BBC: Benn criticises 'war on terror'
President George W Bush's concept of a "war on terror" has given strength to terrorists by making them feel part of something bigger, Hilary Benn has said. The international development secretary told a meeting in New York the phrase gives a shared identity to small groups with widely differing aims.Let's look at Benn's key FALSE ASSERTIONS:
And Mr Benn, a candidate for Labour's deputy leadership, confirmed that UK officials would stop using the term.
The White House coined the phrase after the attacks of 11 September 2001.
Mr Benn said: "In the UK, we do not use the phrase 'war on terror' because we can't win by military means alone. ... And because this isn't us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives. ... By letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength"... It is "the vast majority of the people in the world" against "a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups who have relatively little in common", he said.
... In a New York meeting organised by the Center on International Cooperation think-tank, Mr Benn will urge world leaders to find common ground with potential enemies, rather than relying on "hard" military power. ... The fight for the kind of world that most people want can, in the end, only be won in a different battle - a battle of values and ideas."
Mr Bush first outlined the concept of a "war on terror" shortly after New York and the Pentagon were attacked by Islamist terror group al-Qaeda on 11 September 2001."Our war on terror begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there," he told Congress nine days after the attacks. ... It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."The prime minister's official spokesman said Tony Blair "has always made clear we believe in fighting terrorism not just by military means but by political means as well".
- "In the UK, we do not use the phrase 'war on terror' because we can't win by military means alone.
AND WE ARE NOT FIGHTING WITH KINETIC FORCE ALONE. ALL WAR'S ARE FOUGHT WITH KINETIC FORCE AND OTHER MEANS.
- And because this isn't us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives.
- Bush's concept of a "war on terror" has given strength to terrorists by making them feel part of something bigger,
- The fight for the kind of world that most people want can, in the end, only be won in a different battle - a battle of values and ideas."
THE ENEMY IS UNITED IN THEIR GOALS AND MEANS: TO REESTABLISH THE CALIPHATE - UNDER QUTBIST SHARIA.
THEY ALREADY FEEL THAT WAY; THEY SELF-DEFINE THEMSELVES AS JIHADISTS; IT IS NOT MERELY OUR DEFINITION OF THEM, BUT HOW THEY SEE THEMSELVES.
ULTIMATELY, WARS ARE WON MILITARILY. ONLY COMPLETE VICTORY ESTABLISHES PEACE. THE VICTOR ESTABLISHES HIS VALUES.
THERE CAN BE NO VICTORY IN THE REALM OF IDEAS IF WE LOSE THE KINETIC WAR.
We are now engaged in a GREAT WORLD WAR. Not because Bush says so, but because reality says so: The battlefields of the WORLD WAR stretch from the Philippines to Thailand to Afghanistan, Pakistan. Iraq, Israel, Turkey, Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya, Algeria, Morocco, Spain, France, the UK, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Russia. Globally, there have been OVER 8000 jihadoterror attacks since 9/11.
The enemy in each of these battle-zones may be of different races or nationalities, but they are united in their ideology and fervor; they are all jihadists.
It might make Lefists more comfortable to delude themselves that Bush is too blame for falsely globalizing disparate and containable conflicts. I can see how it might SEEM nicer to delude oneself that one merely has to get rid of "Bush and his war-mongering jargon" to make the world a safer place.
But - sadly - really it ain't that easy. It only seems so to the self-deluded.
That's why denial is such a common delusional device.
A world where Bush is the baddest man around is a safer SEEMING world than one in which Binladenism commit daily acts of jihadioterror with no end in sight. It is is more frightening to accept reality - that we face the most vicious and ruthless enemy in two thousand years and they are everywhere, and their capacity to commit genocide is only limited by their means.
But as comfortable as denial may SEEM, nothing could be more dangerous. If the UK goes the way of Benn, then we will have lost another key ally in the GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, and that will make our ultimate victory that much more difficult.
BTW: Hilary Benn is the son of famous COMMUNIST Tony Benn; (he advocated nationalization of mist industries as recently as 1980). The apple doesn't fall far from the tree: they are both TRAITORS to liberty, justice, and the West.
It also means that this statement from Hilary Benn is another example of the Left playing right into the hands of the jihadists. They are either traitors willfully, or as dupes. Take your pick.
The enemy in each of these battle-zones may be of different races or nationalities, but they are united in their ideology and fervor; they are all jihadists.
It might make Lefists more comfortable to delude themselves that Bush is too blame for falsely globalizing disparate and containable conflicts. I can see how it might SEEM nicer to delude oneself that one merely has to get rid of "Bush and his war-mongering jargon" to make the world a safer place.
But - sadly - really it ain't that easy. It only seems so to the self-deluded.
That's why denial is such a common delusional device.
A world where Bush is the baddest man around is a safer SEEMING world than one in which Binladenism commit daily acts of jihadioterror with no end in sight. It is is more frightening to accept reality - that we face the most vicious and ruthless enemy in two thousand years and they are everywhere, and their capacity to commit genocide is only limited by their means.
But as comfortable as denial may SEEM, nothing could be more dangerous. If the UK goes the way of Benn, then we will have lost another key ally in the GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, and that will make our ultimate victory that much more difficult.
BTW: Hilary Benn is the son of famous COMMUNIST Tony Benn; (he advocated nationalization of mist industries as recently as 1980). The apple doesn't fall far from the tree: they are both TRAITORS to liberty, justice, and the West.
It also means that this statement from Hilary Benn is another example of the Left playing right into the hands of the jihadists. They are either traitors willfully, or as dupes. Take your pick.
No comments:
Post a Comment