Sake White

Just a response to Neo’s post here. Had problems posting it at her place.

One aspect of the traditional idea of American Exceptionalism included the notion that its geography kept the US safe from foreign invasion. This was historically true for the most part.

Pearl Harbor was the singular exception, as far as I know, and it constituted an attack rather than an invasion. Although shocking to the American public, it occurred very far away, in a territory rather than a state, involved military targets, and was perpetrated by a nation at war (not with us—not yet—but at war nevertheless).

Even in World War II the logistics were such that it was not practical to invade or even to attack the US mainland, although there were some attempts at small-scale sabotage.

The post-WWII spread of nuclear weapons to the Soviet Union ushered in something quite new: a Cold War between ideological enemies armed with weapons that could destroy either nation. My generation therefore was the first one brought up with the idea that American geographic exceptionalism had effectively ended.

However, mutual assured destruction—or perhaps the relative sanity of the two nation-players—meant that despite the long duration of the Cold War and the bitterness with which it was fought in non-nuclear proxy wars such as Vietnam, the US remained uninvaded and unattacked, which may have allowed us to consider ourselves relatively invulnerable. And the fall of the Soviet Union only compounded this feeling.

That was true until 9/11, an event that had various unique characteristics. Not only was it the only attack on the mainland, it involved civilian targets, and was perpetrated by an extra-national group that had declared war on the US but had previously been seen as ineffectual, and by actors who had been living among us.

On 9/11 that group was spectacularly successful. But because of its shadowy and terrorist nature it was poorly understood by most people in this country, who had to try to play catch-up to learn what al Qaeda stood for and why it had seen fit to attack us in such a manner. This hasn’t been easy, since al Qaeda’s reasoning is both murky and seems quite different from traditional Western, state-motivated, casus belli.

That difficulty allows the various groups in the West to fill in the blanks in accord with our various positions, agendas, and philosophies. Are the terrorists rational actors, or rageful zealots? Can they be stopped by reason and/or concessions, or can they only be killed? Is this true, as well, of the states they are allied with, such as Iran? If killed, will that fact motivate more people to join this particular cult in love with death, or will it discourage the recruitment of jihadis?

There’s also a divide between those who see that in this technological age such groups do threaten us in a major way, and must be stopped, and those who consider them to be largely incompetent and easily contained.

The former group realizes that, to terrorists, American geographic exceptionalism is no more. The modern global economy and its enhanced communications and flow of material, the extraordinary number of foreigners already residing in this country with more entering all the time (both legally and illegally), and the relative ease of obtaining weapons with a destructive power that heretofore was limited to states, have ended that. 9/11 had the extra added feature of allowing us to see that extraordinary strategic creativity (for want of a better word) could allow terrorists to use ordinary devices such as airplanes as weapons of great destructive power.

As far as “invasion” goes—traditional invasion is no longer necessary to attack the US. Another way of looking at it is that an invasion has already occurred—albeit of mostly peace-loving immigrants and visitors who are intent on minding their own business. But among those millions terrorists can hide, as they did prior to 9/11, and can hatch plans to wreak various forms of destruction.

This was known as a possibility before 9/11, but was not really credited. Now instead of a hypothetical, it is a fact. One of the other myths that was exploded—along with 3,000 people—on 9/11 was that foreigners who actually have lived in this country for any length of time would come to appreciate it, or at least to like Americans well enough to lose the intense hatred that would make them capable of committing the mass murder of innocent civilians. We Americans consider ourselves to be a genial society. The persistence of the rage of the 9/11 perpetrators in the face of somewhat lengthy stays here for many of them was a shock of major proportions.

It’s been almost six years since 9/11, and those years have featured no significant organized terrorist attacks on our shores, despite our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, actions which certainly could be considered provocative. People of different political persuasions interpret this fact in ways that stem from their own pre-existing notion of things, because the truth is that we don’t know exactly why this has been true.

Many on the Right consider the lack of post-9/11 terrorist attacks here to be a combination of two things: anti-terrorist efforts by this administration nipping such plans in the bud, as well as the knowledge of the terrorists themselves that it would be in their interests not to provoke the American public into more forcible retaliation and awareness. If the American public is somewhat of a sleeping giant right now, then let sleeping giants lie.

Many on the Left consider the lack of successful post-9/11 attacks here as evidence that the terrorists are weak and incompetent (inherently so; not from anything the Bush administration has done, of course!) and that 9/11 was a rare exception, never again to be repeated. For this reason, all announcements of the thwarting of new plots must be trivialized and/or considered to be propagandist inventions of the nefarious Bushies. But in addition, I wonder whether the attitude of the Left is somehow a remnant of the long-held idea of geographic exceptionalism; certainly the Left considers America exceptional, although ordinarily in a negative way.

And so, divided we stand. Or sleep. Whether an awakening will occur, and whether it will be a rude one, is everybody’s guess.

People of different political persuasions interpret this fact in ways that stem from their own pre-existing notion of things, because the truth is that we don’t know exactly why this has been true.

I have educated guesses.

