No time for second-guessing

I posted an article 14 months ago written by Joseph Farah which I just re-read; and its worthy of reviewal.

No time for second-guessing
It has become a national sport since Vietnam.
By Joseph Farah

Two years after our dramatically successful invasion of Iraq, leading to the liberation of 26 million Arabs and Kurds, the second-guessing is at all time highs.

They ask:

• Where are the weapons of mass destruction?
• Where are the connections between the regime of Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaida terrorists who attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001?
• Where was the threat Iraq posed to America?

May I remind the second-guessers that no one knew for certain whether Iraq could produce nuclear weapons when we invaded two years ago. However, there was widespread agreement that Iraq would be in a position to do so shortly – certainly by now. Had we not invaded Iraq two years ago, we might be faced with doing so today against an Iraq armed with nuclear weapons – or almost certainly against an Iraq that would be in a position to obtain nuclear weapons and place them in the hands of the terrorists groups they had supported for so long, including al-Qaida.

[Heavyhanded would like to interject here: So not only would we be dealing with Iran and North Korea and nukes, we would be dealing with Iraq's nuke quest as well. Wouldn't that be great? By the way, any emphasis such as bold type is mine, not the author's.]

That was the threat we faced in Iraq two years ago. And that's why invasion was the right call to make. Have we done everything right as a nation since? No. Have we made mistakes along the way? Yes. Do we continue to make errors in the execution of our war policies and the making of the peace? Yes.

But where would we be as a nation had we backed down and permitted Saddam Hussein to remain in power?

There is no question the world would be a more dangerous place.

And that brings us to the crisis we face with Iran today.

Now the second-guessers are suggesting that history is repeating itself – that warmongers in the United States are making a case against Iran based on the same arguments they used with respect to Iraq.

This second-guessing appeasement mentality is having an effect on the national psyche.

Here is the truth about Iran:

• It is committed to producing nuclear weapons.
• It is already reprocessing nuclear material it can use for that purpose.
• It is a terrorist-sponsoring state that may already possess some small nuclear arsenal.
• It has advanced missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons and of hitting Israel and other Middle East neighbors.
• It is fully cooperating with rogue nuclear state North Korea.
• It has already attacked the United States through its proxy army, the terrorist militia Hezbollah.
• It is capable of attacking the United States with nuclear missiles from offshore in ships disguised as commercial vessels.
• It is actively conducting discussions with the anti-American Hugo Chavez regime in Venezuela about nuclear cooperation with that Latin American nation.

The second-guessers tell us there is no threat to the United States posed by Iran.

I don't know how anyone could reasonably come to such a conclusion.

There is an imminent threat.

Second-guessing appeasers of this tyrannical regime will only place our country in graver danger in the future. They always do.

Don't listen to those who are still debating as to whether or not we were right to fight Adolph Hitler and imperial Japan.

Don't listen to those who are still wringing their hands about Vietnam – those who brought shame on our country and a predictable holocaust to Southeast Asia.

Don't listen to those who look at victory in Iraq and see defeat.

Remember Sept. 11.

Defend America.

Defeat the terrorists.

Destroy Islamo-fascism.

Free Iran.

FAIR USE NOTICE: The above may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on Heavy-Handed Politics may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC § 107. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.