How do you win the war on terror?

If we are talking about military steps, in the modern era we say it is over and go home.

The Obama administration is already taking those steps in Iraq and making the investments to get Afghanistan to the point where we can do that too.

In a more profound way, though, the way we win the war on terror is to eliminate enemy.

If there is no enemy, there is no terror.

If there is no enemy, there is no war.

The Bush administration wanted us to believe that we could kill all our enemies because we were so much more powerful than they were.

The reality is that we can’t kill them all, and our efforts to do so only made them stronger because two rose up to take the place of every one that we killed.

Instead President Obama is going to unmask our enemy and reveal that they are more like us and we are more like them than either of us would like to admit.

He is doing that by reaching out to the Muslim world to change their perception of the United States. What better person to do that than a brown skinned man with a muslim-sounding name.

The Muslim world won’t trust the United States overnight. They will want to see tangible evidence that the United States is serious about peace in the Middle East and in Iraq.

Obama is, however, laying the groundwork. He intends to treat the Muslim world with the same sort of respect that we would like to see from them. He will follow that with a diplomatic plan to address the issues that represent barriers to peace.

Ultimately, he will succeed and win the war on terror by turning our enemies into our friends.

Some who read this are going to immediately assume that it is naive to assume that one man could have that effect. One group, however, is taking Mr. Obama’s initiative very seriously. That group is Al Qaeda. If their actions are any indication, they are afraid of him. If President Bush was their greatest recruiting tool, President Obama may be their greatest enemy. I believe he is their greatest enemy because he knows he can win this war.

4 Responses to “Winning”

  1. keith says:

    #1 I hope you are right. I really do

    #2 Bush won the war in Iraq and Obama is merely carring out the final withdrawl. Not much credit should go to him and all the credit should go to Bush.

    #3 Our enemy is the radical Muslims….and they are not just our enemy but the enemy of countries in Europe, Inida, Asia, Africa etc…EVERY WHERE. They are opposed to Christians and Jews. Obama is now out to make peace with a radicalized version of a religon. So much for this not being a religious war…..

    #4 better study up on the anti-christ Jeff. He will make peace and appear to be “christ” though he will not. It’s not the result you should be loking at but God you should be looking for. I am not suggesting this is Obama, nhe is not, but given your prescpition of sucess the anti-christ will bring sucess in bringing peace….and then death.

  2. Jeff Beamsley says:

    No one has won the war in Iraq, yet. We still have to get out of there safely and the Iraqi’s have to figure out how to take back their country without killing each other. When it’s all done, you can start to hand out credit.

    What Obama is doing is recalibrating what has been called the war on terror. He realizes that this is about ideas, not bombs. We win by giving the world different choices than they have had. To the degree that he can demonstrate that he plans to back his words with action, future generations will point to this as the day when the tide turned. Obama is not attempting to make peace with radical Islamists. He is marginalizing them. They need recruits and money. Those will dry up when we no longer appear to be the enemy to the rest of Islam.

    Every generation has seen the anti-Christ lurking under the bed. Every generation has felt that they were in the midst of the end-days. They were all wrong because they were reading Revelation literally. It, like much of the Bible, is a metaphor.

    I finished reading a great book on the Bible by Karen Armstrong. It is basically a history of the book. One of the things that she points out is that literal interpretations of the Bible are a relatively recent phenomenon. Fundamentalists rose up in response to Darwinism. For the vast majority of the Bible’s existence, those who read and studied it found meaning through allegory and metaphor.

  3. keith says:

    Radical Islam appears to be at war with EVERYONE, all the time….I’m not sure how we change that. 9-11 was unprovolked, the cole the same cole, etc.

    Try reading “Evidence that demands a verdict” for the validity of the bible and its literal meaning. Chirst is not a allegory or a metaphor. To further support read “the case for Chrsit.”

    As to Darwin we are about a hundred years after his statement and still waiting for his bird to take an “evolved form.”

    Given the events over the weekend in Iran, Mr Obama, whom I will repeat I like, might be beginning to change his mind that this is not about bombs…..

    have a good week Jeff.

  4. keith says:

    Where’s the beat down here. lets start with this one. Aren’t you going to argue that radical Islam isn’t at war with EVERYONE. Further, would you argue that radical Islam doesn’t take from the Koran its understanding that that SHOULD be at war with EVERYONE?

    Should I provide the factual examples of just the last 15 year that would encompus nearly the entire global……or will you spare me the detailed explaining of my case and just cede this portion of the beat down over to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I generally don’t feel required to give examples of the obvious.)

    I won’t even ask you to jump in on the birds and darwin.

Leave a Reply