If this is a real threat, then the war in Iraq makes sense. It is a warning to evil dictators that playing with Islamofascists, even indirectly, constitutes a potentially existential challenge to their own power.
But lately I never hear the president defend the war in these terms. Is it a political calculation -- such talk focuses too much attention on the narrow question of whether Saddam Hussein had amassed a stockpile of WMDs (as opposed to merely seeking to do so)? Is it a moral hesitation -- should political leaders horrify their own people with the thought of nuclear terrorism? Or is it in fact, as some experts now say, just extremely unlikely that Islamofascists could obtain a nuclear weapon?
I don't know. But without some such real threat, a long war in the Mideast is not an option the American people will support. And unless that kind of threat can be named by our leaders, the American people cannot be expected to spend their blood and treasure perpetually.
(Readers may reach Maggie Gallagher at MaggieBox2006@yahoo.com.)
COPYRIGHT 2006 MAGGIE GALLAGHER
Maggie Gallagher is a nationally syndicated columnist, a leading voice in the new marriage movement and co-author of The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially.
Be the first to read Maggie Gallagher's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.