Naming the Enemy

Submitted by Geoff G (United States), Aug 17, 2004 at 12:44

Mr. Pipes,

I agree that we had better get out enemies accurately identified, or we are in for an unending series of massacres like 9/11/01. The US cannot defend its way out of this.
This is a Muslim problem, and they need to fix it.

I find the US in a situation for which there appears only a binary decision possible: rapid isolationism to protect the homeland, or continuous pre-emption on our nickel. Neither choice is good for the US economy.

As we inexorably close on having to make the decision, our choices will be to ruin the global economy by withdrawal (and be blamed for millions starving, blah, blah), or to make known our objective to topple every form of repressive government: military dictatorship, mullahcracy, and kingdom.

Employing the pre-emptive doctrine, if only 1% of the Muslims are jihadis, then we face a worldwide battle against an army of 14 million fanatics, who recruit more suicide bombers daily.

If we isolate ourselves from the world scene, the jihadis will attack the rest of the world, using the plight they've brought on themseleves as the raison d' etre.

Clearly, we must shorten the timeframe of this inevitable and seemingly never-ending drain on the resources of the free world. What's the message we send to fundamentalist Islam? And, whatever the message, why wait to send it?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".