“Don’t Mention the War”

In the British comedy Fawlty Towers, John Cleese implored his staff, “Don’t mention the war,” around the inn’s first German guests. Of course, the more he tried NOT to mention “the war,” the more “the war” slipped out, until he was goose-stepping around the dining room with a comb-tooth moustache over his lip.

In the British comedy Fawlty Towers, John Cleese implored his staff, “Don’t mention the war,” around the inn’s first German guests. Of course, the more he tried NOT to mention “the war,” the more “the war” slipped out, until he was goose-stepping around the dining room with a comb-tooth moustache over his lip.

Now that the 2006 elections are in the bag, it should be noted that despite media emphasis on “the war,” this election campaign was conspicuous for its LACK of mention of the real war. Yes, they talked around (not about) Iraq (and the view differed less from Republicans to Democrats than either would admit). But Iraq is a front, not the war.

“The war” is Iran’s export of radical Islamic fundamentalism accompanied by terrorism and directed first against the states of the Middle East and then against the modern free world including Israel. Iran’s leadership has been at war with us since 1979. That they took hostages at precisely the moment we were tossing the Shah should have been a clue. Today, Iran is in Iraq. Iran is in the Kurdish regions, Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority. Iran is in Africa, Chechnya and Bosnia (where the Dayton Accord 10-year agreement will run out in 2007 and parties are already jockeying for position). Iran is in league with Hugo Chavez (and Daniel Ortega?). Wherever the war is, Iran is. And Iran is going nuclear.

But with the exception of defeated Senator Rick Santorum, no candidate articulated the nature of Iran’s war against modernity and its determination to recapture territory and population for the Caliphate. No challenger or incumbent saw Iran’s imperialism as being driven by its affirmative view of itself and the future of Islam, not by whatever flaws exist in America, and certainly not by any Iranian understanding of the differences between the Democratic and Republican parties. It is hubris to think the mullahs care about the difference between Jack Kingston and Jim Nelson. Who? Right.

There was no clear strategy from the President – who couldn’t decide between regime change and behavior modification, but pronounced a nuclear Iran “unacceptable” without suggesting how to prevent it or what to do if, like North Korea, Iran just turns up nuclear. Democrats have been content to carp and blame, but now that they share responsibility for governing, they’ll have to do better. We hope there’s a plan, but doubt it.

America will have an altered direction in foreign policy – perhaps less than some people think – but Iran will not. Through Republicans and Democrats, through liberals and conservatives, through red-state rule and blue-state rule Iran has been pursuing the spread of radical Islam through terrorism. The first test for the new Congress and the old President will be to understand Iran’s intentions in Iraq and its impact on our soldiers. Only after that can they seriously consider how long we stay and how we leave.

To be fair, no one wants a wider war than the one they think we already have. But here is the lesson of al Qaeda – they were at war with us long before we were at war with them. Politicians saw what was happening, but no one wanted to mention the war until after 3,000 of our citizens had been killed at home. We’ve taken the same approach with Iran. Will the outcome differ?