Register-Login

Support Buchanan.Org…

We depend on you to keep us online. Please send in a donation today!

Click here to use the U.S. mail or...

Select Any Amount:

Visitors Online

Archives

Calendar

September 2010
S M T W T F S
« Aug    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Our Webserver

Get a Great American
WebHost - We did!

CrisisHost

CrisisHost is a proud supporter of free speech and the Ron Paul Revolution!

Our Site Content on Twitter

Twitter

Get Pat’s Latest Block Buster!

Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War Order from Amazon...

Day of Reckoning

Day of Reckoning

State of Emergency

State of Emergency

~~~ Read Me First ~~~

September 21st, 2007

Is Terrorism Really a Mortal Threat?

by Patrick J. Buchanan

It may have been politically incorrect to publish the thoughts on the sixth anniversary of 9/11, but what Colin Powell had to say to GQ magazine needs to be heard.

Terrorism, said Powell, is not a mortal threat to America.

“What is the greatest threat facing us now?” Powell asked. “People will say it’s terrorism. But are there any terrorists in the world who can change the American way of life or our political system? No. Can they knock down a building? Yes. Can they kill somebody? Yes. But can they change us? No. Only we can change ourselves. So what is the great threat we are facing?”

History and common sense teach that Powell speaks truth.

Since 9/11, 100,000 Americans have been murdered – as many as we lost in Vietnam, Korea and Iraq combined. Yet, not one of these murders was the work of an Islamic terrorist, and all of them, terrible as they are, did not imperil the survival of our republic.

Terrorists can blow up our buildings, assassinate our leaders, and bomb our malls and stadiums. They cannot destroy us. Assume the worst. Terrorists smuggle an atom bomb into New York harbor or into Washington, D.C., and detonate it.

Horrible and horrifying as that would be – perhaps 100,000 dead and wounded – it would not mean the end of the United States. It would more likely mean the end of Iran, or whatever nation at which the United States chose to direct its rage and retribution.

Consider: Between 1942 and 1945, Germany and Japan, nations not one-tenth the size of the United States, saw their cities firebombed and their soldiers and civilians slaughtered in the millions. Japan lost an empire. Germany lost a third of its territory. Both were put under military occupation. Yet, 15 years later, Germany and Japan were the second and third most prosperous nations on Earth, the dynamos of their respective continents, Europe and Asia.

Powell’s point is not that terrorism is not a threat. It is that the terror threat must be seen in perspective, that we ought not frighten ourselves to death with our own propaganda, that we cannot allow fear of terror to monopolize our every waking hour or cause us to give up our freedom.

For all the blather of a restored caliphate, the “Islamo-fascists,” as the neocons call them, cannot create or run a modern state, or pose a mortal threat to America. The GNP of the entire Arab world is not equal to Spain’s. Oil aside, its exports are equal to Finland’s.

Afghanistan and Sudan, under Islamist regimes, were basket cases. Despite the comparisons with Nazi Germany, Iran is unable to build modern fighters or warships and has an economy one-twentieth that of the United States, at best. While we lack the troops to invade Iran, three times the size of Iraq, the U.S. Air Force and Navy could, in weeks, smash Iran’s capacity to make war, blockade it and reduce its population to destitution. Should Iran develop a nuclear weapon and use it on us or on Israel, it would invite annihilation.

As a threat, Iran is not remotely in the same league with the Soviet Union of Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, or Mao’s China, or Nazi Germany, or Imperial Japan, or even Mussolini’s Italy.

And why would Tehran, which has not launched a war since the revolution in 1979, start a war with an America with 10,000 nuclear weapons? If the Iranians are so suicidal, why have they not committed suicide in 30 years by attacking us or Israel?

What makes war with Iran folly is that an all-out war could lead to a break-up of that country, with Persians, Azeris, Kurds, Arabs and Baluchis going their separate ways, creating fertile enclaves for al-Qaida recruitment and training.

Yet, while talking common sense, Gen. Powell himself reverted to cliche. “America could not survive without immigration.”

But this is nonsense. From 1789 to 1845, we had almost no immigration, before the Irish came. Did we not survive? From 1925 to 1965, we had almost no immigration. Yet, we conquered the Great Depression, won World War II, became the greatest power on earth and ended those four decades with an Era of Good Feeling under Ike and JFK unlike any we had known before.

Was the America of the 1940s and 1950s in which Colin Powell grew up in danger of not surviving for lack of immigration?

In our time, Pakistan, Ethiopia and Czechoslovakia have split apart. The Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have broken up into two dozen nations. Terrorism had nothing to do with it. Tribalism had everything to do with it.

Race, ethnicity and religion are the fault lines along which nations like Iraq are coming apart. If America ends, it will not be the work of an Osama bin Laden. As Abraham Lincoln said, it will be by our own hand; it will be by suicide.

Related posts:

  1. Terrorism: The Price of Hegemonyby Patrick J. Buchanan – August 11, 1998 Those twin slaughters in Kenya and Tanzania...
  2. Is Cataclysmic Terrorism Ahead?by Patrick J. Buchanan – January 12, 1999 On the day after Pearl Harbor, ex-President...
  3. What Exactly Is Terrorism?by Patrick J. Buchanan – July 17, 2002 “The American government sure is easily baffled....
  4. The UN Threatby Patrick J. Buchanan – October 9, 1997 U.S. — New Target of U.N. Investigators...
  5. Iran a Threat? I Mean, Really?By Ray McGovern — AntiWar.com With all the current hype about the “threat” from Iran,...
  6. The Terrorism Conundrumby Philip Giraldi – AntiWar.com In the wake of 9/11, almost anything the US government...
  7. High Frequency Terrorism: How the Big Banks and Federal Reserve Maintained Their Death Grip Over the United StatesBy David DeGraw & Max Keiser – AmpedStatus Report In the aftermath of Goldman Sachs’...

2 comments to Is Terrorism Really a Mortal Threat?

  • A neocon mega-church in Albuquerque NM with thousands of members said to its followers to go to war against Satanism, which they said also goes by the name of Liberalism. This church said that Jesus commands them to attack liberals and that vicious attacks are expected because of the Salt of the Earth phrase, twisting the phrase to mean that salt gets into wounds and burns, stings, causes pain, and can kill if enough salt is used.

    Go to any political chatroom and you will see, real time, the majority of the neocons in each room openly threatening terrorism on liberals. Most neocons in these rooms will freely admit they would rather have Osama Bin Laden as POTUS than any Democrat. What about the neocons who post on this board, who would you rather have between any Democrat and Osama Bin Laden for POTUS?

  • Mr. Buchannan is barking up the wrong tree with Islamic terrorism being a mortal threat to America, because we know it won't present a threat to the US from decades to never. The real threat of terrorism comes from the US neocons, the supposed right wing. Wally Herger, GOP rep, God Blessed a self-professed terrorist. Numerous GOP politicians have hinted at revolution, have spewed complete lies about death panels and Obama's birth certificate, telling their constituents that Obama is trying to kill Americans. GOP media stars are doing far worse. Beck aired a fantasy "poison Pelosi" skit, Chuck Norris practically begged for a neocon revolution to overthrow the democratically elected governement, and that isnt .1% of the anti-American rhetoric spewed by neocons.