| | Today, world events cause me to start thinking... and that's dangerous because then I do something crazy like write a blog entry. A suicide bomber (who also happened to be a gunman) assassinated former Pakistani Prime Minister Benizar Bhutto. He shot her in the head and neck, and then the coward detonated a bomb that killed about 20 other people. Bhutto had convinced the Pakistani president to hold elections and end military rule. She was leading a democracy movement in Pakistan - a key nation in scourge of international Islamic terrorism. She was also known to staunchly oppose the terrorist regimes that infiltrated the government and military of Pakistan. It was the second suicide attack at a Bhutto event since she had
returned from exile in October, aiming to contest the elections, and
comes amid an unprecedented wave of violence in the country. The
deadliest terror attack in Pakistan's history targetted her homecoming
rally just hours after her return, leaving 139 people dead. After that attack, authorities repeatedly warned her they had information that Islamic militants were trying to kill her. Bhutto, educated at Oxford and Harvard, became the first female
prime minister of a Muslim country when she took the helm in Pakistan
in 1988. Her father, also a Pakistani prime minister, was hanged by the
military in 1979 after being ousted from power. Recalling
how she stood at his grave, the AP reported today, Bhutto once wrote: "At that moment I
pledged to myself that I would not rest until democracy had returned to
Pakistan." She had repeatedly accused President
Musharraf of being dictator and had been campaigning with fierce
criticisms of what she said was his autocratic rule, vowing her
Pakistan People's Party would deliver democracy. She was truly a martyr for the cause of democracy and the fight against Islamo-terror. And her assassination really affected me today. I am left with this disconcerted feeling about the world, and fear that things are destined to get worse before they get better. And it's for this reason I write - and hope to help us all realize where our political priorities ought to be.
There are big things happening right now in the world in which we live: Pakistan is falling into mass violence and riots, perhaps becoming another hotbed for Islamo-terror. The fight in Afghanistan remains fierce and Al Qaeda and the Taliban still press on. Iran pushes buttons. Putin has become a sort of neo-czar in Russia, and has vowed to protect Iran. The Palestinians have elected the terrorist group Hamas to run the government. And then there's Iraq.
The one thing I believe we all can agree on regarding Iraq is that regardless of the successes on the ground, most of the world and most of the United States are viewing the situation through a skeptical eye. The President has not handled criticism well, and I fear is caving to the polls and politicians and media. Whether you think we ought to go big, go long, or go home... we can't allow the world (and most importantly the Islamic world) to see the United States in a position of weakness. That would surely be an open invitation for more 9/11s.
But that position of weakness is precisely where we're headed. The President has checked out, and let the lame duck fly. He's going to spend the next year doing a whole lot of nothing, and trying desperately to be liked before his legacy is all negative. And it's 2008 - an election year. So the candidates are going to spend a whole year criticizing all things American, and particularly the war on terror.
The political types on both sides are going to try to focus voters on issues they think will bring them to the polls - abortion, same sex marriage, and global warming. But if we let these be the issues on which we vote - particularly during the primary season - we could end up with candidates who will be unable to lead on the international front. And unable to win the war against the terrorists.
The three leading Democrats are not in a position to defeat terrorism. Senator Obama is so far left-leaning and loathes the military too much to bring the Reagan-esque strength and pride we need. John Edwards and Hillary Clinton will only do that which is politically expedient, and I again fear giving the appearance of weakness.
If the Republicans nominate someone like Mike Huckabee - the worst kind of Republican: socially ultra conservative and fiscally liberal - they will do so because they have been convinced to fear gays more than terrorists. Could Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani be the leader we need? Or will be also get dragged into putting their campaign priorities on gays, God, and guns?
My advice is never forget where our priorities ought to be. We can disagree over abortion and the environment and taxes and the economy only once we have protected ourselves against the real threat of international terrorism. The Islamo-terrorists have struck time and again: the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, the bombings at the embassies in Africa, and of course, 9/11. The assassination of Benizar Bhutto should serve as a stark reminder about the difference between those who love freedom and those who fear it. Those who use violence to gain power, and those who use strength to protect.
I hope we've not been so blinded by the mistakes of the Bush administration that we fail to protect the United States from real threats in the future. The next president must be able to lead with strength and a clear purpose.
|
| | Posted 12/27/2007 4:51 PM - 23 Views - 0 eProps - 0 comments
- recommend
  - recs0
- share
- email
 - sent0
|
