Article

2006-08-19 -Short Attention Span Theater-

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by SR-71 2006-08-19 11:05|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Good article. Here's some of the money quotes:

Deterrence was not simply a matter of possessing advanced weapons. That was only half the equation. The other half was to establish that you were absolutely ready to use those weapons to your purpose. And given a choice between superiority in weapons and ascendance in will, weapons always came in second.

No weapons, no matter how powerful, can help the West until it overcomes its loss of willpower. In a state of psychological weakness, weapons become a burden for the capitulating side. To defend oneself, one must also be ready to die; there is little such readiness in a society raised in the cult of material well-being. Nothing is left, then, but concessions, attempts to gain time and betrayal.

The matchless power of inherited Cold War weapons was more than overcome by withering of the very mental attitudes which made them effective. Mark Steyn argued that as a result the West's power shrank in direct proportion to the effectiveness of weaponry because the laws of political correctness always diminished the will to use them faster than their increase in destructiveness. "We live in an age of inversely proportional deterrence: The more militarily powerful a civilized nation is, the less its enemies have to fear the full force of that power ever being unleashed. They know America and other Western powers fight under the most stringent self-imposed etiquette. Overwhelming force is one thing; overwhelming force behaving underwhelmingly as a matter of policy is quite another. ... The U.S. military is the best-equipped and best-trained in the world. But it's not enough, it never has been, and it never will be."

Time to drop the "stringent self-imposed etiquette."

As I've mentioned before. How is it that the non-Muslim world is suddenly responsible for eliminating a tiny but pathologically violent portion of a putative religion? All we are obliged to do is rid this world of any and all who are even remotely connected with the hideous problem of terrorism. No daintiness or extrordinary discrimination is required as we perform this task. If we indulge in such delicacy, it should only be because there has been a concerted and legitimate effort upon the part of Islam to rid itself of jihadist factions.

To date, Islam has done less than nothing to substantially combat terrorism. If Islam continues to disregard its obligation to purge itself of those who would commit endless atrocities, then they must not be too surprised if the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. Highly radioactive bathwater, most likely.

Posted by Zenster 2006-08-19 20:17|| 2006-08-19 20:17|| Front Page Top

#2 I have said before that the Muslims will not stop until they feel beaten. The insurgency and now sectarian strife might have taken a different trajectory if we had gone Roman on some part of the Sunni Triangle.

As long as the (probably mythological) moderate Muslims refuse to clean their own house, the 10% that commit atrocities make the rest irrelevant. Tired of all the excuses. The West will not be able to sort them out. They must be forced to do it themselves.

Posted by SR-71 2006-08-19 21:27|| 2006-08-19 21:27|| Front Page Top

23:59 gorb
23:51 trailing wife
23:45 gorb
23:10 Mizzou Mafia
23:10 Barbara Skolaut
23:07 Barbara Skolaut
23:05 gorb
23:04 trailing wife
23:00 gorb
22:54 gorb
22:47 DanNY
22:43 gorb
22:34 Duh!
22:29 SR-71
22:28 Duh!
22:20 CrazyFool
22:16 3dc
22:08 3dc
22:04 DathVader
22:01 Bobby
21:59 RD
21:58 DathVader
21:57 Bobby
21:57 DathVader