Many on the Right consider the lack of post-9/11 terrorist attacks here to be a combination of two things: anti-terrorist efforts by this administration nipping such plans in the bud, as well as the knowledge of the terrorists themselves that it would be in their interests not to provoke the American public into more forcible retaliation and awareness.

I say look at the logistics and the causal realities. Afghanistan and Iraq changed the global strategic nature of the war if only because they blew AQ’s networks apart and had their funds frozen.

Often times this means that the terroist organization needs time to regenerate via cadres and other sources of aid. 6 years more than enough time for that, however AQ also has been expending leaders, zealots, recruiting efforts, and money in Iraq. AQ is literally unreachable if they put themselves in countries like Syria and Iran, in order to lobby for more state sponsored support. AQ is touchable, by a far margin, if they are in Iraq however. So it places additional strain on their network, Neo, simply because they need to carry on operations and every operation requires resources that is not going towards the Greater Plan so to speak. It takes training, expertise, resources, and some great amount of luck to carry out multiple attacks synchronously.

The motivation of letting Americans sleep is betrayed by the Jihad’s contempt of the fat and slow Americans. They don’t respect you, and they aren’t afraid of you. As for anti-terrorist efforts by the administration, it is simply an offshoot of the power of the SF tradition. Backed by the examples of Afghanistan and Iraq, these rag tag guerrila forces can accomplish much success in Somalia, the Horn of Africa, the Phillippines, and various other places where terrorists breed and multiply. They would have had an affect without Iraq and Afghanistan as an example, but not as much. As for domestic anti-terrorism, we haven’t seen the truly sophisticated methods being used, so American security still has not stood the test, so to speak. the FBI are able to catch terrorists before they strike because these terrorists are easily traced via documents and thus the fBI can keep an eye on them. But what happens when terrorists acquire US insider agents that do their grunt work, planning, reconnaissance, and resource mobilization? Then all they would have to do is ship in from Mexico across the borders on false papers, grab their pre-cached weapons, and then launch the attack. All in a couple of days rather than the huge number of days that would allow them to be caught by the FBI. And if Middle Easterners pass them off as Mexicans, Neo, do you think the FBI could effectively separate them from real Mexicans given the political situation, the Leftist support of illegals, and the various secret bureacratic enclaves that cater to immigration paper frogeries? I mean, how would you know a terrorist from an illegal, just based upon their papers, when both are false? Too many false positives means terrorists harder to see, let alone catch and prevent. This kind of infiltration skills require state sponsored support, which is still focused on Iraq, and wrongly I believe. Iran should be linking up with the drug cartels of Mexico, providing them free and unlimited epe-h-drine, in return for assistance in terror actions. Fanaticism does not give you good organizations, Neo, for that you still need regular human competence.

AQ, like Zarqman, cannot avoid attacking children and those that look weak and accessible. They don’t want to wait for long term planning, and the leaders that could have held off the fanatics long enough to stage a long term attack, have their own problems to deal with in Pakistan.

inherently so; not from anything the Bush administration has done, of course!

Of course. But then again, the ones that say the terrorists are inherently incompetent and weak, are themselves weak and incompetent. So I’m not sure how much of that is due to synchronity or not, but it is certainly off synch by at least 90 degrees.

And so, divided we stand. Or sleep. Whether an awakening will occur, and whether it will be a rude one, is everybody’s guess.

The Leftist social re-engineering plan is a good one, on its face. Categorically speaking, it has been proven by history that if you don’t use your powers, you will lose your powers. This is de facto true. A nation that hasn’t been at constant war or hasn’t had a war lately, sucks at war and needs time to learn. A President that won’t use his legal powers to combat his illegal opponents, will lose his powers, as Nixon did. This is not because Nixon did too much, but that he didn’t do things enough. Even bad plans completed to fullfillment is better than a good plan half arsed, just look at Venezuella.

So, the Leftist soc-engineering thus is based upon the premise that if you can hold America in a perpetual coma, as with Schiavo, you can prevent American power from full materialization through making the will and body too atrophied to be able to hold such power or use it in any way, shape, or form. It should be enough time for the True Anointed to seize power and thus guide whatever American manifestations to the right target, which is social equality, aka more power to self. When Americans are too weak in spirit and body to wield the power of America free of the seals and limitations, then in steps the Anointed for they are Ready to Rule, or govern as PillowC said. Britain has taken very advanced steps in this direction, when they banned all handguns and various other things as a legitimate tool for self-defense. Right before they destroyed self-defense in the first place. Break a man’s pride and ability to protect himself, and then offer him the power of Righteous Government, and you thus have a chain from which to master the human race.

Again, plans don’t survive contact with the enemy. This is the Leftist plan, so to speak. But the Left was ever designed simply as a disposable tool, something that the heirs of Communism and Soviet Imperialism took up once the previous masters failed against the power of the US. When Leftist human traitors accomplish part of their plans, the Islamic Jihad will effortlessly slide into the power vacuum, after the population had been disenfranchised of their power and ability but before the Leftist dogma rises to ascension.

As with all things. Plans don’t survive contact with the enemy. The Left is not an exclusion to this rule, even though they would like to believe themselves too superior to be in the fray.