Its There, If We Want To See It

Tony Blankley, writing in the Washington Times (and reprinted at Real Clear Politics) asks if there is "handwriting on the wall" when it comes to the threat posed by Islamic radicals. He points out that our society has broken into two camps on this issue:

"It would appear that the great divide in both public opinion and between politicians is not Republican-Democrat, liberal-conservative, pro or anti-Bush, or even pro or anti-war (or, in Europe: pro-or anti-American). Rather, the great divide is between those, such as me, who believe that the rise of radical Islam poses an existential threat to Western Civilization; and those who believe it is a nuisance, if, episodically, a very dangerous nuisance."

Blankley goes on to state that the views of each group have hardened into immutable beliefs which are beyond persuasion and that reasonable debate on these issues has become difficult, if not impossible:

"To those who disagree with our view of reality, we are quite ready to impute anything from ignorance, to willful ignorance, to moral cowardice to treason. Those who disagree with us find our alarmism as noxious as we find their willful blindness to reality."

His ultimate conclusion is that only time will tell:

"Thus, while others and I will continue to make our case in public, it seems probably inevitable that the correctness or incorrectness of our views will only become persuasive to the multitude when history teaches its cruel, unavoidable lessons. It was ever thus, which is why history is strewed with broken nations and civilizations that couldn't read the writing on the wall. Of course, it is also strewed with sad hulks of false predictors of doom."

I think he has really hit on something that explains the stridency of the disagreements on these issues. Obviously, I am firmly in Blankley's camp, believing that we must confront, rather than parley with Islamic radicals. In any event, it is well worth the read.