The State Department just isn't Murderous Enough

Tony Blankley wants to kill a lot more muslims and arabs. A lot more. We haven't killed nearly enough. We haven't tortured enough. Darn it, we just aren't taking this war on terrorism seriously. And it's mostly those bastards in the State Department. Or as some like to call it, the Surrender Department.

His latest article is a reaction to an interview David Brooks conducted for the NYTimes which I don't have access too (cause I'm not paying for it). He finds two parts troubling. One is the suggestion that Hezbollah might choose to abandon terrorism for a bit in order to gain world sympathy. The other is that we don't need to worry about winning the hearts and minds of the Arabs - we won't in any reasonable amount of time.

In the short and early middle term, a policy of appealing to the hearts and minds of the Arab street (i.e. "getting out from under the blow to our authority caused by the torture and detainee issues") will be indistinguishable from a policy of appeasement to radical Islamist sentiments. (Of course, "leaning on Israel" is always well received on the Arab Street.)

And, oh dear, that last phrase: "We have to make up [for not spending so much blood or treasure as over the past few years] with diplomacy backed by a hint of steel." More likely a hint of lavender. Somehow, I doubt that Hezbollah, al Qaeda Hamas and their fellow cutthroats are going to take the "hint."

Reading these assessments from someone very high up in the Bush foreign policy hierarchy, it is hard to take in the distressing conclusion that even now, after all we have seen and been through these past five years, it is still believed that we can somehow finesse radical Islamist terrorism with sweet talk. This is going to be a bloody fight to the death between civilization and Islamist barbarity -- made more bloody the longer we wait to take the threat seriously.

We can't get the Muslims on our side without killing a whole hell of a lot of them. Apparently.