Actually, The War On Terror Hasn't Begun

Victor Davis Hanson asks: Is the War on Terror Over?

Do we still need to fight a war on terror?

The answer seems to be no for an increasing number in the West who are weary over Afghanistan and Iraq or complacent from the absence of a major attack on the scale of 9/11.

It's all but become laughable given the current politic. The reality is that any war on terror has hardly even begun. The Bush Doctrine called for seeding democracy within the Middle East, a democracy other than Israel, that is. Political duplicity by the Democrats and ignorance by many might result in that doctrine being rejected.

Assuming that, I say the war on terror has not actually begun as I can point to nothing tangible we have done or are doing to seriously change governments from Saudi Arabia to Iran. So, where will that leave us in some number of years?

Tyrannical regimes, many the West has supported and continues to support over the years, will continue to hold sway within the Middle East. That tyranny will sow even more discontent. As those undemocratic leaders have already proved, they are more than happy to direct the anger and resentment of their uncivilized and unwashed toward the West.

Sunni or Shi'ite extremism, or perhaps a combination of both, makes no difference in the end, so we might as well call it Islamism, will eventually develop a strangle hold on the global economy through their control of oil. How that all plays out is impossible to predict. But one likely scenario should certainly give us pause.

A world economy in tatters, manipulated by extremist regimes, some possessing nukes ... does that really sound like a road map for peace to you? It doesn't much sound like one to me.

There will come a world war on terror one day, provided the Defeat-ocrats have their way. The isolated acts of groups of actors has never been what it is the West should fear the most. It is the amassing of power by extremists on a global scale that would eventually reek true havoc on the world.

That war will be fought with terror, but also with massive armies and nuclear weapons. And it will thrust the world into a dark era, likely greater even than World War's one and two combined.

The costs will be in the trillions, the lose of life will be measured in millions ... and eventually any insightful historians will look back and long for what, relatively speaking, would have been the virtual cakewalk of staying the course in Iraq.

The Hanson column here. Also see Dr. Sanity blogging here.

Comments

[scarshapedstar]

We've gone from "Mission Accomplished" to this?

[seekeronos]

That WILL be te case of yo hippies have your way and sacrifice freedom upon the altar of convenience and Nevillian "peace in our time", and our enemies laugh us to scorn, and drag us down to thier mud-hut, medieval lifestyles.

But I think the Lord Jesus might pop in for a earth-shakin' reality check before things get to the point where no humanity remains.

[Zifnab]

"The costs will be in the trillions, the lose of life will be measured in millions ... and eventually any insightful historians will look back and long for what, relatively speaking, would have been the virtual cakewalk of staying the course in Iraq."

Wow. See, funny you should explain it that way, because by most estimates the cost has already been in trillions, the life lost is steadily reaching the millions, and the "cakewalk" people have been promising in Iraq for the past four years has yet to materialize.

But you can't run on good intentions alone (not that it isn't one more thing this Presidency has been sorely lacking). Wars require tanks, guns, bombs, troops. We're quickly running out of all of them. They also require large capital investments, money we piddled away on Alaskan bridges, faith-based failures, and exorbitant tax cuts. So we've got a Republican Administration that doesn't want to raise the money for a war it doesn't have the troops to fight and doesn't want to ever end. The ball has been in the conservative court for over half a decade. It has offically been dropped, and dropped hard. Remember when Tom DeLay and Bill Frist were shrieking of Terri Shavio? Remember when there was the Nuclear Showdown at the Filibuster Coral? The Bankruptcy Bill? The Operation Predator that seemed to employee as many pedophiles as it caught? The epic failures of FEMA and a rebuilding effort that has been a travesty of corruption from day zero? This was the Bush Administration frittering away time, energy, and political capital on things that weren't terrorists coming to kill us.

The conservatives lost focus, Dan. They got social graces confused with the hard war on terror and they started worrying more about Justice Sunday than Osama Bin Laden. They don't give two flips about national security and they've been saying it with their votes for the past 6 years. Time's up.

