 |
 |
 |
|
Re: Friday, November 3, 2006
The problem for many of us is the utterly non-serious foreign policy of the Democrats. Sure, you can toss rocks at Iraq, and the idealism that has led us to try to Democratize it (Wilsonian, almost). However, abject abandonment is not an answer. If you thought the post Vietnam genocide was fun, wait until after a retreat from Iraq. Here's some of what will play out: -- Iran is a Shia power. With the US out of the picture, Saudi Arabia and Egypt (Sunni powers) will feel compelled to get nukes for their own protection. The Shia and Sunni hate each other along the same lines as 17th century Protestants and Catholics. A 30 years war rerun with nukes isn't my idea of a good time -- The Turks will watch the Kurds try to set up a separate Kurdistan, and invade northern Iraq, in order to stop their Kurds from trying to join in. It's come close to that with us there. -- Hamas and Hezbollah will see a US withdrawal as a sign that it's time to make the final push on Israel - and Iran and Syria will agree. Oh boy - another regional conflict with nukes all around. -- We'll end up having to bail from Afghanistan. You think Pakistan or any of the other border states will want (now seen as fickle) US troops using their country to enter Afghanistan? End result: jihadists interpret Iraq (shortly followed by Afghanistan) as huge victories. This isn't like Ireland, where the IRA had limited objectives - It's more like 16th and 17th century Spain, where they want to stamp out apostasy and infidels wherever they can. Imagine a Spain that won against England in 1588; that's about where the jihadists will be after a US withdrawal. The Democrat answer to all this is to plug their ears and chant "la la la", claiming that terrorism stems only from our entry into Iraq. if you believe that, feel free to explain: -- the ongoing slaughter of Christians in Indonesia -- the large Islamic insurgency (thousands dead) in southern Thailand -- the current mess in France - attacks on police and fire every night, with some kind of riots that will eclipse last year's a near certainty Look around the world - wherever there's a significant Muslim minority, there's a problem. You can't blame much of that on Iraq. This is why I - and I'm sure I'm not alone in this - can't pull the "D" lever on Tuesday. Leaving all that aside, there's a simpler reason that has nothing to do with foreign policy. The Democrats have done a far better job of getting rid of my civil rights than the Republicans who supposedly yearn to do so. While Bush signed Campaign Finance "Reform", which party spent years advocating it? Why is it now illegal to do issue advocacy that names a candidate within 60 days of an election, unless you have the wherewithal to become a 527? Where do I go to get my first amendment rights back? I won't vote "D" solely on that issue, and I'll never vote for McCain, same reason. There are responses to this message:
|
