After being wrong so often, isn’t there a point where shame begins to set in? Looking over the last three years, every single Democratic prediction has been proven wrong, and not in a small way.
A full recounting of every errant claim advanced by leftists would take volumes. Highlights include the claim that Afghanistan would defeat the U.S. military (“look what they did to the Russians”); that invading Iraq would cause the collapse of moderate regimes like Egypt and Saudi Arabia; and that a wave of refugees would flee occupied Iraq.
Well, when I last checked, Afghanistan was adopting its new constitution after being defeated in roughly three weeks; Egypt and Saudi Arabia have yet to collapse; and millions of Iraqis are celebrating freedom, getting new jobs and reading one of the 400 new Iraqi-run local newspapers. Liberals were utterly, totally, wholly wrong.
We live in dangerous times, times that liberals are ill-prepared for. Sept. 11 proved that the terrorist threat to America was a clear and present danger. International terrorism, coupled with the weapons of mass destruction produced by rogue nations, could wreak far more damage than the 19 hijackers of Sept. 11 could even dream.
To combat this long-neglected threat, the Bush administration launched a comprehensive assault on global terrorism. We targeted terrorist networks, worked to cut off funding and began pressuring the dictators who provide terrorists with weapons, money and support. We introduced democracy to peoples who have known only subjugation.
To do this, we have worked with any nation willing to aid us. We have forged a global coalition against terror. We have taken our case before international bodies, where appropriate. We have convinced former supporters of terror-Saudi Arabia and Pakistan-to cut off their support.
Those rogue regimes that would not comply-like the Taliban and Saddam Hussein-have been dealt with.
Even Muammar Khadaffi, 30 year dictator of Libya, has responded to our pressure. Libya has long been a supporter of terrorism, including attacks on American troops in a nightclub in Berlin and the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The Khadaffi regime has suffered international economic sanctions for its support of terrorism.
Yet this dictator has-after a nine-month series of negotiations-sought readmittance to the community of nations.
He has promised to halt his WMD programs and his support of terrorism.
Khadaffi’s surrender is already bearing fruit. As reported by Nazareth’s Kul El-Arab newspaper, Khadaffi has sent a delegation of five “top government officials” to open diplomatic relations with Israel, a longtime Libyan enemy.
Just one week ago, left-wing UK paper The Guardian reported that Libya had also surrendered a shipment of 1,000 high-speed uranium enrichment centrifuges. These centrifuges are banned technology, used solely for the purpose of producing weapons grade uranium for use in a nuclear bomb. No country is supposed to be able to purchase even one, but Libya had 1,000.
This news is hopeful-Khadaffi’s move bolsters his credibility-but also worrying. If Libya could acquire these banned technologies so easily, what of Iran, North Korea, Syria or other aggressor states? Clearly, nuclear proliferation is more pervasive than anyone thought.
Reasonable people are entitled to wonder why this international dictator became a would-be statesman.
The answer, given to the London Spectator in April 2003 by Silvio Berlusconi, prime minister of Italy, was simple.
Khadaffi said that “I will do whatever the Americans want because I saw what happened in Iraq and I was afraid.”
Having pursued the correct course in Iraq, we are rewarded not only with the removal of Saddam Hussein, but also with the capitulation of Khadaffi.
Once again, Bush has been proven right and his arrogant, sneering liberal critics proven wrong.