Posted on 01/01/2009 6:29:21 PM PST by CE2949BB
Washington, D.C.--The acts of war by Hamas against Israel are precisely what people should expect from Bush’s so-called democracy strategy in the Middle East.
The administration campaigned for elections in the strongholds of various Islamist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, groups that it should have worked to destroy. In the Palestinian territories, Bush insisted that Hamas be allowed to participate in the 2006 elections--and the jihadist group won a landslide. Thanks to that political victory, Hamas gained an unearned legitimacy for its vicious war to exterminate Israelis and Westerners. Winning power with the aid of their enemy confirmed for these Islamists that the West will abet its own destroyers.
America’s self-defense entails crushing Islamic totalitarianism--not ushering its jihadists into political office and galvanizing them to redouble their war against us.
### ### ###
Elan Journo is available for interviews. To interview Mr. Journo or book him for your show, please e-mail media@aynrandcenter.org.
For more articles by Elan Journo, and his bio, click here.
Trying to bring democratic and representative reform to these nations is not a mistake. President Bush has also done alot to go after and kill thse who believe in the ideology of terrorism and dictatorship.
Both approaches must be going on simultaineously to win this war. At times this approach will work and at times it will also fail but it still must be done.
The Palestinians are waxing poetic about the good old days when Israelis controlled Gaza.
This report is garbage. Hamas and Sheikh Yassin have had legitimacy in the eyes of Gazans for a number of reasons including their support for the intifadah, the construction of clinics, their control of the education institutions in Gaza, and their opposition to the PLA support for the Oslo Accords. It is not up to the USA to wipe out Hamas and Hizbollah. Israel must take the lead on that score , and it is clear that the extirpation of both is not presently feasible.
This approach has also emboldened Mohammedans to attack and destroy Eastern Christian communities from the Balkans to the Iran/Iraq border.
If we are to win the war against a resurgent Islam, we need to be clear eyed about what has worked, what hasn’t and what price others have paid for our foreign policy mistakes. In the meantime, it pays to remember that in the past, the defeat of Islam has usually meant a fight to the death.
There’s no point in elections if terrorists win them.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” - Churchill
At first I was ready to get all angry based on the title, but then I realized that this is really a criticism of us not being hardline enough. I agree. While we have no right to tell someone they can’t worship Allah, I have this huge worry about Islamic fascism getting a significant foothold in the civilized world. It must be crushed NOW. It deserves no respect.
The Law of Unintended Consequences, but the initial reactions are not always the same as the longer term results.
Oh, come on. Bush is a blithering idiot, period.
“Trying to bring democratic and representative reform to these nations is not a mistake.”
I agree it is not a mistake to try. But realistically, it will not often succeed. In the case of Iraq I believe it will devolve once more into a dictatorship when we leave.
I guess this is the reason for my disdain for the idea of making the world “safe for democracy”.
We should ONLY fight for reasons of self defense or for the defense of our allies. And when we do, we need to kick ass; none of this pissing away our soldiers like we did in Vietnam.
I think defense of the western world is reason enough. But we need to get aggressive with it. I seriously hope Israel doesn’t back down (yet again).
How long has this guy been out of work, anyway - just get out of the slammer, maybe?
I agree. But can you imagine the alternative — a blithering old fart.
Why, oh why, didn’t we have to “try to bring democracy” to Eastern European nations? Duh, and duh! Democracy in Arabia? What a laugh! The West never learns. Zimbabwe and the rest of Africa are such a smashing post-colonial success, ain’t they! Just like democracy in Detroit.
Amen to that. Letting Hanoi get away with placing anti-aircraft batteries on hospital rooftops is just one of the bad mistakes we made, a precedent nobody has the courage to break from now.
This doesn't mean we should just do nothing. It only means that we should think and try harder to understand the social, political, and economic structure of a society before pushing an idea. Also, perhaps we sometimes we need to take gradual approach that will not yield in a short term but can only be enjoyed in long term.
LOL the liberal approach is to sit on our butts and let them come and kill us all...
Yeah that will work.... Idiots... I guess 911 wasn’t enough... well what possibly can Obama say to the familys of Americans killed in the next attack on the Homeland?
“This doesn’t mean we should just do nothing. It only means that we should think and try harder to understand the social, political, and economic structure of a society before pushing an idea. Also, perhaps we sometimes we need to take gradual approach that will not yield in a short term but can only be enjoyed in long term.”
So you strongly disagree with this article then? After all, it advocates crushing islamic totalitarianism.
What a pile of feces. Elan Journo Is another of the blind that does “NOT” grasp the idea of democracy. Everyone, every group, and individual, has the right to representation. It does “NOT” give them the right to fire rockets into civilian populations. Then....to run and hide when the times comes for them to answer for their actions. But I forgot....this is the Islamic Extremists way of waging war. The only thing that makes these idiots understand is total obliviation. No hiding behind women and children, running into Mosques, or hiding under rocks as far as that goes. I don’t blame Israel one bit for making this point known, and felt, through out the Muslim arenas.
