[DakotaRed]

In 2003, Zakaria supported the Iraq invasion and within a short period of time, began opposing it.

With articles as this coming out, is it any wonder the country is going back to sleep?

No doubt if the Dems retain congressional power, we will see another Case-Church Amendment barring any further help to Iraq and Afghanistan, just as they did with Viet Nam

[Dallas59]

Over-reacted? How about UNDER reacted.

[Cincinna]

Zakaria has shown his true colors since 2003. He is now shilling for the enemy.

In fact, we under-reacted to 9-11, IMHO.

The wake up call really didn’t begin to sink in until Obama was elected, and we saw the reality of what it means to have an administration naive or willfully oblivious yo the threat of Islamo-fascism, that is pro-Islam, anti Israel and anti Western culture.

[dixiechick2000]

“In the 1980s, we thought the Soviet Union was expanding its power and influence when it was on the verge of economic and political bankruptcy”

IIRC, communism was on the march in the late ‘70s under Carter. Reagan was the one who bankrupted the Soviets, and seriously got thier attention in the 80s...with his “nyet” in Reykjavik...and Star Wars.

I know that this post is a little simplisitic, but so is my memory right now. It’s late. ;o)

Goooo Reagan!!!

[Cindy]

Fareed Zakaria, you are today’s STUCK ON STUPID award winner.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

NEVER FORGET.

[counterpunch]

I think we over reacted.
There never should have been a DHS.
We’ve lost more of those ‘freedoms’ the terrorists hate to our own government than the terrorists could have ever taken.

[Silentgypsy]

OOPS! Dallas59. Getting that person mixed up w/Daisyjane69.

[DakotaRed]

I should have also included, he also advocates the ground zero mosque.

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/06/the-real-ground-zero.html

In my estimation, he has returned to his own Muslim roots.

[An.American.Expatriate]

Wow, how simplistic.

I guess we overreacted to Pearl Harbor as well, because look at the threat the Japanese posed after the war ...

[okie01]

Osama bin Laden’s terror network has been unable to launch a single major attack on high-value targets in the United States and Europe.

Fareed, ol' buddy, ol' pal, Madrid, London, Bali.

Not thousands dead. But hundreds.

[WesternPacific]

No doubt if the Dems and RINOS retain congressional power, we will see another Case-Church Amendment barring any further help to Iraq and Afghanistan, just as they did with Viet Nam

Fixed it.

[Fresh Wind]

I actually saw a recent copy of Propagandaweek in a waiting room a few days ago. What a joke it has become. There was page after page of left-wing editorials, and virtually no news. I get more substantial publications as junk mail every week.

[Oztrich Boy]

The “overreation” demonstrated that nations could not offer an operational haven to extranational terrorist groups with no repercussions to themselves.

[marron]

To launch 911 he had the help of Iraqi intelligence. We hanged Saddam and wiped out that intelligence service.

He has other contacts, but we’ve sat on enough of those that he is left hiding in a cave. Or in an Iranian compound, one or the other. Or dead, there’s that possibility. That would make it tough for him to launch any new attacks too.

Prior to 911 he was building a network of insurgencies in Central Asia with an eye toward creating a Central Asian caliphate too. In doing that, he had a Texas sized territory to use for his training camps, and he had the Saudis and the Americans turning a blind eye to what he was doing. After 911 all that changed.

Fareed thinks he’s being clever in pointing out that Bin Ladin hasn’t managed to launch any new attacks. But it is because we went after him and everyone who supported him that he can’t mount any new operations directly. He was always a bit of a false flag, anyway. Hanging Saddam did a lot more to snuff out all that stuff than probably most people give credit for.

[nathanbedford]

The author has made superficially persuasive points. His points would have much more substance if we lived in a world before Hiroshima, but we do not. We live in a world in which a handful of suicidal, Islamist zealots could very well smuggle an atomic weapon across our unguarded Mexican border and detonate it virtually anywhere in America.

We live in a world in which those same Islamists could smuggle a mason jar containing a virus and release it virtually anywhere in America.

The Maxim: we must get it right 100% of the time and the terrorists need only get it right one time is absolutely true in our world of weapons of mass destruction. This changes the whole game and renders this article utterly irrelevant.

The relevant discussion can only be how to we wage war against terrorism more efficiently, less expensively, and less intrusively?

But wage it we must

[gthog61]

What an idiot! Maybe Al Quada isn’t as much of a threat precisely because we reacted.

[Lancey Howard]

LOL!
I clicked the thread title, saw “Newsweak” was the source, and had to post this on my way back to the forum.
I can hardly believe there are still enough barbers and orthodontists getting this crap magazine to keep it alive.

[DB]

He says since Al Qaeda has failed to stage another major attack over nine years it is proof we over reacted...

The moron can’t connect the fact that our reaction is what prevented another major attack. Some people are too stupid to live.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Where do you get this “we” crap Fareed? What did you do after 3000 Americans were brutally murdered by a bunch of murdering Islamists?

[doc maverick]

Fartweed can take his “Post American World” and his allegations of 9/11 “over-reaction” and shove ‘em where the sun don’t shine.
He’s living in the wrong country.