Posted on 09/22/2006 9:25:45 AM PDT by areafiftyone
Radnor - Rudy Giuliani spoke at Radnor High School in Delaware County on Wednesday. Sponsored by the World Affairs Council, the former mayor of New York City outlined his understanding of how the War on Terror began, how it will continue and what's at stake if America gives up.
"Somewhere, someplace, people are planning to do it again," he said in regards to the Sept. 11th tragedy, "This is a lot more of a psychological war."
One of the biggest mistakes, Giuliani insists, that Americans can make is believing that the War on Terror began after the tragedy. The mayor stated that the conflict with Islamic terrorism goes further back than 9/11 or even the bombing of embassies and the USS Cole in the 1990s or the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. It goes back to the 1960s.
Giuliani described world reaction to terrorist attacks such as the 1972 Olympic hostages in Munich, Germany and the hijacking of the Achille Lauro in 1985 as "defensive." The terrorists involved in the Achille Lauro specifically were arrested by Italian authorities, but released two hours later in order "to save Italy from [future] terrorist attacks."
Because there was "no real reaction or reaction out of fear," it legitimized terrorism, Giuliani argued and sent the message that "if they do terrorism, they'll succeed, and gain access to the bargaining table."
People also made the mistake that terrorism was the product of Western injustice. Giuliani said that this was "an analysis of us rather than an analysis of them ... a projection of our thinking." How else would Yassir Arafat, a renowned terrorist, win a Nobel Peace Prize. "Was anything more absurd?" Giuliani asked the audience.
While America and the world treated terrorism as a criminal matter and reacted defensively to Islamic terrorists, "President Bush realized the fact that they had declared war on us." If America was to seize the offensive, "We would be more secure, [but] not perfectly secure, if we go on the offensive ... It's the only way we're going to stay safe."
Giuliani urged the audience that America is up against more than just Osama bin Laden or al-Qaida.
"It's not one organization or one person... They're all separate groups, there are many of them, they don't always work together... but there's a unity of purpose - they hate us. They hate what we stand for."
Specifically, they hate our freedom of religion: "Everyone has to be Muslim." They hate our freedom for women: "Women were killed in Afghanistan for showing too much skin."
Giuliani compared the position that some politicians and partisans make by emphasizing that America should focus only on Osama bin Laden or al-Qaida to how the Department of Justice would fight organized crime by focusing on only one family. He said that while authorities took out one crime family, rival crime families prospered, and the cycle of organized crime continued.
The solution, Giuliani said, is to focus on all terrorist groups and support states simultaneously.
Giuliani did not downplay the threat of Saddam Hussein and his regime.
"...the threats we would be facing is even greater... He would have been more powerful if he was still in power," he said.
For those who didn't think Iraq is a central front on the war on terror, Giuliani said the terrorists disagree. "Why are so many terrorist groups pouring so many resources into Iraq?" he said.
Coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq help deter other state sponsors in terror, Giuliani said. He pointed to how Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi decided to give up his nuclear ambitions. "Why did Gaddafi do that? It wasn't like it was a conversion of St. Paul," Giuliani joked, "I think he said to himself, 'I'll make a deal.'"
Giuliani discussed how military power is the only true bargaining chip in the War on Terror. "Whenever America is reluctant or unwilling to use power, you got nothing. Ronald Reagan ended communism because they were afraid of him," he said. "He use to get criticized so much by the New York Times and liberal media," especially for labeling the Soviet Union as the "evil empire."
The increased military spending during the 1980s, Giuliani reflected, was necessary in order to defeat the Soviet Union by bankrupting the power. The Soviets "realized that he wasn't going to stop until he spent them into oblivion," he said.
Peace is achieved, "through strength, not weakness That is how we have to deal with terrorism," Giuliani said.
Giuliani outlined the long term strategy for the War on Terror, which involves understanding the real root causes of terrorism. Terrorists come "out of regions in the world where there are repressive governments and repressive people."
"The reason they have miserable lives has nothing to do with you or me or Israel. The people of these countries are taught to blame their problems" by projecting them onto Israel and the United States, Giuliani said.
In the long run the United States must, whenever feasible, replace repressive governments in the world with accountable, democratically-elected ones. It won't happen everywhere but America must do it where we can, he said.
