Beldar on “We're Making More Terrorists!”
Beldar always says it better than I do. I need to work on that.
“By invading Iraq,” they say, “President Bush has caused more terrorists.” For example, I just saw a blogad pimping a new book with a blurb from a WaPo review by Richard Clarke that gushes, “[Jonathan] Randal makes a convincing case that the U.S. war on Iraq has needlessly extended the lifetime and ferocity of this generation of terrorists as never before.” I haven't read Mr. Randal's book, and neither do I plan to waste the time or money to do so, because I already understand his “convincing case,” and I know what it amounts to:
Rubbish and balderdash.
Radical Islamic extremists are not like poison ivy—“don't scratch it, it'll only get worse!” The necessary premise of this argument is, “If we'd only—(choose one or more)—(a) let them alone, (b) treat them with due respect, (c) allow them to drive Israel into the sea, then they wouldn't keep flying airplanes into our buildings, blowing up school busses, kidnapping and beheading civilians, etc.”
These folks won't be happy until my two daughters are in burqas and they and I together are under the watchful eyes of thought-and-conduct police who'll correct any deviation from their approved path. They won't be happy until our civilization is destroyed and replaced with one that they've dictated.
It's a great posting, with a great ending:
So if you're all worked up into making this particular argument in my presence, don't be surprised if I snort derisively and wander off to do something more productive—say, clipping my fingernails or cleaning my toilets—instead of debating it with you at length. You're a fool, and unless you're also a client (and I don't argue politics with my clients anyway), I have no obligation to suffer your foolishness gladly.
Josh Poulson
Posted Saturday, Oct 30 2004 03:17 PM