But reading "House of War" by James Carroll (Houghton Mifflin, 2006) reminds us that the current administration may have brought us to a precipice, but it didn't lead us down the path to the cliff's edge. President Harry Truman, in exaggerating the Soviet threat like the current administration does fanatical Islam, was nearly as literal-minded as Bush. Also, authorizing not only two atomic bomb strikes, but the development of the exponentially more destructive hydrogen bomb, he bears much responsibility for nuclear proliferation in the ensuing years.
We also helped create non-state actors hostile to us by funding the mujahadeen fighting the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, which has been called Russia's Vietnam. In the interim, Iraq became an encore presentation of America's Vietnam while Iran looms as a rerun of Cambodia. Also, when arming them, we failed to foresee that today's mujahadeen, viewing the US through the same lens as Russia, would become tomorrow's jihadi.
Meanwhile, it's embarrassing how many progressive commentators don't understand that the argument "Our policies are creating more terrorists than the Sorcerer's Apprentice does brooms" makes absolutely no impression on the administration and the hard right. Fretting about making enemies is for liberal-left wusses.
Now that the blame has been divvied up, can we have our teddy bears and security blankets back? Sure, just suck that thumb a little longer while we define security, which we'll do by pointing out what it's not first.
Security is not prohibiting airline passengers from boarding with water bottles. Nor is it turning young mothers into taste testers for explosive liquids. When compared to how spotty port security has been, this kind of hyper-vigilance can't help but come off as OCD-ish.
Second, security is not taking credit for terrorists' failure to attack us in the last five years. The real reason might be that they just haven't moved all their chess pieces into position to pull off their next big checkmate.
Third, security does not consist of attacking countries before they have nuclear weapons. Non-nuclear states can't help but conclude that the only sure way to avoid an attack by the US is to acquire or develop nuclear weapons.
If we -- government and public alike -- believe risking the lives of a million of our own is acceptable, provided we can take out ten million of theirs, we might as well sign up for assisted suicide now. A defense doctrine that channels the likes of the late Herman Kahn is little more than living death.
What security is is talking the likes of Kim Jong-il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad off the ledge and luring them back inside with enticements. Won't that just encourage other world leaders to rattle their sabers until they fly off the handle? Perhaps, but, once again we have only ourselves to blame.
Turns out it was an American president, Richard Nixon, who redefined the madman theory of national leadership. When Hanoi wouldn't budge at the 1969 Paris peace talks, he ordered B-52s loaded with thermonuclear bombs to circle the north polar cap in hopes that a cowed Soviet Union would nudge North Vietnam to cooperate with us.
Security is also accepting that invasion and occupation are not credible foreign policy at a time of, in John Robb's words, open-source warfare (drawing from a large pool of co-developers). Time to keep it simple, stupid. Get out, stay out, and stop backing dictatorships.
Just like progressives have trouble focusing on politics when a Democrat occupies the White House, chances are jihadis will lose their edge in the absence of infidels tramping around their homelands and holy cities.
In time, perhaps, we can stop worrying about death by fragmentation as well as an Apocalypse with the power to make the Revelations look like a children's book in comparison. Who knows? Maybe one day the results of a poll on the greatest threats to our well-being will find terrorism way down the list from Internet security.
If you liked this article, please click on this link and vote on the article to send it to the top of Netscape's front page.
Russ Wellen is the nuclear deproliferation editor for OpEdNews. He's also on the staffs of Freezerbox and Scholars & Rogues.
"It's hard to tell people not to smoke when you have a cigarette dangling from your mouth." -- Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
I just would like to add to this excellent article...
Any security (from police to National Security) is about 98% a development of the dedicated core of the professionals. Those people are supposed to be scrutinized on the basis of the following:
honesty
integrity
logic
dedication
professionalism
courage
These people are to know exactly what they do , why and what are their obligation towards the country or an office. There must not be ANY OBLIGATION TOWARDS ANY INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP including but not limited to PRESIDENT. The national security people are to be responsible only to Congress. And that overseeing is to be extremely tight and puinishment for violation - severe.
The national security must not include anything which does not constitute a tool of one, namely assassinations, torture, lying to the people, cooking the books, deliberate undermining of countries, etc. It has to be efficient in using the currently available technology and cultivation of allies.
National security administaration officials from middle managemment and up are to be annually scrutinized by Congress in order to provide absolute transparency about their activities. No ' blue' ' black', 'wetboy' or any other operations are to be performed.
Last but not least. National Security people cannot and should not act as law enforcers or executioners. They cannot command over military personnel and they cannot plan military operations.
Homeland Security as it is now does nothing like that. On the contrary- it serves individuals. We are less safe than before.
by
Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3360 comments)
on Tuesday, September 12, 2006 at 11:43:11 AM
I am in the process of moving from Ohio to Tennessee. You should see the political ads on their TV. You even have democrats bragging that they voted to spend 5 trillion dollars to defeat terrorism (Bill Ford against Bob Corker Senate race).
The other big issue is who hates Mexicans worse.
by
mattzcat (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 58 comments)
on Sunday, September 24, 2006 at 3:52:40 AM
