US contribution

Submitted by Darren (United States), Oct 13, 2006 at 18:58

NATO won't get there because most of its membership's heart is not in the battle. As Belgium, Netherlands, etc creep towards seeding territory to Sharia, can we really expect them to meaningfully contribute warriors to fight Islamic expansion (of any shade) elsewhere. Their troops, no matter how well trained lack the sense of purpose which reflects their home nations Post modern lack of purpose.

What gets me, however is the U.S. administration's seeming acceptance of middle east stasis. I can only believe they feel it will hurt chances at the polls in November. What gives? my thoughts: a) more troops and renewed aggression in Iraq and (especially) at its borders by the US is needed ASAP and with a modest sustained push could really break the opposition. The militant Islamicists weakness is there for all to see. Some resolve could crush them. b) the Left/Democratic leadership will scream and rant if troops are increased, or decreased, or stay same. c) the center and right are losing interest because of leadership's seeming inability to show resolve and try step a). The generals won't call for it - the bureaucracy doesn't reward such risk taking (in the back of their minds is the risk of being hauled before a Pelosi/Reid future committee).

Only the President can set the wheels in motion. He can do what is right which will almost surely not hurt the GOP politically - we can only hope the above has been considered as the Administration tries to steer its way forward in this nasty campaign season...

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".