "what is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers. He assures them that his -- that this is the road to paradise -- though he never offers to go along for the ride.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life. We've seen it in the murders of Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg, and Margaret Hassan, and many others. In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo Van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I do not feel your pain -- because I believe you are an infidel." And in spite of this veneer of religious rhetoric, most of the victims claimed by the militants are fellow Muslims.

When 25 Iraqi children are killed in a bombing, or Iraqi teachers are executed at their school, or hospital workers are killed caring for the wounded, this is murder, pure and simple -- the total rejection of justice and honor and morality and religion. These militants are not just the enemies of America, or the enemies of Iraq, they are the enemies of Islam and the enemies of humanity. (Applause.) We have seen this kind of shameless cruelty before, in the heartless zealotry that led to the gulags, and the Cultural Revolution, and the killing fields.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies. In truth they have endless ambitions of imperial domination, and they wish to make everyone powerless except themselves. Under their rule, they have banned books, and desecrated historical monuments, and brutalized women. They seek to end dissent in every form, and to control every aspect of life, and to rule the soul, itself. While promising a future of justice and holiness, the terrorists are preparing for a future of oppression and misery.

The critic's response? "They're not really a threat, and besides, Bush has no strategy." Of course, they've been real helpful, just chock-full of, ideas. It's all Bush's fault, you see, because he didn't support [insert liberal cause here]. And now it is up to them to stop him, through their wise words, stirring protest songs, and principled stands.

But just last evening, a "specific threat" was made against the New York City subway system. Last week, a man blew himself up at a University of Oklahoma football game. We may very well be on the leading edge of a terror offensive.

Of course, these stories are still developing.

The Islamist movement has, for well over a decade, announced their intentions to kill any who stand in their path to total dominion. When will we take them at their word?

Recommended Reading
Victor Davis Hanson: "The Quiet Consensus" and takes a look at an alternative Iraq.

Iain Murray takes a look at the Conservative Party in Britain.

Jim Robbins analyzes President Bush's speech yesterday.

Jonah Goldberg on Harriet Miers.

Patrolling the Front
e.gage is still finding random pictures. Is it that quiet up there? One thing we definitely agree on, though - you should go see Serenity.

Jamo (j.m.) is maintaining the U2 watch, and finds an interesting article on the power of books. He and I also examined the latest nomination to the Supreme Court.

Adam (The Niem) is back! He reviewed Serenity for us, reviews the start of the second season of Lost, and shares some favorite Conan O'Brian jokes.

Nathan wonders if Harriet Miers is part of a bigger strategy.

Matt and Maine Man are MIA, and Spencer (The Unknowable) has been lurking in the comments.

And me (Tyler)? I want to believe Ms. Miers is a good choice, but I'm not convinced. I think President Bush flubbed this one. It's also the 50th anniversary of National Review, there's some interesting earthquake news, and you really need to go see Serenity.

Thought(s) of the Week:
"Personal relations matter more in international politics than the historians would have us believe. Of course, nations will follow their overriding interest on the great issues regardless, but there are many important occasions when the trust built up over several years of contacts makes a real difference to how things turn out."
-- President Ronald Reagan

"I aim to misbehave."
-- Capt. Malcolm Reynolds, Serenity

Churchill Quote of the Week:
"Statesmen are not called upon to settle the easy questions. These often settle themselves. It is when the balance quivers and the proportions are veiled in mist that the opportunities for world-saving decisions present themselves."
-- Sir Winston Churchill


At 12:44 AM, Blogger PJ said...

I agree that President Bush made an excellent speech.

Had it not been for conservative talk radio, I doubt I would have heard more than ten seconds of it.

Even more telling was the kneejerk Reid/Pelosi denunciation of the President's common sense. They obviously hadn't listened to a word he said.

Great blog. Bookmarking now.


Post a Comment

<< Home