Last January

Submitted by Octavio (Italy), Feb 10, 2007 at 10:07

Last January, I posted an article on how the West could beat Islamic terror. My reasoning was based on a basic assumption: the enemy within your gates is more dangerous than the one outside. In other words, the guys from Tora Bora are not a danger to the West, until they settle here.

As a consequence, we don't need to invade other countries. Muslims are a danger because we allow them to settle here, not because Afghanistan or Iraq are dangerous. Indeed, military intervention could be avoided. The anti-war position is endorsed by left-wing liberals, as well as right-wingers such as Le Pen- for Europe- and Buchanan- for America. War is just not working. It is a disaster. I based my reasoning on the FACTS available. FACT: the war on Iraq is not delivering the right results. FACT: the idea of pre-emptive war is all wrong. Well, there was one Fred Nielsen who attacked my anti-war view, without explaining why he was against it. Does he think that war is working in Iraq? I have been asking myself what he disagrred with, I have been asking him as well, but he wouldn't answer.

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".