Tough words, take 3
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg
Newt Gingrich:
Defeating the terrorists and thwarting efforts by Iran and North Korea to gain nuclear and biological weapons must be the first goal of American policy. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, if violence is necessary to defeat the terrorists, the Iranians and the North Koreans, then it is regrettably necessary. If they can be disarmed with less violence, then that is desirable. But a nonviolent solution that allows the terrorists to become better trained, better organized, more numerous and better armed is a defeat. A nonviolent solution that leads to North Korean and Iranian nuclear weapons threatening us across the planet is a defeat.
7:19 AM / August 11, 2006
: include(/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in
: include(): Failed opening '/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.2/lib/php') in
How is the monumental waste of resources that is taking place in Iraq supposed to contribute to achieving these goals?
Rule 1: no links to the Moonie Times, worldnut daily, etc.
KFJ- Good question! Gingrich apparently failed to include another possibility: a violent response that leads to either no change or even an increase in terrorists and their abilities to make war.
But, violence is somewhat of a sacred cow to Gingrich and his fans. To suggest that a violent response will not solve the problem is unthinkable!
Of course there are times when violence does not solve the problem look at the French Revolution.
However, on the subject of Iraq, it is pertinent to note the demise of a goverment which was on the same level of terrorists. The simple removal of Hussein and his supporters was a victory against terrorism. Any man who leads a country with state-established rape rooms is a terrorist. Whether or not he struck against America is besides the point.
Leftists always profess the need to help the underprivilaged in America. What about the underprivilaged/opressed in other countries whose government will NOT help them? Are we, as the most powerful, and one of the most rich nations in the world, to sit back and watch as these atrocities happen elsewhere? That seems contradictory to Leftist thinking. Help our own people but not those who are 100% worse off? That is selfish and simply cruel.
Tell me, how can you possibly think the blow we struck against Iraq is not positive?