U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens’ body
When photos surfaced earlier this week of our Ambassador Christopher Stevens’ bloodied and beaten corpse, the news from Libya and Egypt became personal.
What am I saying? It didn’t become personal; it’s been personal for Americans for quite some time. We were just reminded of it this week.
Citizens of the United States came face to face once again with the dreadful truth.
Our country is the object of deadly aggression by Islamic terrorists.
And what a week for a wakeup call. Think it’s a coincidence our embassies in Libya and Egypt were under fire on the anniversary of 9/11? Hardly.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton wondered aloud how this could happen. I wonder the same thing. Have we learned nothing?
We don’t tolerate bullying in our schools. We don’t allow our grandmothers to carry cuticle scissors on airplanes. Yet there is doubt about whether Marines guarding our embassy in Cairo were allowed to have live ammunition. There are questions about why the embassies were not better fortified for the 9/11 anniversary when intel indicated aggressors were primed to strike.Some are quick to condemn our own citizens who speak against Islamic terrorists. Quick to label our fellow Americans’ words hate speech. But the fact is Islamic terrorists have repeatedly demonstrated real, tangible hate against us.
Remember Tehran, Lockerbie, Nairobi, the World Trade Center 1993, the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen, Shanksville, the Pentagon, and the World Trade Center 9/11. Add to that Cairo, Benghazi, and Sanaa.
Pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle turn against each other in crisis, providing an easy diversion from the terrorists’ actions. We need to pull together and stop handing the terrorists convenient excuses on the silver platter of our round-the-clock infighting and commentary.
“Yes, American reporters. We attacked because the United States hurt our feelings.” Give me a break.
I don’t want war. I repeat, I don’t want war. But inaction is no good either. Wringing our hands and rethinking our strategy every time terrorists attack our people communicates weakness. Swift, unwavering justice that takes out terrorists—not innocent civilians at home or abroad, is warranted. Let’s roll.
These wise words from Maya Angelou apply: “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”
We’re way past the first time. This week the terrorists sent us a reminder. They showed who they are, and we need to believe them. Others who hate the U.S. are watching. Let’s show them we unequivocally, unapologetically defend our own.
Pingback: Advent | everyday epistle
Pingback: Why Mitt Romney Has My Vote - Project Underblog
Pingback: Aimee: Weighted Scales, Who Loses When Moderator Enters Debate? | Finding (Un)Common Ground
Pingback: Aimee: The Joker vs. Robin, My Take on the Vice Presidential Debate | Finding (Un)Common Ground
I don’t disagree with you entirely, but I also don’t think what you’re proposing is entirely plausible. Acting too quickly will quite simply put innocent lives in danger and increase the risk of war. Deliberate action requires time and careful planning. Swift justice, I’m afraid, is an oxymoron.
Maybe, but I like to think that our intelligence services know who to target and where they are, and that our troops are capable of carrying out such a mission. If this isn’t possible and we can’t swiftly target those responsible, then I think we need to focus resources on making it possible. Thanks for your intelligent comment, by the way.
At risk of sounding defeated… violence in the name of Allah has been ongoing for hundreds of years here in America and abroad. I ask you… can these believers really be swayed to change in view of the fact that Thomas Jefferson was dealing with the same issues so long ago? Maybe at the end of the day the best offense for America will have to be a good defense….
“Thomas Jefferson finally dramatically reduced their reign of terror in about 1815. But it is important to remember that these Mujahadin had been about their neferious work against ‘unbelievers and infidels’ for around 300 years prior to that (1), which means they have been performing this specific manifestation of their evil for nigh on 500 years now. There are some differences though, like there are more of them, spread out around the world, and no longer committed to just demanding tribute but fanatically committed to our utter destruction.”
Sarah, thanks for your comment. “Can these believers really be swayed to change…?” I’m not so sure the terrorists can be swayed to see the U.S. any differently. That’s their choice. And if I’m understanding your assessment (please correct me if I’m misunderstanding it), I agree that maybe our best offense is a good defense–a quick and sure self-defense when our citizens are threatened as they obviously were this week.
“Have we learned nothing?”
Moot point, you and I live in fly over country. Have our political leaders learned anything? Surely, yes. But evidently not. I find it much more plausible, lacking tangible evidence I can convey from this location, to promote the concept that Washington simply does not care (about the same things as you and I do.) We are peasants at best – useful idiots as the Supreme Soviet used to say.
One thing needs no further proof – we are whelmed with unending lies, deceptions, half truths – and an unacceptable framing of the debate from our government and the lapdog media which effectively limits the dialog one can have with one from the churlish masses.
What to do?
First things first. Recognize that “They showed who they are, and we need to believe them” applies equally to both terrorists and duly elected officials who daily flout the Constitution they swore to uphold.
I need a shorter soapbox. Vertigo is dangerous.
Roy, why do you love to call my points moot?
Just kidding. Thanks for coming by and commenting.
You make an excellent point: not only do the terrorists show us who they are, but so do our leaders. Question is, when will we believe them?
Aimee,
I do not condone Muslim zealots. Nor do I condone Christian zealots. But, mostly, I do not condone violence. We need a rational response to what is happening and we need to parse out the different events.
According to the latest news reports, the attack on the Libyan embassy was organized and planned – a true terrorist act. The chaos outside the myriad of other American embassies across the Muslim world are a direct result of fanatical fueling of anti-American sentiment. Not terrorists, just unruly mobs of religious fanatics.
These are different dynamics that require different responses. I would hate to see us pulled into a war because of mob mentality. That’s not the best America can offer the world. However, do we need to find a quick, efficient response to the Libyan terrorist attack on our embassy? Yes, I think we do. But, it needs to be calculated and focused, not an all out war.
I worry at the notion that we are facing one target, one enemy. We aren’t. In each country, in each province, and even probably in each village, there is different enemy. A careful understanding of the Muslim world, informs us that, in fact, localized sectarian conflict is really at the heart of their anger. Let’s not give them one mutual enemy to fight against.
I want to be clear, Lisen, I don’t want a war either. I hope it does not come to that.
I’d like to see our special ops target identified terrorists in the different countries, provinces, or villages. Our intelligence is (or should be) capable of identifying those threats. As for the mobs, they are fueled by anti-American sentiment that I suspect comes from the terrorists in the first place. All the more reason to focus on dealing with the terrorists.
So who do we attack? Apparently fundamentalist mobs are attacking embassies and holding protests all over the Muslim world. How do we “defend” against that? The thing we need to defend against is intolerance and ignorance, and that defense cannot come from more killing and military force.
You know, Suebob, that is such a great point. The mob frenzy we see on the news today is, I think, emboldened by the success of the terrorists. All the more reason to deal decisively with the terrorists in the first place. We wind up with a much more complicated issue, like the mobs we see now, if we don’t act.
Just this morning I was reading a great article in Investor’s Business Daily that said something very similar: “The White House stubbornly refuses to believe that when jihadists shout ‘Death to America!’ they actually mean it.”
While I don’t necessarily think we need to go on some grand offensive to make every country in the world agree with us, I think it’s time to call an enemy an enemy and quit handing out apologies to the people who murder Americans.
Thanks, Shannon. I mean, seriously, when someone tells you they hate you, burns your country’s flag, threatens your citizens–how much clearer can the message get?