He also remarkably writes:
Which brings the inevitable conclusion: regardless of what happens to Iraq's nascent democracy, a war must be fought to defeat the terrorist ideology, and to compel the nations that sponsor terrorism against us and our allies to cease doing so. Unless and until that occurs, the war goes on.Thanks Jed for confirming that you and yours see "war" as pretty much the only answer. The fact that military options are but one piece of the long, hard process of dealing with threats that face our world seems to escape you. And once again, how does war defeat an ideology? Can war compel? I understand war destroys. War doesn't however build squat. Also, since you've pretty much rejected Old Europe and the United Nations I don't suppose cooperation amongst law enforcement and intelligence communities gives you much hope. But I'd really like to know how to respond to the threat from China? Reckon we ought to be getting ready for the "showdown"? You claim China wants war don't you? It looks like you're now rather worried about the words of Islamists, China, Hugo Chavez and Russia and ... as well. Newt Gingrich wrote the foreword so surely it will be a blockbuster.
Surely being ready to fight a possible enemy possessing serious modern weapons and the like rather than trying to fight an ideology makes some sense. I agree we ought to be aware of words from nations or groups or persons that might wish us harm or merely have contrary interests or perspectives.
I also know that Regnery Publishing and their Human Events and ... not to mention Jed Babbin might not be the best sources to turn for serious thinking. Earning that keep Jed on the wingnut welfare? Being on the dole for the glorious cause of movement conservatism must be a nice way to earn a living since so many are doing it. John Gunn