Sunday, May 13, 2007

Mohammed Fadhil on the Stakes

Iraq the Model's Mohammed Fadhil, on the stakes in Iraq, and the cost of we leave the mission unfinished:

It is up to us to show tyrants and murderers like Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah, Syria's Bashar Assad, and their would-be imitators who seek to control Iraq's people and wealth that we, the people, are not their possessions. They can't take out our humanity and they can't force us to back down.

The world should ask them to leave our land before asking the soldiers of freedom to do so.

The cost of liberating Europe in the last century was enormous in blood and treasure. In fact, it took half a century of American military presence thereafter to protect those nations from subsequent threats. If that made sense during a Cold War, and it did, then I don't understand why anyone would demand a pullout from Iraq (and maybe later, the entire Middle East) when the enemies are using every evil technique, from booby trapped dead animals to hijacked civilian aircrafts, to kill innocents.

And so, my friends, I will call for fighting this war just as powerfully as the bad guys do - because I must show them that I'm stronger than they are. The people of America need to understand this: the enemies of a stable Iraq are America's enemies, and they simply do not understand the language of civilization and reason.

I have nothing else I can add. Read the whole thing, as they say.

HT: Michael J. Totten

UPDATE: Some commenters have complained on MJT's blog about Fadhil's connections and biases. It's reasonable to assert that he's biased in favor of the war, but I don't think he ever hid that fact. Many have complained that his piece was linked to by righty outfits like Hannity, Michelle Malkin, et al. I fail to see how this is Fadhil's fault, or relevant. At the end of the day, it was an interesting and compelling piece, and that's why I (and I'm assuming MJT, the NY Daily News) linked to it.


qj said...

It is funny that Canada or Mexico doesn't have enemies in Iraq. Explain to me why they don't have the same problems in Iraq? Don't they have the same interest?

US intervention and meddling in the affairs of other nations is the main reason the US is a target of terrorism. Canada and Mexico, our neighbors, do not have enemies in the middle east. It seems to me, since they are our neighbors and our two biggest trading partners, they should be suffering the same hostilities.

The war on terror will not be won by a standing army or conventional military tactics. Occcupying Iraq and Afghanistan is burdening and depleting resources that can be better used in combating terrorism.
It is going to take counterterroism forces, such as Special Ops, human intelligence, technology, civil society outreach, and flexibility to contend with terrorism.

Rachel said...

Canada and Mexico are also dirt poor compared to us. Canada has its own concerns over terrorism and the "Fort Dix Six" issue proves that Mexico is just an open back door to whoever wants to come in (and I support an amnesty act).

I agree that there are many sources that have not been used to their best on the WOT - and neither party has promoted them. However, do not delude yourself into thinking that countries that do not fight do not have enemies.

If (on the virtually nonexistent) Muslim extremist took control of the US, do you think they would just stay there? Canada is a western country and Mexico is a Catholic one. Any country that the extremists feel is not in line will be next on the line.

qj said...


Canada and Mexico don't have a terrorist threat because the two do not have a interventionists foreign policy.

The Muslim world has comtempt for the US due to our government's meddling in their domestic affairs.
The US government has a history of destablizing the region with covert
operations. For a few examples, go to ""

The US presence, now, in Iraq and Afghanistan is galvanizing all Muslims to fight. It is some what of a cultural custom for most Muslims to unite in fighting a non-Muslim enemy. This happened in the Soviet/Afghan War.

The US and the free world must fight terrorism, however, it will have to be fought with a uncoventional warfare strategy.
IMO, mobile commando style forces, coupled with human and high tech intelligence will have better success in combating terrorist. A standing Army of tanks and armored fighting vehicles is to clumsy and less flexible in fighting a guerrilla style enemy.