Toronto Star: "By WWII standards, Al Qaeda is a criminal nuisance"

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

Editorial: Bush's amber signal
Mar. 20, 2006. 01:00 AM

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1142635819662&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795



"America is at war." Those are the grim opening words from U.S. President George Bush's new National Security Strategy, the document that will guide American military thinking for the remainder of his term in office. More than four years after the 9/11 terror attacks, as Americans are tiring of the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, United States military policy-makers offer no relief.

Quite the opposite. Bush is struggling to rally skeptical Americans to his bellicose view of the world, by arguing that Islamic extremists pose a comparable threat to the vast Fascist war machines of World War II, and the Soviet Communist empire. "The 20th century witnessed the triumph of freedom over the threats of fascism and communism," says the security text, unveiled last week. "Yet a new totalitarian ideology now threatens, an ideology grounded not in secular philosophy but in the perversion of a proud religion."

While few will argue that Al Qaeda and its ilk do pose a lethal threat that must be suppressed, this hyperbole undercuts Bush's case.

Some 50 million people died in World War II. And a Cold War nuclear conflict could have annihilated many more in a few hours. By those standards, Al Qaeda is a criminal nuisance, nothing more.

[Flabbergasted]

1. So true

[Canuckistanian]

2. Ah, bless the Toronto Star

One of the few beacons of sanity in the newspsper world in Canada.

[Common Sense Party]

3. More hyperbole about the "new totalitarianism"?

THE MANIFESTO OF 12:

Together facing the new totalitarianism

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new global totalitarian threat: Islamism.

We -- writers, journalists and public intellectuals -- call for resistance to religious totalitarianism.

Instead, we call for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values worldwide.

The necessity of these universal values has been revealed by events since the publication of the Muhammad drawings in European newspapers. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the arena of ideas. What we are witnessing is not a clash of civilizations, nor an antagonism of West versus East, but a global struggle between democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The preachers of hate bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a world of inequality. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred.

Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of greater power imbalances: man’s domination of woman, the Islamists’ domination of all others.

To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed people. For that reason, we reject “cultural relativism,” which consists of accepting that Muslim men and women should be deprived of their right to equality and freedom in the name of their cultural traditions.

We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of “Islamophobia,” an unfortunate concept that confuses criticism of Islamic practices with the stigmatization of Muslims themselves.

We plead for the universality of free expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on every continent, against every abuse and dogma.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of enlightenment, not of obscurantism.

Signed,

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Chahla Chafiq , Caroline Fourest, Bernard-Henri Lévy, Irshad Manji , Mehdi Mozaffari, Maryam Namazie, Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie, Antoine Sfeir, Philippe Val, Ibn Warraq

[Telly Savalas]

4. A few weeks ago in the Star, they interviewed a British conservative

who said something to the effect that declaring a "War on Terror" gives the terrorists undue dignity. Unfortunately too many folks even in what's supposed to be the U.S.'s liberal party just don't get it.

This article is bang on. Al Qaeda is but a criminal nuisance. That doesn't mean that they pose no danger and that we should ignore them. It just means we need to maintain perspective if we are to have a sensible discussion of security issues. Republicans want to treat the dialogue on national defence as if it were some sort of dick-measuring contest and too many Democrats are willing to play that game.

[dansolo]

6. They aren't a nuisance

They are a means to an end--just as Saddam was.

[blondeatlast]

5. A little needed perspective. K&R. nt