Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ArlJim78
i disagree with him from time to time, but i've learned over 20 years of reading him to pay attention to what he says. Personally I feel he's strongest on foreign policy.
|
"The 9/11 attacks, Krauthammer wrote, made clear the new existential threat and the necessity for a new interventionism. On September 12, 2001 he wrote that, if the suspicion that al Qaeda was behind the attack proved correct, the United States had no choice but to go in to war in Afghanistan. He supported the Iraq war on the “realist" grounds of the strategic threat the Saddam regime posed to the region as UN sanctions were eroding and of his weapons of mass destruction; and on the "idealist" grounds that a self-sustaining democracy in Iraq would be a first step towards changing the poisonous political culture of tyranny, intolerance and religious fanaticism in the Arab world that had incubated the anti-American extremism from which 9/11 emerged."
I don't feel this was an example of strength. I feel it was an example of ignorance, because there is an assumption here that these Moslems (who had no idea what Democracy was) would choose to support Democracy(they didn't, and they won't.) There is a basic lack of understanding amongst American policy makers about the Islamic World. They care about Islam, and destroying Israel. Democracy is not on their radar. So, our best response would of been to keep terrorists out of this country by using the most hi-tech methods money could buy. That would of been a lot smarter than trying to make Moslems embrace Democracy. That's been a waste of American money, and lives.