The Wisdom of Anger
Charles Johnson points me to Mark Steyn's latest masterpiece. This time, Steyn wonders about Zarqawi's decision to bomb those hotels in Amman:

True, he did manage to kill a couple of dozen Muslims. But what's the strategic value of that? Presumably, it's an old-fashioned mob heavy's way of keeping the locals in line. And that worked out well, didn't it? Hundreds of thousands of Zarqawi's fellow Jordanians fill the streets to demand his death.

Did they show that on the BBC? Or are demonstrations only news when they're anti-Bush and anti-Blair? And look at it this way: if the "occupation" is so unpopular in Iraq, where are the mass demonstrations against that? I'm not talking 200,000, or even 100 or 50,000. But, if there were just 1,500 folks shouting "Great Satan, go home!" in Baghdad or Mosul, it would be large enough for the media to do that little trick where they film the demo close up so it looks like the place is packed. Yet no such demonstrations take place.

The past couple of days have left me with a feeling that things are spinning out of control. People who don't really have this country's best interests at heart are too gleefully cheering on the enemy.

Which makes them the enemy.

Demonstrating the will to lose as clearly as America did in Vietnam wasn't such a smart move, but since the media can't seem to get beyond this ancient jungle war it may be worth underlining the principal difference: Osama is not Ho Chi Minh, and al-Qa'eda are not the Viet Cong. If you exit, they'll follow. And Americans will die - in foreign embassies, barracks, warships, as they did through the Nineties, and eventually on the streets of US cities, too.

It's true. They will follow. Unless they are destroyed now.

In these four years of the War against Islamofascism, our troops have fought with incredible bravery and resourcefulness, but they have done so conventionally. The day will come when they will have to unleash Hell on these animals.

We haven't seen anything yet.