By: Dick Morris
President Barack Obama's essentially European world outlook has
no better illustration than his comment to
Bob Woodward during a july, 2010 interview
that "we can absorb a terrorist attack.
We'll do
everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest
attack ever...we absorbed it and we are stronger." What?
The essence of the differences between the European and American
view of terrorism is the deeply felt, but often unstated opinion on the
(((((Continent that terrorism is normal))) and that it would be a mistake to
over-react to it. In the United States, terrorism cuts very, very
deeply into our national psyche. But in Europe, it's often just one of those things.
After all, Europe has seen a lot worse than the relatively naive
American public has ever had to witness. The last serious bloodshed
on American soil came in the Civil War. The Pearl Harbor and 9-11
attacks stand out as landmarks in our history precisely because
we have shed so little American blood with the boundaries of the
United States. Britain lost 50,000 people in the blitz during World
War II. France lost about one-quarter of its military age men in
World War I. Germany saw seven million die in World War II
(not counting the German Jews the Nazis killed). Next to
these horrific casualties, 2400 dead at Pearl Harbor and
3,000 lost on 9-11 pale by comparison.
Basically, Europeans say to America "get over it. Grow up. ( really)
Welcome to reality." But Americans refuse to accept
the idea that random death and massive violence are
inevitable concomitants of the modern world.
We demand that government emphatically reject this
as a norm and move heaven and earth to stop it from happening.
The President of the United States is supposed to
reflect American views and priorities, but he so
clearly indicated how the European view shapes his thinking in the Woodward interview.
The practical consequences of such an outlook are profoundly disturbing.
Obama told Woodward that "we'll do everything we
can to prevent" another 9/11, but his confidence
that we could "absorb" an attack, clearly implies
that he won't. If preventing an attack on the scale of 9/11
or greater is the absolute priority it was for George W. Bush,
we will indeed do "everything we can" to stop it. But if it is
something we can "absorb" preventing an attack is but one
of a number of competing priorities. The Obama worldview
also demands that we avoid racial profiling, protect the civil
liberties even of non-citizens who are not in the country, and
limit interrogation techniques well short of torture. If a
president has a basic confidence that 9/11 could be "absorbed",
these competing priorities are likely to loom large
in his thinking and attenuate his efforts.
His comments also indicate a total lack of realization
of the escalating nature of terror attacks. In 1993, we
lost a few people when terrorists hit the Trade Center.
By 2001, they had refined their techniques and demolished
the buildings and killed 3,000. The next attack is not
likely to be "another 9/11." It is far more probable ( REALLY )
that it would be a dirty bomb or even a nuclear
device or some other weapon of mass destruction,
dwarfing the casualties of 9/11. These things escalate.
And, unless we realize that they do, we are not likely
to really do all we can to stop it.
If the stakes are the
total obliteration of New York City, we will obviously
do more to stop the attack than if they are "merely"
another 9/11. And Obama's view that the threat we
face is of the order of magnitude of 9/11 indicates
a blindness to the danger we face.
Finally, the Obama comments indicate a cold and inhuman
view of the likelihood of 3,000 new deaths. He says ( No! way! )
we can "absorb" such mayhem. Can the mothers, fathers,
wives, husbands and children of the dead "absorb"
the attack as easily?
Obama's comments remind
one of the notion of acceptable casualties in warfare.
This is World War I thinking at its worst. Americans
do not count on "absorbing" an attack of this magnitude.
We see it as a unique horror to be avoided at all costs.
But Obama, like Mao calculating how many Chinese
he could afford to lose in a nuclear exchange, seems
to focus on how much we can "absorb" as a nation.
This is chilling stuff indeed.
well we will not absorb Obama come election & we will
be ready for any tricks he may impose apon this country
for whatever reason and we will defend &
throw him out of the white house if we have to!
He has another thing coming! He can just absorb it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama is using the term absorb a terrorists attack like taking
a daily vitamin,Obama seems to speak a lot to try to place fear into the
American people-Just what muslims like! oh! well! you know what i say!
we are not back up in a corner! If they want a fight! find out who
keeps threatening us & who is causing this country evil & danger-And get them!
We are not going to keep sitting back & watching what happens!
we will fight and defend & we will put a stop to these evil people! Be sure of this!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We should help other countries as well to protect & defend them!
Lets get America back where she needs to be strong & brave & a very powerful
Nation which cares for other countries also all over the world.
God above backs us up & helps us! Lets get the job done & stop all this
fear talk like Obama does.We have the weapons! We have more then weapons!
Enough! is Enough! We will not allow our country to be raped by these
lunatics.No matter who Obama defends or what Obama may say!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------