McCains got it right

The Coffee Shop
1

John McCain: We Must Take the Fight to the Enemy

Sen. John McCain told Fox News today that the reason Americans should pay very close attention to what happened today in London is because “This is a grim reminder of the war that we continue to fight against people who want to destroy everything we and our friends across the Atlantic stand for and believe in.”

Regarding our own homeland defenses, McCain told interviewer Shepard Smith, “We have made progress, we have a long way to go, and if we fail to take the fight to the enemy, the enemy will take the fight to us.”

Smith pointed out to the senator that if someone wanted to take a weapon in a backpack onto any subway in the U.S., there would be no way to stop it. So, he asked, how do we remedy this?

McCain said that there is more we can do at our ports and rail stations, "but the moral of the story is, you can’t fight them here.

"You’ve got to go where they’re bred, and that happens to be in these madrassahs that are funded by the Saudis, where the are taught to hate and destroy the West and everything we stand for.

"We’ve got to go where these terrorists breed … in the Middle East, with the followers of extreme Islamic fundamentalism.

“We can take preventive measures, but the best way to prevent these attacks is to go after them where they breed.”

McCain also defended current U.S. foreign policy that is pushing democracy all over the world, saying, “Repressive and oppressive governments also provide the incentives for this kind of extremism and that’s why we’re fighting hard for Democracy in the Middle East, whether it be in Egypt or Iraq or any of these other Middle Eastern countries - that’s why Afghanistan was so important.”

McCain also doesn’t believe the convoluted notion that we are somehow creating more terrorists by fighting them.

“These people were bent on our destruction September 11 … we had not had a war in Iraq at that time. … It’s clear that there is a breeding ground of radical Islamic extremism that predates anything the U.S. has done.”

He added, “If you believe that Iraq is a breeding ground, then we should do everything we can to further the process of democracy and stability in Iraq.”

2

"You’ve got to go where they’re bred, and that happens to be in these madrassahs that are funded by the Saudis, where the are taught to hate and destroy the West and everything we stand for.

Except when he’s wrong. They’ve studied the terrorists involved in 9/11 and other places (not counting the attacks current in Iraq), and found that the overwhelming majority (like nearly all) of them were not involved with any madrassas. Many of them are/were highly educated, often with engineering degrees. McCain is repeating an incorrect myth. But it sounds good, doesn’t it?

3

Except when he’s wrong. They’ve studied the terrorists involved in 9/11 and other places (not counting the attacks current in Iraq), and found that the overwhelming majority (like nearly all) of them were not involved with any madrassas. Many of them are/were highly educated, often with engineering degrees. McCain is repeating an incorrect myth. But it sounds good, doesn’t it?

Who is they? I think you are wrong too. From one of your, I am sure, favorite websites…

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/madrassas.html

would seem to prove McCain is in fact correct.

4

Except when he’s wrong. They’ve studied the terrorists involved in 9/11 and other places (not counting the attacks current in Iraq), and found that the overwhelming majority (like nearly all) of them were not involved with any madrassas. Many of them are/were highly educated, often with engineering degrees. McCain is repeating an incorrect myth. But it sounds good, doesn’t it?

Who is they? I think you are wrong too. From one of your, I am sure, favorite websites…

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/madrassas.html

would seem to prove McCain is in fact correct.

(hey, let’s keep it civil, Major)

You are conflating the people who attend the madrassas (mostly lower class) and make up the kind of people the Taliban used in Afghanistan, with the people (mostly educated middle/upper class) who are involved with the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Madrid, and elsewhere. In the interview you linked above, I see this:

“… In order to have terrorists, in order to have supporters for terrorists, in order to have people who are willing to interpret religion in violent ways, in order to have people who are willing to legitimate crashing yourself into a building and killing 5,000 innocent people, you need particular interpretations of Islam.”

None of the 9/11 terrorists were involved in madrassas. It is possible to get the interpretations of Islam mentioned from elsewhere. It seems clear that al Qaeda is not going to use uneducated madrassa “graduates” to pull off attacks against the US or its allies.