Giuliani contended that the present condition of violence in Iraq was worse under Saddam Hussein, the only difference is that the Iraqis voted in their elections in high turnout when the New York Times predicted low turnout.
While there are still sectarian violence, Sunnis and Shiites gathered together and formed a new constitution in hopes of protecting majority rule while respecting minority rights. "That is how you create a peaceful world," Giuliani said.
Giuliani ended his speech by asking the audience why there hasn't been a terrorist attack on America since September 11th. He also said that we ought to "prepare ourselves for the fact that we will have another terrorist attack" at some future juncture. Every municipality in America should have an emergency plan in place, because the terrorists will try something new - something American authorities have not contemplated.
Giuliani believes that terrorists will try to attack remote places in America next instead of just big cities.
Yes I am would you like to be on it?
I voted for Rudy twice as Mayor and did not regret either vote. He's a tough guy and walks the walk whereas others just talk the talk.
Class of '82.
Indeed I would. I think I've pretty much decided that he's "my guy" for '08...thanks!
No Problem!
Rudy Giuliani on Gun Control
All gun owners should pass written test
I do not think the government should cut off the right to bear arms. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a gun owner should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to pass a written exam that shows that they know how to use a gun, that they’re intelligent enough and responsible enough to handle a gun. Should both handgun and rifle owners be licensed...we’re talking about all dangerous weapons.
Source: Boston Globe, p. A4 Mar 21, 2000
"Rudy Giuliani on Gun Control
All gun owners should pass written test
I do not think the government should cut off the right to bear arms. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a gun owner should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to pass a written exam that shows that they know how to use a gun".
I don't agree at all with that.
Don't reckon you do. We should keep the discussion on the forum, so everyone knows how we feel.
I'm fine with that as long as I am not the one who has to shut up. It's more and more the case around here.
Gun ownership, and proper use, should be encouraged, not merely tolerated. If we have a situation wherein too many people refuse to live up to the standards required of free citizens, do something about them, don't punish decent folks.
The problem seems to be that many of the bottom feeders are voters, when they aren't fornicating or mugging tourists, and the politicians need those votes, maybe even more than they need mine.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a wealthy elitist, I am financially near the bottom, but society has never had to lock any doors because of me, or support my children. I love kids, would have made a bunch of them, but I stopped when I had what I figured I could handle, and do it right.
That approach worked pretty good, BTW.
I get asked why I'm not a democrat, with all the "great" things they want to do "for" people "like" me. My answer is always that I don't like what they will do "to" me, in exchange for the milk and cookies.
Tellyawhat, if the Republicans ever get the urge to do those things "to" me, I'm gone! I'm only here for the Freedom!
If he intends to try for the nomination he'd better start talking! I will not assume he has positive opinions just because he expresses no negatives.
I wonder, did Rudy attend the progun rally in NYC today?
Also Rudy Giuliani has proved that he won't fold under pressure. He did not panic on 911, contrast him to Ray Nagin. I am aware of his flaws. Good, he does not try to hide them. I see what I get with him. I am comfortable with that. This is no time to elect a mamby pamby President. I want a tough SOB. He fits the bill. Plus I like the guy.
RKBA is not comparable to the abortion issue in this instance. Until jackbooted thugs begin kicking down doors and aborting babies, there will be little similarity.
I am sure you believe you want freedom, but, you aren't willing to risk anything for it.
Without using up bandwidth with charts and statistics, less than 1/10 of 1% of the privately held firearms in the USA are ever used in an improper manner.
"There is no reasoning with the gun people"? Sorry, you are not trying to reason with a "gun people", you are trying to reason with a "Republican", and not doing very well at it!
OK if you want to insult me. Let's get down to brass tacks. Asking you to take a test does not seem like a big deal to me. You seem to think that a President can just arbitrarily take your gun from you totally discounting that a President can merely ask for legislation. Then Congress has to act then there are the courts. So that clearly will never ever happen.
So paranoia over someone not agreeing with you 100% on a gun issue seems a little over the top.
Secondly I don't think I need a gun to take a risk. Merely standing up to your kind is a risk. You talk about your rights, but what about the rights of the people who are killed every year by careless gun owners? Do they not have any rights? Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? What about them? Why is there only your way?
"Asking you to take a test does not seem like a big deal to me".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.