Home
In this issue
April 9, 2014

Jonathan Tobin: Why Did Kerry Lie About Israeli Blame?

Samuel G. Freedman: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Jessica Ivins: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Kim Giles: Asking for help is not weakness

Kathy Kristof and Barbara Hoch Marcus: 7 Great Growth Israeli Stocks

Matthew Mientka: How Beans, Peas, And Chickpeas Cleanse Bad Cholesterol and Lowers Risk of Heart Disease

Sabrina Bachai: 5 At-Home Treatments For Headaches

The Kosher Gourmet by Daniel Neman Have yourself a matzo ball: The secrets bubby never told you and recipes she could have never imagined

April 8, 2014

Lori Nawyn: At Your Wit's End and Back: Finding Peace

Susan B. Garland and Rachel L. Sheedy: Strategies Married Couples Can Use to Boost Benefits

David Muhlbaum: Smart Tax Deductions Non-Itemizers Can Claim

Jill Weisenberger, M.S., R.D.N., C.D.E : Before You Lose Your Mental Edge

Dana Dovey: Coffee Drinkers Rejoice! Your Cup Of Joe Can Prevent Death From Liver Disease

Chris Weller: Electric 'Thinking Cap' Puts Your Brain Power Into High Gear

The Kosher Gourmet by Marlene Parrish A gift of hazelnuts keeps giving --- for a variety of nutty recipes: Entree, side, soup, dessert

April 4, 2014

Rabbi David Gutterman: The Word for Nothing Means Everything

Charles Krauthammer: Kerry's folly, Chapter 3

Amy Peterson: A life of love: How to build lasting relationships with your children

John Ericson: Older Women: Save Your Heart, Prevent Stroke Don't Drink Diet

John Ericson: Why 50 million Americans will still have spring allergies after taking meds

Cameron Huddleston: Best and Worst Buys of April 2014

Stacy Rapacon: Great Mutual Funds for Young Investors

Sarah Boesveld: Teacher keeps promise to mail thousands of former students letters written by their past selves

The Kosher Gourmet by Sharon Thompson Anyone can make a salad, you say. But can they make a great salad? (SECRETS, TESTED TECHNIQUES + 4 RECIPES, INCLUDING DRESSINGS)

April 2, 2014

Paul Greenberg: Death and joy in the spring

Dan Barry: Should South Carolina Jews be forced to maintain this chimney built by Germans serving the Nazis?

Mayra Bitsko: Save me! An alien took over my child's personality

Frank Clayton: Get happy: 20 scientifically proven happiness activities

Susan Scutti: It's Genetic! Obesity and the 'Carb Breakdown' Gene

Lecia Bushak: Why Hand Sanitizer May Actually Harm Your Health

Stacy Rapacon: Great Funds You Can Own for $500 or Less

Cameron Huddleston: 7 Ways to Save on Home Decor

The Kosher Gourmet by Steve Petusevsky Exploring ingredients as edible-stuffed containers (TWO RECIPES + TIPS & TECHINQUES)

Jewish World Review July 2, 2008 / 29 Sivan 5768

Why we remain safe

By Jack Kelly

>
Printer Friendly Version
Email this article

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Liberal pundit Michael Kinsley once defined a "gaffe" as a politician inadvertently blurting out the truth. By that standard, Charlie Black, a senior adviser to Sen. John McCain, committed a gaffe in an interview June 23 with Fortune magazine. Mr. Black was asked by Fortune editor David Whitford what the impact on the presidential election campaign would be if there were another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.


"Certainly it would be a big advantage to (McCain)," Mr. Black responded. There followed a hypocritical minuet with which we've become too familiar. First, the faux angry response from the Obama campaign: "The fact that John McCain's top adviser says that a terrorist attack on American soil would be a 'big advantage' for their political campaign is a complete disgrace, and is exactly the kind of politics that needs to change," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.


Then, the distancing from Sen. McCain: "I can't imagine why he would say it. It's not true."


Finally, the groveling apology from Mr. Black: "I deeply regret the comments — they were inappropriate."


Mr. Black had said nothing that wasn't true, or that Democratic political consultants don't say in private. When voter attention is focused on national security, Sen. McCain benefits. A terrorist attack would focus voter attention on national security.


But the attention of voters is not focused on national security, chiefly because there hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since Sept. 11, 2001. The number of experts who, on Sept. 12, 2001, would have predicted this happy state of affairs is precisely zero.


The absence of an attack suggests to some, among them Sen. Obama, that there wasn't much of a threat to start with. They want to return to the law enforcement approach to fighting terrorism that prevailed before 9/11, and regard the Bush administration's efforts to surveil terrorists a greater threat to Americans than the terrorists themselves.


Since that approach contributed mightily to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers barracks, the 1998 bombing of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, and, of course, 9/11, it's no wonder Americans prefer Sen. McCain on security issues.


"Before 9/11, America's counterterrorist capacities were, to put it politely, disorganized, unfocused, poorly staffed and poorly run," wrote former CIA officer Reuel Marc Gerecht. "To President Clinton's credit and great shame, he intellectually understood the nature and horrific potential of bin Ladenism and al Qaida — as he understood, and regularly tasked his senior officials to explain nationally, the dangers of an increasingly restless Saddam Hussein. Yet he could not summon the fortitude to strike devastatingly against al Qaida and its Taliban protector or Iraq."


Doubtless much of our good fortune is due to increased vigilance by the FBI and other security agencies. And some of it is due simply to good luck. But the principal reason why we've been safe at home these last seven years has been the war in Iraq.


Sen. Obama describes the war in Iraq as a "distraction" from the war on terror. But that's not how al Qaida saw it.


In a 2005 letter to Abu Musab al Zarqawi, al Qaida's number two, Ayman al Zawahiri, described Iraq as "the place for the greatest battle of Islam in this era."


A few months earlier (December, 2004), Osama bin Laden himself said in an audiotape: "The whole world is watching this war and the two adversaries; the Islamic nation on the one hand, and the United States and its allies on the other. It is either victory and glory or misery and humiliation."


For al Qaida, Iraq has turned out to be misery and humiliation. The best of its fighters have perished there, and so has its standing in the Arab world. Support for the terror group has vanished within Iraq, and plummeted elsewhere in the Muslim world. Other Islamic fundamentalists, among them Mr. Zawahiri's mentor, "Dr. Fadl," have criticized al Qaida and called for nonviolence.


In 2003, Canadian columnist David Warren hypothesized Iraq would be the flypaper that would lure in al Qaida, and where it would be destroyed. While I doubt this was a deliberate Bush administration strategy, that's the way it's working out. Al Qaida was right that Iraq is the central front in the war on terror, but wrong about the outcome. America's Democrats have been wrong about both.

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

JWR contributor Jack Kelly, a former Marine and Green Beret, was a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration. Comment by clicking here.

Jack Kelly Archives


© 2008, Jack Kelly

Columnists

Toons

Lifestyles