5

Taking the fight to them does not necessarily mean fighting in Iraq. To me, taking the fight to them means actively gathering intelligence, infiltrating their organization, arresting/killing the leaders, etc.

No one disagrees with “taking the fight to them”, just the strategy and the tactic that is at contention.

6

(hey, let’s keep it civil, Major)

You are conflating the people who attend the madrassas (mostly lower class) and make up the kind of people the Taliban used in Afghanistan, with the people (mostly educated middle/upper class) who are involved with the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Madrid, and elsewhere. In the interview you linked above, I see this:

“… In order to have terrorists, in order to have supporters for terrorists, in order to have people who are willing to interpret religion in violent ways, in order to have people who are willing to legitimate crashing yourself into a building and killing 5,000 innocent people, you need particular interpretations of Islam.”

None of the 9/11 terrorists were involved in madrassas. It is possible to get the interpretations of Islam mentioned from elsewhere. It seems clear that al Qaeda is not going to use uneducated madrassa “graduates” to pull off attacks against the US or its allies.

I’m always civil with you Ken. I realize none of the 9/11 hijackers were from a madrassa. The point I,and I think the article points out, is that they are in fact a breeding/recruiting tool for the TAliban and AQ. The fact is the Taliban is far from dead in this GWOT. I just think we do need to keep our eye on the ball as it reates to where some of these terrorists are coming from regardless of whether they are highly educated Saudi’s or lowly peasant Pakistani’s.

8

Taking the fight to them does not necessarily mean fighting in Iraq. To me, taking the fight to them means actively gathering intelligence, infiltrating their organization, arresting/killing the leaders, etc.

No one disagrees with “taking the fight to them”, just the strategy and the tactic that is at contention.

Oh I concur 100%. The problem as I mentioned in a previous thread is it often takes years to infiltrate any organization and unfortunately our intelligence capabilities were severly diminshed and hampered under President Clinton (I am not blaming, only pointing out a fact). The problem is not limited to Iraq, it is in fact world wide, hence the “G” in GWOT.

9

Don’t say he got it right till the polls stablize. He is king high worthless.

10

Then why aren’t we going after the Saudis? The Taliban shielded Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and paid a price which was appropriate yet the Saudis (remember 15 of the hijackers were Saudis) remain our “allies.”

It seems our loyalties are somewhat misplaced.

As I noted earlier, Al Qaeda is not a country and we are not fighting governments. McCain has a point in that we have to take the fight to them but it has to be done using present day tactics, not the tactics from 1980. The use of intelligence, surveillance and infiltration is more important than tanks and machine guns, something we did not realize prior to going to Iraq. To invade a country at gunpoint to promote peace and freedom is very naive and is showing once again, that it doesn’t work.

Al Qaeda is a network of cell groups bent on destroying our lives. In their way of thinking, revenge killings are justified even if they have to really stretch to define revenge. For example, one Islamic professor noted that thousands of Muslims were killed in Bosnia, so for another Muslim to plant a bomb in London as retribution, would be “justified” in their way of thinking. You can’t defeat that type of logic. The only way to defeat them is to use intelligence to break up their clandestine meetings and you are not doing that when you kill insurgents in Iraq. If anything, you are rallying those Muslims in Europe that see our presence there as an assault on their religion and way of life.

The solution is to take our soldiers off of their soil and revamp the military using methods to defeat terrorists in 2005. It is a long-term process and the world needs to work together on this and stop being divided, which are presence in Iraq is accomplishing.

I agree. If I were king for a day the first thing I would do is confront Saudi Arabia and their continued support for the madrassas. I happen to think this is one area President Bush is making a mistake. The problem is our dependence on their oil. We do not presently have the capacity to fend for ourselves (for oil). Notice I said capacity not ability. There is ANWAR and other options but those are years off. We are in a catch 22 with Saudi Arabia. Our economy and way of life depend on that oil and as we know sometimes you have to get into bed with the enemy to preserve that way of life. Its not ideal but its a fact. We can argue alternative fuel sources and thats all well and good but again is years off. There is no easy answer as hypocritical as it is to turn a blind eye to Saudi Arabia.

