03 October, 2006

a (potentially unpopular) different theory

Recent announcements from local and national news have been resounding with similar concerns about the ongoing war and what it means for national security. The primary argument being given is that the war in Iraq is not truly helping; it only seems to be fueling further terroristic plots against America. Therefore, as the logic goes, the longer we stay in Iraq; the more we increase the likelihood of becoming victims of terror attacks in the near future.

There is some truth in this -- partly because of the style of fighting we are engaged in and partly because of the type of combatants we are fighting (i.e., they do not always fight fair). But there may be another reason why Iraqi militants are becoming more courageous in their desires to attack us again. In any type of combat situation -- whether it be war, martial arts, etc -- the key is to watch for weaknesses in the opponent. Sometimes these weaknesses manifest themselves in physical forms (i.e., a bum knee; or, an unprotected border); sometimes they manifest themselves in diplomatic forms (i.e., the one being attacked simply wants to talk); or sometimes, they emerge as a result of psychological struggles (i.e., hope of winning is divided from within).

The first form is always the primary focus; for once a weaknesses is found, exploitation of that weakness is the next step (i.e., continually pummel that area). The second form is the most fun for an enemy to find because it makes his job that much easier (i.e., fish in a barrel). (I should, at this point, apologize for all the "i.e.'s". If they are a bit annoying: sorry). There is a proper place for talking when it comes to dealing with potential conflict -- the key word being "potential". If both parties are willing to seek a compromise before a struggle begins, let'em talk until they pass out from exhaustion. But if one party lurches across the table and sucker-punches the other party in face -- and the assailant has no desire of backing down -- the conversation is over. (I guarantee that if I went up to one of our leaders in government, who simply wanted to talk about things, and punched him in the face; he’s not going to ask me to stop so that we can talk about it. You can bet that he’s going to fight back). The third form of weakness is the one that an enemy truly wants.

My theory on why the terrorists are becoming more anxious: they see the division within the ranks -- both in politics and on the battlefield; they see a nationwide media-promotion advocating surrender and withdrawal; and they even see portions of their enemy’s government (i.e., us) standing behind this promotion. How are they seeing this? Well, we would redefine “foolish” if we thought that these terrorists do not have access to televisions and we would further redefine it if we thought they didn’t watch them. We, for the most part, are basically showing (quite literally) our enemy that we don’t want to fight this war; but remember two things: 1) our enemy does not always fight fair (i.e., they could care less that we don’t want to fight -- they do!), and 2) our enemy has already come across the meeting table and sucker-punched us in the face, and they are certainly not going to stop -- no matter how politely we ask them.

About two years ago, I had the opportunity to speak with a Muslim from Somalia while being transported from my hotel to the Denver airport. The first 10 minutes of the ride was uncomfortably quiet, partly because it was 4:30am and I was the only passenger in the van. The driver then broke the silence by asking a rather pointed question: “What do you think of war in Iraq?” (Not really a topic of discussion I had planned on with a complete stranger -- let alone at 4:30 in the morning). I told him that I was saddened by the fact that the situation had come to war, but in light of the circumstances surrounding it; there was no other choice. To my shock, he agreed with me. Then he said something that has clearly rung in my ears ever since: “Now that you [i.e., Americans] are in this war, you can never leave; and it is a war that will never end. If you do leave, we will go right back to where we were before. If you stay, you have to want to stay because Islamic fighters don’t know how to give up.”

If we are fighting a war with an enemy who does not know how to give up, and if we are fighting an enemy that does not always fight fair, and if we are (inter)nationally broadcasting our lack of desire to fight this war; we are giving them every reason to plot further attacks on our country. I understand that this is not going to be a popular post -- I may even lose one or two of my four or five readers; but I think it is an option that has gone unnoticed for too long.