“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Saturday, September 16, 2006

Ed Koch Diagnoses the Problem

Over at RealClear Politics Ed Koch has a column entitled Losing our Fighting Spirit.

He writes:

...I believe that the U.S. is faltering in the current war against international terrorism, and we are losing our will to prevail. We are losing our fighting spirit as a result of the fighting between Republicans and Democrats on just how to prosecute the war.

The President calls the war on terror "the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century, and the calling of our generation." The President's speech was attacked, as usual, by a number of Democratic party leaders with Senator Ted Kennedy in the lead.

One of the worst attacks on the President came from Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, himself a presidential candidate in 2008. He demanded that the President stop referring to those engaged in terrorist attacks against us and others as Islamic fascists. He said, "Fascist ideology...doesn't have anything to do with the way global terrorist networks think or operate, and it doesn't have anything to do with the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world who practice the peaceful teachings of Islam." But what about the tens of millions who are terrorists and want to kill us? Does he have a description for them? The media rarely call those engaged in acts of terrorism "terrorists," preferring to refer to them simply as "militants."

There are very few Democrats who have stood firm and put Country above partisan politics. Along with Zell Miller, and Joe Lieberman, Ed Koch is one of them. So far Miller and Lieberman have been villified by their party. Were Ed Koch more active in the party, he would have been crucified by now. I suspect that his turn is coming.

BTW - He has a very good idea:
My personal view is that if we told our regional allies -- Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan -- and our NATO allies that unless they join us with boots on the ground and share the casualties and cost of the ongoing war, we will leave; they would have no option but to come in; otherwise on our leaving the civil war would intensify and spill over Iraq's borders.

Will anyone listen?

HT: Desert Rat


  1. No one listens
    no one cares

    Does anybody really know what time it is?

  2. Rat - the individual time scale tracks the historical scale with a lag. Your emphasis is not wrong per se but the timing requires complex bureaucratic interplay of goals, objectives, plans, funding, implementation and in-play adjustments.

    Good for you for beating drum. But let’s keep it simple. The right way forward is what? Tomorrow we must do what? The next election should focus on what? Can the average American make it happen or will the professional pols make it happen? Let’s lay it out.

    Allen vs. Webb in VA is one race. What course of action would you have the American electorate support? Can you sell it? The enemy is named [Islam]??? The response is [bomb Iran]???

    The front and center issue is spelling it out - and making it happen.

    Basic business model.

    I've been around long enough to know your message. The next step is what? IMO this is a 'real time' operation

  3. To put it simply,
    match 'em on the ground, anywhere, everywhere.
    Insurgency for Insurgency
    Bomb for bomb
    Genocide for genocide
    Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.

    Use proxies around the world, to bleed them from a thousand cuts.

    Start today, for a better tomorrow.

  4. After reading the exchange between sausage, doug and buddy I am wondering if we aren't better off to let the Mullahs keep them under control.

    Can you imagine unleashing millions and millions of new perverts on the world?

  5. They already are loose upon the World, whit.