I get more convinced every day that a large percentage of Americans are upset because we're not ruthless enough in Iraq and elsewhere. And indeed, recent polls seem to indicate that many Americans want the US to be harsher, if necessary, in the War on Terror. Mark Steyn says:
In my corner of northern New England, as in Highgate and Holland Park, it is also stressful being a Bush apologist. Most of the guys I hang out with demand to know why he's being such a wimp, why's he kissing up to King Abdullah about a few stray bananas in some jailhouse, why's he being such a pantywaist about not letting our boys fire on mosques, why hasn't he levelled Fallujah. In other words, don't make the mistake of assuming that Bush's poll numbers on Iraq have fallen because people want him to be more multilateralist and accommodating. On my anecdotal evidence, they want him to be more robust and incendiary.
In the past week, there's been a lot of talk about al-Qaida planning attacks to hopefully influence the US elections. But here's the thing: I don't think we're Spain. I don't think Americans would respond to another attack with demands to appease the terrorists. I think Americans would respond to another attack with demands to nuke the Middle East.
I took an informal poll this weekend. I asked what would you want the US to do if, for example, the WWII Memorial Dedication or Indy 500 crowds were atttacked resulting in tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of deaths.
No one thought we should just go and nuke people, but, there was strong support for us to demand the immediate turning over of all known terrorists in a country "or else". "Or else" is up for debate.
My brother, who, truth be known, is a little out there, would start by bombing Mecca, then Medina until all terrorists were in US custody and everyone renounced Islam. He would also support bombing Palestine with planes full of rocks and immediately putting all Arab non-citizens in America on "rafts in the ocean" Like I said, he's a little out there, but you get the idea.
If al-Qaida is foolish enough, and lucky enough, to get off a major attack in America, I believe the only regime change they'll get will be in Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Posted by at May 30, 2004 09:19 PM
The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/98
|# March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM Converted_Comment|
I'm one of the people who thinks that Bush isn't being tough enough in Iraq. There is no reason Americans should be getting shot in the back over there. Start dropping leaflets warning people to get out, then bomb trouble spots into oblivion.
We should firebomb Mosques, homes and wherever else terrorists are hiding. As for bombing Mecca and Medina, I think I could go for that just to teach radicals a lesson: don't mess with us. And any Muslim in America who doesn't like it can go back to the hell hole they fled from in the first place.
Of course, Bush is too PC to do any of that.