Bringing the War Back Home

Is it Waterloo for the forces of perpetual war for perpetual democracy?

Brian Doherty | June 14, 2004

(Page 2 of 2)

This made some people groan, but it was clear from many things said during the conversation following Frum's presentation that a true democracy in the Arab world today wouldn't exactly recreate the civilization of Soho, Beverly Hills, or Cannes. (Frum is aware of this as well.) So, imposing what people really mean by democracy in this context—a culture emulating the mores and styles of early 21st century liberal quasi-capitalism—is a far longer and more onerous project than just throwing an election. So, there you go...a long, long, long fight to end evil. But worth it. Remember 9/11!

While remembering 9/11, it might also be worth remembering all those days since 9/11. Many present in Guber's handsomely appointed library wondered aloud about why nothing of consequence had happened since then in terror terms, noting that two suicide bombers in a couple of theaters could annihilate the entire movie industry. Where is this terrorist threat? Maybe there really isn't that severe of a terrorist threat? (Frum posits that since 9/11 our terrorist foes are afraid to try anything less earth shaking for fear of seeming to be backing down or something. Maybe, but if so they are complete idiots—a strategy of death by a thousand small cuts would likely be quite effective in breaking the Great Satan's will, and would be a lot easier to pull then a well-coordinated megacatastrophe.)

But it will apparently never again be acceptable to suggest that we aren't facing a constant and imminent danger from terror. Remember 9/11! And so long as there are 50 people with a grudge against the U.S. and some spending cash, we can never realistically say the war on terror is won, can we? No amount of Americans with Disabilities Acts in Syria and court decisions in favor of gay marriage in Saudi Arabia will really end the threat of terror anyway. The scenario that Frum and his ideological friends present is one that truly guarantees eternal war-crisis footing.

Labeling the mentality Frum represents seems to send some people into a tizzy, I know. So we can certainly retire the term "neocon" if it will protect delicate sensibilities and help us see the situation more clearly, without people feeling it necessary to man ramparts to defend themselves, or others, against the sinister things they insist people really mean when they use that word.

Let us just call them—awkwardly, perhaps, but anything to avoid gross misunderstanding—"advocates of the war in Iraq and a further continuing war in the Middle East in order to impose civilizational change in the Arab world and protect ourselves from terror." Whatever you call them, their prescriptions do not seem to be furthering the interests of citizens of the United States, and will guarantee a perpetual war for perpetual democracy. This means they have earned—at the very least—a rest from driving U.S. foreign policy thinking.