American credibility lost over religious issues

Aaron Butler

Somalia, never known for its stability or unity, was invaded last year by Ethiopia and probably no one in the United States cared - nobody I knew, anyhow. Fighting has since coalesced in defeats for the Islamic order and retreats to the southern end of the nation, where the United States Navy has blockaded the country and cut off lines of retreat.

Perhaps, as a Republican, I am not seen as one who can be allowed to be upset about such things.

But knowing full well the biases that exist out there that all conservatives must knuckle down to hard-line policy and have no opposition (mostly fueled by the increasingly liberal and increasingly shameless media) to any administrative action, I feel compelled to rant.

I'm glad to stand against this type of preemption while at the same time protest sign- carrying liberals (unanimously distracted by Iraq) who let it slip below their radar.

So let me champion this issue with all my conservative faculties and perhaps give the left something else to complain about as well. It seemed to me altogether foolish to further risk American credibility (already paper thin in East Africa and in the world) in pursuit of such a decidedly anti-Islamist action.

This is, whatever one may say in regards to regime change rhetoric: a religious issue. And yet, already we have lost face in the few short weeks of this affair.

Only on the ground in Somalia have there been any real changes as result of our blockade what with the recent surrender of one of the more moderate leaders of the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC).

Of course the United States is justifying these recent actions by claiming (surprise) that the ruling UIC has been working with al-Qaeda. Apparently even us conservatives are now expected to accept that any and all actions of military maneuvering can be explained away by the provocation of the penultimate shadowy terrorist club.

Not to demean the nature and very real threat of said organization but when did the world stop requiring proof to initiate its foreign policy.

I, for one, do not consider Islam, even it's most fundamental aspects, proof alone to blockade one of the poorest nations on Earth.

Should, by the same line of thinking, Russia blockade the American Eastern coast on grounds that the right-wing Pat Robertson could possibly be a threat to their internal security.

This is all dangerous in that it exists insofar as we are the most powerful nation on Earth.

Should there come a time when we are matched or surpassed in that title, could we forgive our allies if they then allowed us to be privy to such unilateralism?

In a world filled with legitimate problems in the form of an emerging socialist dictatorship in Venezuela, a nuclear Iran, and a nightmare situation in Iraq, can we really afford to waste our time and efforts to modify the corrupt political climates in the hopeless desperate regions of the world?

http://media.www.thenews.org