DUers See Neither Forest OR Trees

Wesley K. Clark: "Al Qaeda Is Not An Existential Threat"

"Al Qaeda is not an existential threat to the United States the way the Soviet Union was...Thus far, we don’t have an opposing superpower against us, no matter how much the neoconservatives long for this. Perhaps the neoconservatives believe that we can only be defined by having an enemy."

July 1, 2007-NYT Magazine interview with Wesley K. Clark:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01wwln-Q4-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

A DUer Is Impressed...

What remarkable insight, and that's exactly it. For decades, America was defined by it's opposition to the Soviet Union and communism, and many know of no other way to define America except by having an enemy that threatens our very existence. There is another way to define America, and that's by constitution and moral authority of our ideals.

That's what the 08' election is going to be about: fear vs. ideals. And that is the choice before us: paralyze efforts to advance the spirit of our constitution and the cause of freedom, or reclaim our moral authority and advance our ideals.

The ability to speak truth to power the way Clark does makes him the Democrat with the best chance of winning in 08' by reminding Americans of the power of our ideals to overcome our fears. (calteacherguy)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1227237

Oh, the Demmies think they're SO special... They think they're so forward-thinking and clever! They'll easily write some doggerel like 'many know of no other way to define America except by having an enemy that threatens our very existence' without ever realizing that the Dems have made US the enemy.

They have made President Bush, Dick Cheney, his staff--even underlings like Scooter Libby--more of an enemy to them than Al Qaeda could ever be!

They have accused our Republican party of carrying out the 9/11 attacks, lying about the Pentagon, intriguing to get the United States into a war for it's own personal enrichment, spiriting citizens of other countries away to secret prisons where they are mercilessly tortured--and all manner of deceit, domestic terrorism, and circumventing the laws.

Democrat party members have never accused the bombers of the WTC, the hijackers who flew into the Pentagon, those who rammed into the USS Cole, the bombers of the Khobar Towers and African embassies, the murderer of Leo Klinghoffer and the Israeli athletes, the train/subway bombers in Madrid and London, those who destroyed a Bali nightclub (resulting in grievous loss of life), the beheaders of Daniel Pearl, the hijackers of British sailors, the captors of Tehran hostages--or anyone else--of ONE TENTH of that!

They think WE threaten their 'very existence'. They say, at a huge number of Lefty blogs and message boards, that they are more afraid of us and President Bush than they'd ever be of some 'outside' threat. Even John Edwards came out and said that the War On Terrorism is nothing but a bumpersticker'. Now, we have Wesley Clark echoing the same thing!

All the Democrat presidential candidates for '08 say they will defend us if we are attacked first. However, that means they're willing to sacrifice an LA, or Philly, or Houston, or Miami, or Manhattan, or Boston, or Chicago--and untold American lives--before they'd even consider lifting a finger in self-defense. And that is simply unacceptable.

For America, Israel, and Europe to remain safe, leaders are going to have to emerge with a plan that steps up to the threat of nuclear weapons. They'll have to realize that 'allowing' a first attack by an enemy--tossing it off as collateral damage--will not work in a world full of nuclear weapons.

The Democrats are quick to blame America and Israel for the death of every single Iraqi or Palestinian civilian that terrorists hide amongst or store their weapons, but they are willing to write-off a major American city--or several of them at once--because they are unwilling to weigh the risks of a preemptive strike and formulate a realistic plan of self-defense.

Maybe losing a city or two (or 4-5!) is okay for the monied Kerrys, Kennedys, Pelosis, Deans, Gores, Clintons, Obamas, Reids, Murthas, etc. of the world--who easily have the means and prestige to set up a fulfilling life elsewhere (and can convince themselves it won't be their city that gets hit) but that's not an option for ALLLLLLLLLLLL the rest of us.

They need to stop all their 'we-are-the-world' whoop-de-do and get down to the business of being a plain ol' AMERICAN. The 'spirit of our constitution' or our 'reclaimed moral authority' won't mean a damned thing if we're dead.

Bush Derangement Syndrome notwithstanding, WE are NOT the enemy. It may be comforting for the Demmies to think so (I guess that's easier to take than thinking there really IS an outside entity that wants you dead) but that's not reality.

I don't know if Sun Tzu ever stated it in his tome 'The Art Of War' but common sense ought to tell anyone that the first thing you do when waging war (or in keeping yourself safe) is correctly identifying your opponents. So far, the Dems have done a spectacularly lousy job of it.