The Bottom Line On Terrorist Threat (Joe Gandelman)
Joe Gandelman
There is a real dilemma the government, political parties, and the electorate face in the case of terrorism.
If the governnment doesn't issue warnings people will ask why it didn't if it something happens. If it does and nothing happens people may think it was crying wolf.
On the other hand, there are those who suggest the warnings may have some internal political motive. And what to do about the case of Spain? It's a fact that the bombings there seemed to influence the election results and certainly in the end influenced Spanish government policy. But in pointing this out are government officials falling into the trap of suggesting that voters who don't vote for the administration here are doing the bidding of the terrorists?
Cut through all the dilemmas, the genuine nuances, and the clear cut partisan jockeying by some (particularly talk show hosts) and you do have a bottom line. And columnist Charles Krauthammer hits the nail on the head at the end of this column:
Even if you don't agree with him on his stance on issues, this is indeed the bottom line. We are in a DIFFERENT WORLD. And by saying this I'm not suggesting either party has a monopoly on how to deal with it — but that NO ONE should forget it. The initial shock and horror of 911 may have been smoothed over by time...but the threats are indeed out there.
If the governnment doesn't issue warnings people will ask why it didn't if it something happens. If it does and nothing happens people may think it was crying wolf.
On the other hand, there are those who suggest the warnings may have some internal political motive. And what to do about the case of Spain? It's a fact that the bombings there seemed to influence the election results and certainly in the end influenced Spanish government policy. But in pointing this out are government officials falling into the trap of suggesting that voters who don't vote for the administration here are doing the bidding of the terrorists?
Cut through all the dilemmas, the genuine nuances, and the clear cut partisan jockeying by some (particularly talk show hosts) and you do have a bottom line. And columnist Charles Krauthammer hits the nail on the head at the end of this column:
There is no gradualness and there are no countermeasures to a dozen nuclear warheads detonating simultaneously in American cities. Think of what just two envelopes of anthrax did to paralyze the capital of the world's greatest superpower. A serious, coordinated attack on the United States using WMDs could so shatter the United States as a functioning, advanced industrialized society that it would take generations to rebuild.
What is so dismaying is that such an obvious truth needs repeating. The passage of time, the propaganda of the anti-American left and the setbacks in Iraq have changed nothing of that truth. This is the first time in history the knowledge of how to make society-destroying weapons has been democratized. Today, small radical groups allied with small radical states can do the kind of damage to the world that in the past only a great, strategically located industrialized power such as Germany or Japan could do.
It is a new world and exceedingly dangerous. Everything is at stake. We are now deeply engaged in a breast-beating exercise for not having connected the dots before 9/11. And yet here we are three years after 9/11, the dots already connected themselves, and we are under a powerful urge to ignore them completely.
Even if you don't agree with him on his stance on issues, this is indeed the bottom line. We are in a DIFFERENT WORLD. And by saying this I'm not suggesting either party has a monopoly on how to deal with it — but that NO ONE should forget it. The initial shock and horror of 911 may have been smoothed over by time...but the threats are indeed out there.
One side says we are at war, one side declares that it's a matter of international law enforcement.
Question is, how much like the Islamicist's world would the utopian's world look like? Given the history of the great leftist projects like Mao's China and Stalinist Russia, the similarities are likely to be greater than the differences.
Everything changed for me that day. When I hear anybody try to gloss over the fact that everything changed that day, they lose me. Don't tell me about 'getting back to normal' ... this IS normal.
(Unless you're dead from the neck up ... which means they got you because you didn't realize that fact.)
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.