The War on Terror Did Not Create Nidal Hassan

Friend Tim invites my attention to the incomparable Christopher Hitchens' (incomparable, except on religion, where I find him tired and shrill) attempt to frame the recent Fort Hood terrorism in the proper perspective. There as you may remember, Nidal Hassan (I will resist the convention to grant famous murderers the custom of the use of all three of their names). Hitch is writing largely in response to Robert Wright who--in a recent NYT editorial basically engaged in a bit of intellectual open-field running. The intelligentsia had previously been avoiding the obvious fact that Mr. Hassan's act was one of wanton terrorism (so as not to feed the hysteria that would surely attend such knowledge in this country; always--in their view--one Bill O'Reilly show away from the lynch mob) . Wright's nifty new move is to recycle the worn and vapid meme that "the war on terror radicalizes--and creates more terrorists".

We've heard this one since the beginning of the war on terror, generally espoused by some very wise and seemingly very rational apologists for inaction. They tell us that the terminology of war is misplaced, they tell us that this is largely in international criminal network best dealt with as a law enforcement and diplomatic threat. But most of all, they tell us the War on Terror creates terrorists.

It occurs to me that FDR's speech on December 8th created tens of millions of radicalized Japanese in one fell-swoop. LBJ's step up of Mr. Kennedy's war in Southeast Asia had a similar impact. This is what war does--it creates enemies. In the process of the conduct of war, sometimes more enemies will be created as the enemy gains allies and or successfully propagandizes at home.

This element of recruitment and radicalization among an enemy is not peculiar to Islamic terrorists, nor is it particularly something to be feared. It is part of the sturm und drang of war, something that war planners take account of, and something that a war ultimately aims to target (in many instances). Ever heard of "breaking the will" of the enemy? This is what is broken--the support among the populace, the farm system for the fighting forces, the desire to keep fighting (or to keep surrendering one's sons to the siege guns of the enemy).

Mr. Wright's position--and that of those who would have us assume a different posture in the War on Terror--is a "turtling" strategy, one where they hope that hiding in our shells will provide us with the protection we need. Don't anger the radicals, or they'll become terrorists. Nonsense. Show the radicals that becoming a terrorist is a poor career choice.