Knight Of The Mind

I'll do my best to present a philosophical and generally conservative look at current events and life, the universe and everything. Readers are invited to take all that's posted herein with a grain of salt. or if they prefer, a grain of salt, a slice of lime and a shot of tequila.

Location: Alexandria, Virginia, United States

Greetings and welcome. My name is Steve, I'm 35 years old and I work for the US Army as an Operations Research Analyst. Hence my blog title Knight Of The Mind.

Thursday, August 12, 2004

A More Sensitive War On Terror

Kerry has figured out how to really put the clamps on Muqtada Al Sadr but good. He intends to fight a sensitive war on terror. He explained his brilliant master plan to a party of journalists recently.

Kerry had told a meeting of minority journalists last week that he could do a better job than Bush of cultivating allies in the war on terrorism. "I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side," he said.

This runs headlong into an inconvenient buzz saw of factual information. For starters, Kerry, himself, claims he favored dropping the hammer on Saddam and would have done so as President. The French, The Germans, The Canadians, The Russians and The Chinese inveighed against our taking any such step. The only way Kerry could make these nations not feel antipathy towards our efforts in Iraq would have been not to undertake them.

Sensitivity does not override what other nations view as their vital self intrest. There is no sensitive game of Realpolitik. Vice President Dick Cheney pointed that out in direct and certain language during a campaign rally.

"America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive," Cheney said.
"Those that threaten us and kill innocents around the world do not need to be treated more sensitively, they need to be destroyed," he said.

Cheney accented some form of the word "sensitive" a half-dozen times and drew laughter from the partisan crowd. He said Kerry had a "fundamental misunderstanding" of the world.

The Kerry Campaign wasted no time in returning fire. They forgot the whole sensitivity thing. I'll bet Cheney's feelings were hurt after this fusillade of obfuscation.

"This vice president's lack of sensitivity is precisely what led this administration to ignore the advice of the professional military and rush to war (in Iraq)," Kerry spokesman David Wade said. "We can't afford another four years of their failed insensitive foreign policy."

So there we have it. We should have spent another twelve years watching Saddam Insane wipe his butt with a toussel of UN regulations and using the Oil For Food Boondoggle to pay the families of Hezbollah suicide bombers an annual Darwin Award Grant for the pointless and stupid death of their favorite suicide bomber. We really screwed the poochie when we rushed headlong into war over there.

As for 'we' not being able to afford four more years of insensitive foreign policy, I'm reminded of Ronald Reagan's brush off of Bill Clinton's pathetically fatuous claim that "We won the Cold War." Raegan asked Bill Clinton the same thing Dick Cheney should ask the Kerry Lackey that offered up the asininity. "Who is we?"


As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.
Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by