[Darth Malice]

The United States is in the very start of a long war with Islam.20 or 30 years from now we will be fighting Al-Queda's armies for conrol of Europe.

[LOL]

some of the winger commenters need to slow down and cool out for a bit. Your typos are making your posts inscrutable. Or at the very least, making you look stupid.

[hobo]

Repeating myself from an earlier post, I strongly believe the Bushwhacker plans to start WWIII. Popularity polls show him at about 30% and being voted the worst Prez the country has had. He needs to do something to enhance his legacy and therefore, with our armed forces stretched so thin and having to beg, borrow and steal to remain above water, he will launch nuclear weapons with the excuse that he had no choice; that he was forced to, in order to save the rest of the free world. In spite of what happened when the US dropped the A-bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, it won't work in the Middle East.

I once liked the guy, but now regard him as a very pathetic and ignorant human; one languishing in an undeniable state of abject denial.

God save us from this ego maniac.

[Buzzy]

I think that the way Bush put together his administration and the pitiful state of the decision makers in the Pentagon had more to do with the mistakes made in Afghanistan and Iraq than Bush himself ever did.

One of the biggest mistakes was keeping Clinton's CIA director, Tenet, in place. Powell was a dismal failure as Secretary of State. I was never enamored with Rummy as Secy of Defense. The Pentagon is so hyped up over high tech smart bombs, big armour, high speed Humvee patrols etc. that they forgot they were fighting raggedy men using AK47s and RPGs. That's like swatting flies with a sledge hammer.

It's the same stupid mistakes our military leaders have made since VietNam. You can pound the enemy with firepower, flatten a village with tanks, cruise thru an area twice or 3 times a day but if you don't hold ground, meet and greet the natives, provide them security, invest in their future and make them your friends you're just spinning your wheels.

While a lot of the trolls like to make fun of "the surge" I would submit that it's a good thing we finally started putting enough troops into Iraq to hold some ground and stop spinning our wheels. We should have gone in with twice as many troops as we did anyway. The front line is seldom more than 5 miles deep, more troops are needed to secure the area the troops just rolled over than to fight at the front.

[Purple Avenger]

"because by most estimates the cost has already been in trillions, the life lost is steadily reaching the millions"

And I can find these estimates where? AQ propaganda pamphlets?

[southdakotaboy]

This whole thing is going to take a much more serious turn when the muslims start to mees with the Chinese. The government in China will not allow any disent in its borders and they have some major muslim ethnic groups in the west. When these groups try and break away things are going to get ugly over there. We will most likly never hear much about it at first but when we do it will involve the deaths of tens of thousands if not more.

[templar knight]

PA, you'll have to excuse Ziffy. Apparently his mommy and daddy sent him off to college without handling one of the single most important parental chores. They never spanked his little ass for lying, so he grew up to be a liar.

[Hard Right]

Some mistakes were made, but not invading wasn't an option for many reasons-reasons I pointed out in another thread.

Not enough troops-Obviously we had enough to take Iraq, but not enough to hold territory, keep the peace, destroy weapon stockpiles, seal the borders, etc.

Not killing Al Sadr the first chance we had. The so called civil war was little more than thugs under Sadr killing Sunnis and sunni Saddam holdouts and terrorists killing shiites. The terrs wanted such a situation knowing the Dems would squeel like pigs because of the violence.

Hugely excessive concern about civilian casualties. Restrictions make sense until they become so ridiculous they start costing Americans their lives. (thanks to lefties this is a problem)

[ET]

I have a lot of respect for Victor Davis Hansen, who is actually a democrat. As a historian, he brings a broader context to the "War on Terror." From his perspective, the threat we face is very real and will take effort and time to defeat. He is anathema to the "give up iraq now...the WOT is a bush conspiracy" morons who plague his party.

And to the liberals who post here. I'd suggest nowings, kelvin and BallsinStomach read his column, but I fear there are too many big words.