Sunday, September 12, 2004

Are we safer?

I tried to write something for 9/11 and no matter how I tried the words just didn’t seem to come together. After many false starts I conceded defeat. 9/11 was a watershed moment in western history. It was also a personal watershed moment to me. Prior to 9/11, I was willing to let everyone go to hell in their own fashion as long as I did not have to pay for your ticket to ride. 9/11 changed that.

This morning I was listening to Capital Hill Gang on CNN (at 4:30am it is either that or infomercials) and one of the talking points was "Are we safer now than we were three years ago?"

So few of us study war anymore that most people have lost the capacity to understand what war is, and to comprehend that like life, warfare can and does evolve and change. It is a Herculean task to explain what 4th generation warfare is when you have no basis of understanding what 1st, 2nd or 3rd generational war was.

Western civilization is under attack and the West is at war. I realize that many would rather put their head between their legs and say, I can’t see you, I can’t hear you. I don’t know what you are talking about as there are no incomings in the backyard, the bus still runs, and I don’t have to take my ration card to the grocery store to shop for milk and butter. War, what war? To those whose heads are firmly between their legs, the War on Terror is a product of delusional thinking. The only time their heads will rise is when the blast from the incoming does it for them and then it will be too late.

To ask if we are safer now than we were 3 years ago is like standing on the beaches of Normandy and saying "Are we safer now than before we came?" If we are safe at all it is because (to paraphrase Orwell) rough men and women stand ready to do violence on your behalf. Al Qaeda has not been vanquished. The real question should be "Are we ready?"

No comments: