This Is the Way Out????

Adam's Apple

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2004
4,092
452
48
As John Stossel is so fond of saying, "GIVE ME A BREAK!" Victory over the terrorists is the only realistic way out if we don't want to fight them tooth and nail in our own country.

JEFF JACOBY
The Danger of Engaging with The Enemy
By Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe
December 6, 2006

How many times does the lesson have to be relearned? There is no appeasing the unappeasable. When democracies engage with fanatical tyrants, the world becomes not less dangerous but more so.

Shortly after 9/11, President Bush famously declared that every nation "now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." At every step of the way, Iran and Syria have unambiguously been with the terrorists.

As the world's foremost sponsors of radical Islamic violence, the State Department reported in April, "Iran and Syria routinely provide unique safe haven, substantial resources, and guidance to terrorist organizations." While the Assad regime engineers the assassination of Lebanese politicians, Iran's rabid president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, calls openly for "death to America" and demands that Israel be "wiped off the map."

Syria was Saddam Hussein's most dependable Middle East ally, and almost from the moment the Iraqi insurgency began, it was clear that Damascus was pouring fuel on the fire. Iran, too, works overtime to intensify the Iraqi bloodshed. ABC News reported last week on the discovery of "smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq: brand-new weapons fresh from Iranian factories." Among the finds: "advanced IEDs designed to pierce armor and anti-tank weapons." In other words, to murder US troops.

No regimes on earth have more to gain from an American defeat in Iraq than the theocracy in Iran and the Assad dictatorship in Syria. They have every incentive to aggravate the Iraqi turmoil that has so many Americans clamoring for withdrawal. "There is no evidence to support the assumption that Iran and Syria want a stable Iraq," writes Middle East Quarterly editor Michael Rubin, whose experience in the region runs deep. "Rather, all their actions show a desire to stymie the United States and destabilize their neighbor. More dangerous still . . . is the naive assumption that making concessions to terrorism or forcing others to do so brings peace rather than war."

The war against radical Islam, of which Iraq is but one front, cannot be won so long as regimes like those in Tehran and Damascus remain in power. They are as much our enemies today as the Nazi Reich was our enemy in an earlier era. Imploring Assad and Ahmadinejad for help in Iraq can only intensify the whiff of American retreat that is already in the air. The word for that isn't realism. It's surrender.

for full article:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed.../12/06/the_danger_of_engaging_with_the_enemy/
 
It's like we invaded France and then asked the Nazis and Italian fascists if they'd play nice. We should be sending troops into those two countries before we try to fully stabilize Iraq. It's like....buying new furniture while youre house is still on fire. Come to think of it, having the cart before the horse seems to be a big problem among American politicians, most notably when it comes to the border.
 

Forum List

Back
Top