As for “revenge killings” I am not so sue. There were terrorist attacks long before the first Gulf War which is when everyone thinks they started. I happen to agree that the “radical” arm of Islam resents and hates Western Civiliation and everything we stand for. We can’t just get “off their soil” and revamp the military then come back at a later date. Our military is going through a massive transformation as we speak and will take years to complete. Our intelligence base is also being rebuilt and will take time too.

12

Our economy and way of life depend on that oil and as we know sometimes you have to get into bed with the enemy to preserve that way of life.

I suggest that the consequences of being in bed with the enemy (oil-rich nations that support fundamental Islam) are more of a threat to “our way of life” than are the hardships that may occur during a transition to non-fossil fuel-based economy. Think about the constant terror attacks, elevated terror alerts, threats to civil liberties, huge economic costs of those alerts and the “GWOT”, the division of our country, the loss of life in Iraq; the list goes on. The sooner we bite the bullet and get out of bed, the sooner we’ll get rid of the fleas.

If there’s one thing I believe about this country, it is that the people have an incredible ability to “suck it up” and do what it takes to accomplish a task, when asked. Just look at WWII, the Manhattan Project, Apollo, etc. But we’re not being asked to sacrifice anything. Instead, we are told that conservation is for sissies (or whatever Cheney said), and we should keep on traveling and shopping and burning gas in our SUVs. Leadership, bah.

13

and would be willing to sacrifice my wife of life to do it.
Freudian slip?

14

If there’s one thing I believe about this country, it is that the people have an incredible ability to “suck it up” and do what it takes to accomplish a task, when asked.

Sure. Didn’t you notice how we all pitched in when they asked us to go shopping to fight terror? You weren’t inspired? It was epic, a tale for the ages.

15

“To me, taking the fight to them means actively gathering intelligence, infiltrating their organization, arresting/killing the leaders, etc.”

Are you implying this is not being done? Because there is ample evidence in the news that it is being done. To me, taking the fight to them militarily, and doing the above are not mutually exclusive.

16

I don’t much like McCain, but he has it right with this quote.

This is one of the better threads. Intelligent arguments can be waged about what the right way to take the fight to the enemy might be. It is not hard to argue that Iraq is not the right vehicle, though I disagree. Taking McCain’s statement as a foundation has provided an area of common agreement that is rare on this board.

This was the point I was trying to make with the Livingston quote yesterday. I doubt he and I would ever agree on a single tactic, but he outlined an attitude and an objective yesterday that I completely agree with.

17

All along I have been saying the wrong man got elected Prez. in 2000. If McCain had been elected we would not be in Iraq. He’s former military and can’t be snowed like GW was. Keep your fingers crossed that he gets elected in '08. Until then it’s going to be a very bumpy ride.

18

“We must take the fight to the enemy!!!”

Thats nice.

Where are the enemy and will they come out and show themselves so we can bomb them?

They are in Pakistan…can’t invade them they are our “allies”. They are in Saudi Arabia…can’t invade them they have all that oil. They are in London, Sydney, Bangkok, Hong Kong and right here in the middle of the United States of America.

McCain can rattle his sabre all he wants but you can’t beat these guys with armies or navys or air forces.

19

Thanks Neville.

20

You’re welcome Lyndon.

21

Sorry, this is the same McCain that joined the chorus saying we didn’t have enough troops in Afghanistan. He wanted tens of thousands. The Taliban fell with a total of 500 odd sets of American boots on the ground a week or two later.

McCain acts as if he has some substantial strategic military expertise. No knock on McCain. He has certainly paid the price for his service to his country, but he just doesn’t know much in this field, and he doesn’t seem to know what he doesn’t know.

22

And if you’re referring to Neville Chamberlain which I’m sure you are you must be comparing opposition to then war with his policy of appeasement towards Nazi Germany.

If thats the case I’m invoking Godwin’s Law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law

you lose.