Why did we start a war with the “Stalin” of the Mideast after being attacked by the region’s “Hitler” and “fascists”… just asking. The smart communication strategists of the Bush administration (well versed in political and war history no doubt) started with these analogies… not me.
The last time the US had to deal with a “Hitler” and a “Stalin”… the war strategy was different… and victorious.
A related question… You have enemies with (may be) nuclear weapons - some of them led by religious fanatics believing in martyrdom and others led by atheists who do not believe in martyrdom nor life after death. Who’s more dangerous? Who can be deterred in the traditional “cold” war fashion? Who has more of a stake in staying alive… here, on earth? Hitler killed himself and Eve without hesitation. Would Stalin have done something similar in a similar situation? Probably not… he was very much like Sadam… clinging to his own life no matter what.
Generally speaking, isn’t it safe to assume that it is easier to scare atheist enemies into some sort of a negotiated peace and not exactly so easy to have this with religious folks ready to “stay the course” at any cost?
Post a Comment