Reexamining the Worldview of Naysayers
There are many out there who look at the world and try to fit people and/or events into a right wing/left wing or liberal/conservative paradigm. While this makes for easy pickings from pundits and opinion makers who want to undermine positions that have merit simply because they come from an ideological position opposite to their own, it does little to actually determine how world events come to pass. It is far easier to consider Fox News loony if you think it is full of right wingers or CNN wacky if you think it is full of liberal tree huggers than to actually examine their bias on the news.
Bias is everywhere in the reporting of news events. It is why people consider reading the New York Times versus the Washington Post or Wall Street Journal for certain types of news. It is why people view Fox rather than CNN or MSNBC. Spin is everywhere, yet there are certain fundamental positions that cannot be argued with - things that are easily determined as right or wrong, regardless of political position.
This notion of right and wrong extends into the political sphere. You can argue the merits of whether President Bush should have landed on the aircraft carrier via helicopter instead of the aircraft he did. However, you cannot argue that he believed that going to war to eliminate the Ba'athist regime in Iraq was going to improve the national security of the US. Nor, you can argue that going into Afghanistan to eliminate the Taliban regime, who offered refuge for al Qaeda was not in the national security interests of the US, or the rest of the world for that matter.
It is into this debate that the naysayers have hijacked the debate and inserted moral relativism where only right and wrong should exist.
Thus, the naysayer argues that the national security of the US is somehow weaker today than in January or February of 2003 or even before 9/11/2001 because of President Bush's actions against Iraq and Afghanistan's regimes that supported and assisted terrorist groups. Simply put, there are fewer terrorist attacks against US interests worldwide since the US launched its war against terrorist sponsors.
Afghanistan harbored the leadership of al Qaeda, which planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks. The regime was eliminated and the remnants have been routed. A new, more moderate regime is now in place and elections will be taking place to establish a permanent government - all without US having colonial ambitions. Naysayers complained that Afghanistan would turn into another Vietnam, yet more was accomplished with fewer troops than ever attempted.
Latest Articles