On Frist, Afghanistan and Hedged Defeatism

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist either leapt into the defeatist camp or was slightly misquoted when discussing our prospects in Afghanistan. Either way, I’m already quite fed up ith Frist for the night (see here).

The Jawa Report‘s Dr. Rusty opines on the matter, and I can’t say that there’s much I disagree with in his words and I recommend that the reader peruse them all. In fact, I have previously stated many of his thoughts already, chief among these being that a large portion of our current problems in Iraq and Afghanistan stem from the fact that we never mercilessly made it clear to our enemies that they were beaten — at least not in a language that they would understand.

My one withholding of agreement comes from the following from the good Dr. Rusty:

If democracy in the Middle East is a grand experiment, then the null hypothesis has been disproven. No, the majority of Muslim nations are not yet ready for democracy. Give them another hundred years and we’ll run this experiment again.

It was and still remains a noble experiment, one that may indeed save countless thousands — realistically even millions or billions — of lives, so I’m not as quick to jump ship on the idea. The Bush administration spoke of a period of many years, possibly decades, and the American people were on board; then the period of political sniping and media undermining, coupled with an MTv-type attention span by the American public, undercut the viability of a long-war effort. Unfortunately, the Long War remains to be fought and none of those who have hampered our efforts have provided legitimate alternatives.

I have yet to give up hope on the possible seedings of democracy in our current theaters of operations. Still, I am willing to acknowledge the two alternatives that always stood off-stage ready to enter on cue: surrender, retreat and eventually sacrifice our hopes for our grandchildren’s world , or brutally move forward in a barbaric way that the U.N. and our overly-sensitive Euro “allies” will hate but has historically proven to be the language understood by enemies. The latter is especially valid when we are talking about a culture that seems often to only understand violence. Should our current efforts — grandiose, hopeful for the human spirit and self-limiting in their violent nature — fail upon the rocks of a reality presented us by our enemies and those who refuse to stand against them, then I will return to my initial reaction after 9/11. I will again want blood, and I mean blood in mass quantities. This time around, though, that want will stem from a calmer notion than revenge; instead it will stem from a rational approach toward the only remaining means for the survivability of Western civilization as we know and love it.

I just haven’t thrown in the towel on the nice approach yet. After that, should it truly fail, then cry havoc and unleash all that phrase bloodily entails.

There should be nothing agreeable about warfare. God forbid that I should recommend brutality, but we face facts like men. It is not a trade for a philosopher.

—Prince de Linge, of Austria