For the love of God, please read the whole thing before condemning the author.
Note this part:
“America’s self-defense entails crushing Islamic totalitarianism—not ushering its jihadists into political office and galvanizing them to redouble their war against us.”
It should be however applied selectively. Look at Turkey or the Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq... it works there.
In other cases a pro-Western authocracy is preferable.
We have to look out for our interests, and stability of pro-Western governments should be the prime interest. In some places, were the people are evolved enough, democracy can take root and should be supported.
"Democracy" in the islamic world doesn't come overnight, and it's never perfect as it isn't in any other place.
It is a process which a)needs a pushing start b)stability and security to evolve and c)secularism/western orientation.
Turkey went through that process throughout the 20th century and so far has largely (comparatively) stayed well on the path. The Iraqi Kurds are in the middle of this process aswell. Iran went through the westernisation/secularisation process, but on the authoritarian path, which ended unfortunately in the islamic "republic".
Eternal vigilance is the other important factor. Iran wasn't vigilant on the threat of islamism. Turkey has to watch out, and take care it doesn't fall victim to it.
The Palestinian areas are entirely different from the rest of the Middle East though. They are not a proper state, have no semblance of proper governmental institutions, are entirely based on the hatred/hostility towards Israel and have not the slightest economical structure.
Any other Islamic country shines brightely compared to the Palestinian areas. Democracy there would inevitably lead to the victory of terrorists.
“I think defense of the western world is reason enough.”
I agree, and that’s why I supported the war in Iraq. But the idea that we are doing it to transform it into a democracy is a lousy justification.
It’s not our job to change the world.
I wouldn’t say I strongly disagree. In fact, I think the article has a point, that is, pointing out the consequence of pushing democracy on place like Gaza. I’m sure the administration was aware about the possibility of Hamas winning. The fact that they were pushing for it perhaps shows that they believed Hamas could be ‘tamed’, or they really really thought democracy will sort out everything anyway at the end.
I still think that wherever Democracy is tried in the Islamic world - Pakistan, Palestine, Iran, etc. the radicals get elected as most voters in these countries are Muslims.
In order for Democracy - as viewed traditionally in the west, to succeed, you need certain other ingedients besides besides a ballot box.
You need respect for minority rights, you need tolerance of varying opinions, you need an educated electorate. All of these are lacking in Islamic societies and in some cases contrary to Koranic teaching.
In short, for Democracy to suceed in the Islamic world, you ahve to de-Islamicize the population.
I believe Bush’s foreign policies, in some cases, were naive and unrealistic and shaped by pro-Islamists and neo-cons in his administration.
The title is too categorical. We have wisely supported Jordan’s King Abdullah with his enlightened autocratic rule rather than urge more power for his parliament, democratically elected but too pro-Islamist. Likewise Egypt’s Mubarak and even the House of Saud, whom we’ve nudged toward democracy only very gently (well, the al-Sauds were very frank that Osama bin Laden could win a democratic election there, and we were realistic). In Lebanon, a fragile and compromised democracy is at hanging on to legitimacy, after a fashion. That said, the Bush policy of democratic elections for the Palestinians, elections to form fully empowered, not limited, governments, was a lousy idea, and compleyely predictable. A limited parliament with the best strongman that could be found as the ultimate “decider” was the better option, and we’ve since recognized that by propping up Abu Abbas in the West Bank against Hamas in Gaza. The next West Bank elections will surely be “handled” in such a way as to ensure Fatah’s continued power there.
The so-called “Bush Doctrine”:
To the islamist philistinians: “Take Gaza and take the West Bank. Condi’ll help you.” Esentially cutting Israel in half.
To the Islamists in Waziristan: “BOOM!!!”
Then holding hands with, and kissing that filthy saudi/wahabbist prince when they and their oil should should have been the first target in this so-called “War On Terror.
There’s plenty more. And with 0bama coming into office, man,are we in trouble.
RE :”Oh, come on. Bush is a blithering idiot, period’
I used to believe the Hannity-Coulter talking points that GWB was brilliant and just being victimized as a threat(like in books ‘Slander’ and ‘Treason’). And I used to defend him. But about two years ago I figured out the dems were right on this and my side was wrong. And this is very painful because I hate them, and his ‘idiot’ gave everything to Obama/Pelosi.
Democracy, in the sense of free elections in a free enviroment, has never been tried in Iran since the Constitutional Revolution 1906... and back then pro-constitution, pro-limited power, pro-modernisation forces won. From 1921-79 Iran was a pro-western, secular autocratic monarchy with a virtually powerless parliament. The only exception being the time from 1941-53... and back then the strongest forces were secular nationalists, monarchists, liberals, communists and representatives of certain professions (toilers, merchants etc.). Islamic "conservative" voices weren't dominating and far from unified.
