I agree that freeing the US from energy dependency can only be good, but to think that that alone can stop terrorism is naive.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Thursday the Bush administration is waging a "phony war" on terrorism, warning that the country is losing ground against the kind of Islamic radicals who attacked the country on Sept. 11, 2001.
A more effective approach, said Gingrich, would begin with a national energy strategy aimed at weaning the country from its reliance on imported oil and some of the regimes that petro-dollars support.
"None of you should believe we are winning this war. There is no evidence that we are winning this war," the ex-Georgian told a group of about 300 students attending a conference for collegiate conservatives.
An unfair statement really, to go without terrorist attacks is a "victory", but not a victory in the traditional military sense. To flatly announce that "we are losing" while our troops are still in Iraq/Afghanistan is something I expect from the far left, who'd rather see us lose the war than see GWB's poll ratings increase. But Gingrich sounds a lot different than John Edwards.
"We have to take this seriously," said Gingrich.
"We used to be a serious country. When we got attacked at Pearl Harbor, we took on Imperial Japan, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany," he said, referring to World War II.
"We beat all three in less than four years. We're about to enter the seventh year of this phony war against ... [terrorist groups], and we're losing."
Once again, it's not that kind of war, when Hitler committed suicide in his bunker as Berlin fell, the war was over. Today, we've conquered Bagdad and killed Saddam and his sons only to have the war rage on. It's interesting that Gingrich didn't mention jihad. He recognizes Saudi Arabia as a financial exporter of Wahhabism and terrorism, but is he ready to announce why terrorists behave the way they do? Is Gingrich willing to admit that terrorism is rooted in jihad, and that violent jihad is very much a part of Islam? Can he identify the root cause? I doubt it.
