Strategic myopia

NY Post Editorial:

Give John Forbes Kerry credit for being honest as he accepted the Democratic Party's nomination for president last night. Because in his 55 minutes at the mike, he was truthful about how he'd fight the War on Terror.

He won't.

"The United States never goes to war because we want to," Kerry said. "We only go to war because we have to."

At best, this is a gross calumny: President Bush never "wanted" war — and it is repugnant even to hint otherwise.

At worst, it is telling evidence of a profound misunderstanding of America's proper place in a fractious world.

It is a world in which new forces — hostile to America and its commitment to freedom and human dignity — were unleashed as the four-decade-long standoff between superpowers came to an end.

Those forces need to be confronted.

Let's be frank: John Kerry spent four months in Vietnam — and an entire career finding reasons not to employ reasonable force in pursuit of his country's legitimate security objectives.

Until, that is, the fall of 2002, when he decided to run for president.

Then, America had cause to topple Iraq — at least enough so for him to vote for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Now, the winds — or so he seems to think — blow elsewhere. So he says he meant his vote only as a "threat."

Can he really be that naive?

...

Kerry last night promised to "bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers and reduce the risk to American soldiers. . . . And bring our troops home."

That is not a plan. It is prelude to desertion under fire. (Last helicopter out of Baghdad, anyone?)

He said he wants "to get the terrorists before they get us." How? By rebuilding alliances. (Feel safer now?)

Kerry knew full well last night the importance of appearing tough on terror.

He thanked those of the "greatest generation for making America strong, for winning World War II, for winning the Cold War and for the great gift of service which brought America 50 years of peace and prosperity."

Hollow words, given that during Kerry's years in the Senate he voted against most of the weapons systems that kept the Soviet Union at bay — and ultimately made the Cold War victory possible.

"Peace and prosperity" prevail because America maintained sufficient strength to deter and defeat global communism — yes, the Vietnam War was part of that — and anyone who believes otherwise isn't fit to be president of the United States.

Not while America faces the grave threats inherent in global terrorism.

For the searing flames of 9/11 are but a taste of what radical Islam has planned for America, given the opportunity.

Again, the highlight of Kerry's life until now has been his opposition to the Vietnam War and his opposition to keeping the military strong.

Even now, when he says, as he did last night, that 9/11 "was the worst day we have ever seen," he betrays a profound misunderstanding of what actually happened that day.

A war that had been underway for a decade finally came to America's shores. And until the towers came down, Kerry hadn't a clue.

The attacks, frankly, were the logical result of the very quasi-pacifist philosophy that has long animated him and his party.

A war is not fought by voting to cut defense and intelligence budgets, as he did consistently.

Nor by pulling punches when "allies" object, as he promises now to do.

Nor even by focusing, as Kerry does, on "homeland security."

It is by going after and destroying the enemy. Period.

"Allies" be damned.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Iraq says civilian casualties in Mosul caused by ISIS booby trap, not US air strike

Liberal fascists strike against Trump supporters in Berkeley

OPEC reduces production again in price maintenance program