I was worried there for a moment: I thought George W. Bush had said something I agree with.
Asked, "Can we win?" Bush said, "I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that the — those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."
Yes. Precisely. Exactly. This is the most sensible thing I've heard yet out of the Administration on the subject. This not a war in which, one day, we'll lead the tanks in a victory parade down the middle of the enemy's capital. What we want is a world in which terrorism is as unacceptable as slavery is now, and that will be a long, slow slog, and it will require winning hearts and minds more than just dropping bombs.
We are never going to "win" it by just showing that America has superior military power. They know we have superior military power; that's why they are using terrorism instead of conventional warfare.
And if we are always going to be fighting it, we need to acknowledge there are no "temporary" measures: No "temporary" loss of liberty "until the war is over." The "war" will never be over, so if we give up liberty for it, it's gone forever.
Of course, he then retracted the statement. Pfew, that was close.
(Yes, I know that Edwards made political hay out of it. Shame on him, too.)
posted 23:07