Since 1979 Iran has not seen free and fair elections. They are sham elections, starting with the ridiculous faux "referendum" 1980 in which supposedly over 90% of Iran voted for the islamic republic.
Elections in Gaza were a wise move. It forced Hamas out of hiding and into the public ranks of official order. Israel is now fighting an established government on terms of war rather than ambiguous indigenous civilian war against an alleged social welfare group.
oy.
Excellent point. Now that there are organized Hamas “security” forces, they are way easier to fight then before.
Hamas Covenant 1988
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
Thanks to FReeper bethybabes69 for the link (today).
lol
Yeah, like GW made a concious effort to hand over the fed to the left. I sort of want the next repub president just to be enough....protect us, do enough to keep government from growing and put in good judges....other than that, just maintain the ship.
I can understand your concern considering what we have been through with GWB. What we need is a intelligent conservative (not big government-Wall street type ) who is articulate and understands importance of selling his conservative ideals.
call me a “whatever” but largely, democracy seems to work best in ex English colonys, except Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Other than that, some wise men saw through the devine Right of Kings, directly to the Devive Right of the Individual. Magna Carta to our Constitution. Evolution of Anglo-Saxon thought /government, throw in Adam Smith and it’s a 1000 to nothing football game (no competition, and they fumble a lot and arm tackle)
“Trying to bring democratic and representative reform to these nations is not a mistake.”
I agree, once the terrorists went legit as an elected body, the international handouts stopped and they had to start functioning as a government accountable to voters, instead of a Marxist revolutionary force being funded by Commies and gullible Americans.
SLA
“While we have no right to tell someone they can’t worship Allah”
....
“I have this huge worry about Islamic fascism getting a significant foothold in the civilized world. It must be crushed NOW. It deserves no respect.”
I separated your comment for a reason:
If we wish to have a chance at achieving what you desire in your second sentence, our only choice is to compel upon Mohammedans that restriction which you stated in your first.
If the “religion” of Mohammed “deserves no respect”, and indeed represents “facsim”, why SHOULDN’T we prohibit the “worship” of it?
Consider a slight rewording of that:
If the “religion” of Nazism “deserves no respect”, and indeed represents “facsim”, why SHOULDN’T we prohibit the “worship” of it?
- John
Let me respond to your question with a question. Do all muslims support “islamic fascism”?
Trust me, they are right. “Democracy” is not freedom. In the middle east they would gladly vote for any politician who promised to destroy Israel and us.
Some people are just too stupid to govern themselves. I’m from NJ. I know.
Now folks everywhere can see just how poorly the Palestinians would handle being a sovereign nation.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
Rather short, but essentially correct. Armed terrorist groups should not be accepted in the electoral process. Hamas, Hizbollah, al Sadr in Iraq. Fortunately Egypt ignored our "advice" about increased Muslim Brotherhood participation in their elections.
There’s American style democracy with our Constitution and Bill of Rights, then there are other forms of democracy. In both Afghanistan and Iraq, they held free elections and sought input from their populations about what sort of constitution they should have. Both nations based their constitutions on sharia.
We’ll know how successful our efforts in those two Islamic nations have been over five to ten years after most US troops have been withdrawn, and we see happens when those peoples are on their own.
But, the article contains a good bit of truth. The Islamists often win elections as in Algeria, and they are near that in Turkey. We should definitely have learned that, just because free elections are held, it doesn’t mean we’ll like the results, and the results might be worse than what existed before the elections.
I hope we’ve learned that everyone does not want American style freedom, democracy and individual rights. Many Americans have lived under the illusion that they do for far too long.
There was a time proven way to deal with threats such as Islam, and that was to isolate it. Do not live among it and do not allow it to live in your nations. Conduct diplomatic and business relations, but no more. But we've foregone that proven method and allowed ourselves to be saddled with the lunacy of PCness and multiculturalism.
So, Islam is just another one of the world's great religions, a religion of peace. W said so.
The old USSR was isolated, and we only had diplomatic and some cultural exchanges with it. It collapsed, though some elements of it are making a comeback. But we passed up that approach with Islam.
When people elect terrorists to represent them they become responsible for the terrorist they elected. Those voters can no longer be considered “innocent” and can be held accountable as a whole. I think that is a good thing. Or in other words it eliminates the excuses and unveils the people for what they are.
Isolating it is exactly what was happening when the World Trade Center was taken out.
You can’t isolate it. You can’t build enough walls to keep them out. You have to take it to them or suffer the consequences.
Do you mean Islam is not a religion of peace? Who would have guessed?
It does appear that nuclear weapons will be necessary to wipe the scourge from the Earth.
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.