|
| “
|
There was something quite Roman in the killing of Osama bin Laden,
something reminiscent of the manner in which the Romans eventually
dealt with a rogue’s gallery of charismatic tribal enemies—Spartacus,
Vercingetorix, Jugurtha, Mithridates, Boudica, and others—all of whom
claimed victory over the Romans and invulnerability from their global
reach, only to be eventually defeated, forced to kill themselves,
executed, or killed in battle.
The killing reminds us that there are official
rules we cite and
unofficial ones that, thankfully, we actually follow. Pakistan is to be
praised publicly as a partner, even as privately it is recognized as
the sort of enemy that allows bin Laden to build a mansion in a suburb
inhabited by its retired military officers. So we swiftly invade the
country, kill him, and then praise the Pakistanis for their help—with
full knowledge that bin Laden couldn’t have been there for years
without Pakistani government assistance. I have no idea whether
disseminating such disinformation is sustainable. |
Victor
Davis Hanson seldom, if ever, misfires, and does not here. Nary a
wasted word. This is one of those things you want to duplicate in
toto, but I won't because you can read it here.
But one more thought that defines it.
|
| “
|
It’s also easier to conduct assassinations abroad if
the Commander-in-Chief is liberal. This neutralizes criticism from the
media, universities, the legal community, and Hollywood. Obama the law
professor can assassinate bin Laden in Pakistan, dump his body in the
ocean, and with first-person emphasis boast of our brilliant mission in
a way Bush the Texan could not get away with— |
” |
|
