God Bless Christopher Hitchens

Chris Hitchens hits it out of the park, yet again, in this piece in Slate. His argument: no passive measures we take can prevent Islamist attacks.
The former man of the left debunks the notion that Spanish participation in Iraq caused the bombing in Madrid. Were that the case, he points out, then the Al Qaida bombing of the Synagogue in Istanbul should have been prevented by Turkey’s Islamist government refusal to let the U.S. use Turkey as an approach route, through the Sunni Triangle, to Baghdad. But the Turks, it seems, are insufficiently pious in their adherence to Islam. As are the Moroccans. As for the rest of us:

It cannot be very long now before some slaughter occurs on the streets of London or Rome or Warsaw, as punishment for British and Italian and Polish membership of the anti-Saddam coalition. But perhaps there is still time to avoid the wrath to come. If British and Italian and Polish troops make haste to leave the Iraqis to their own “devices” (of the sort that exploded outside the mosques of Karbala and Najaf last month), their civilian cousins may still hope to escape the stern disapproval of the holy warriors. Don’t ask why the holy warriors blow up mosques by the way—it’s none of your goddam crusader-Jew business.
The other countries of NATO, which has now collectively adopted the responsibility for Afghanistan, should reconsider. As long as their forces remain on the soil of that country, they are liable to attract the sacred rage of the Muslim fighters. It will not be enough for Germany and France to have stayed out of Iraq. They cannot expect to escape judgment by such hypocritical means.
French schools should make all haste to permit not just the veil but the burqa, as well as to segregate swimming pools and playgrounds. Do they suppose that they deceive anybody when they temporize about God’s evident will? Bombings will follow this blasphemy, as the night succeeds the day. It is written.

Read the whole thing.
Hat tip to VodkaPundit.

Advertisements

2 comments

  1. Aakash

    Hitchens is not a “former man of the left”… He is a man of the left.
    As I pointed out in this blog entry, many liberals supported the Iraq war, because it is consistent with their principles. Check out leading liberal blogger Michael Totten’s entry about this, in which he cites leading left-wing political theorist and intellectual Paul Berman, the author of Terror and Liberalism.
    The Hitchens brothers are a left-wing, right-wing pair. Crazy Christopher is a socialist who has, for awhile, been supporting promiscuous military intervention, liberal internationalism, and globalism. Peter Hitchens, however, is the conservative one of the brothers; Peter has been fighting for sovereignty, against the threat of the European Union, and against the atrocious Blair government.
    Here is an article by Peter Hitchens on the Iraq war:
    Not in our Name: Peter Hitchens says that this is a left-wing conflict and Conservatives should not support it
    As I noted in that blog entry, Christopher Hitchens is one of many leftists who supported this war.

  2. Al Maviva

    He’s small “c” conservative in a lot of respects, and he is that way about the two or three important questions of the moment, one of them being whether the small “l” liberal Western civilization is worth fighting for. That makes him a man of the right, in my book, at least in our warped times.
    Being right on one or two questions out of twenty, on a weighted exam where those couple of questions are worth 90% of the score, makes you an honor role student.