Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. :: Townhall.com Columnist
Memo to the president
by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who won Tuesday's presidential debate?


Mr. President:

By now you have been getting lots of free advice about what to say – and what not to say – in your remarks Wednesday about a new strategy for Iraq. Some of it, like Jim Baker’s recommendations that would have translated into our defeat, you have wisely rejected. You have evidently decided to accept others reflecting your laudable determination to prevail, including staff shake-ups and surging of forces.

The leaks depicting your decisions to date seem, however, to reflect the same miasma that has afflicted many of your critics – namely, the perception that strategic adjustments are in order only vis a vis Iraq. A variation on the theme is the mistaken belief that we can make changes in policy or strategy towards Iraq without acknowledging, let alone reckoning with, the fact that it is but one front in a far wider war.

In case the free advice you have taken aboard to date hasn’t addressed these points directly, I would respectfully suggest that you factor into your thinking the following suggestions:

First, at this moment of critical redefinition, you have to root your strategy for Iraq in the context of the larger, truly titanic and global conflict being waged against us by a totalitarian ideology. In the interest of clarity and a new sense of direction, you must give new names to the war and to the enemy we confront. It is no longer enough to describe the former as “the war on terror” and the latter as “terrorists.”

Today, we are engaged in “the War for the Free World,” a formulation that makes clear that nothing less than the future of freedom and Western civilization is at stake. And our principal enemies at the moment are adherents to “Islamofascism,” a term you have used twice before. Most Muslims want no more than the rest of us to live under the sort of repressive theocracy such ideologues seek. But unless the Islamists are stopped, most immediately – but not exclusively – in Iraq, we will surely confront their violent bids for power elsewhere, including here.

To be sure, you have made such points from time to time in the past. But it has never been more important to underscore this central reality behind the changes you will be announcing Wednesday. Not least, by so doing, you can make clear why it is impossible simply to acquiesce in the face of congressional criticism and negative polls to alternative strategies that will result in a terrible loss for the Free World in Iraq – and further embolden its enemies and their enablers.

As you know, chief among these foes at the moment is Iran. Again, the problem is not confined to Iraq, although Tehran is certainly making every effort to ensure freedom’s defeat there. The Iranian mullahocracy is also actively engaged in international terrorism, destabilizing Lebanon, explicitly threatening Israel and the United States and amassing the nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles needed to carry out such threats. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Frank Gaffney Jr. is the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy and author of War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Frank Gaffney's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Subject: hosekuervo opines:
"we should have them hunting down Osama Bin Laden to the ends of the earth. Instead, he is a thousand miles from Iraq, making videos and planning his next attack."

When was the last time a new video of Osama surfaced?

Why is it that "liberals" such as yourself think the U.S. Military is incapable of handling more than one mission at a time?

And if we knew Osama was in Pakistan or Afghanistan and we mounted an offensive to grab him WITHOUT either country's permission, who do you think would be the first group of people in our country to cry foul? Liberals maybe?

And who is being "simple minded'????

War for the Free World
..I thought it was a War on Terror...or was it War against Saddam Hussein?...or maybe it was a War agains Weapons of Mass Destruction?..or it might have been to save our oil sources? Coulda been to honor treaties with similar countries like...Saudi Arabia or Isreael???? It could also have been a war against Al Quaeda?? A War against Osama bin Laden? or a war against opium? or a war against Muslim "extremism"?
or a war to exact revenge for the @3000 killed Americans in the WTC?.......who knows...
what it could be today...or tomorrow...or the next Administration... oh and what ever happened to our "allies" in our "Coalition of the "Willing"??? to do what..."fight" the "war"???
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.