Conservative Writers Support Liberals?

We are all familiar with the adage "politics makes strange bedfellows". And bedfellows or not, politics can spring some stunning surprises.  Those of you who get The Cleveland Plain Dealer may have seen a headline in the Forum section on Tuesday, Aug. 15, which declared- Military won't win terror war.  The headline itself was not the surprise, but the column and the columnist it spoke for was totally unexpected.

Many who get the Plain Dealer, and many who do not, are familiar with syndicated columnist George F. Will, whose column often appears in this newspaper.  He writes for The Washington Post and often appears on televised political talk shows.  He is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative republican; very stiff-necked and puritanical to my mind, but for some reason I always read his column.  Although it usually angers me, I often detect a thread of truth in spite of his laissez-faire economic-political philosophy. 

He certainly has been a strong proponent of great military power and a champion of the "nose to the grindstone get all you can get" free enterprise system.  However, as a dedicated conservative he has been very critical of the enormous spending practices and humongous deficits run up by the Bush administration.  To my great chagrin, however, rather than rail against the huge tax cuts for the wealthy most of his energy seemed to be directed against welfare, social and economic programs.

So far as I could ever tell he has been a strong supporter for our attack on Iraq and U.S. Mideast policy, although true enough to his profession to admit what a bungled, tragic quagmire it has become.  But given even his journalistic integrity, imagine my surprise, and I would expect the surprise of many of his loyal readers, to see a "Military won't win terror war" headline above his name and his following declarations:

"Cooperation between Pakistani and British law enforcement has validated John Kerry's belief (as paraphrased by the New York Times magazine of Oct. 10, 2004) that 'many of the interdiction tactics that cripple drug lords, including governments working jointly to share intelligence, patrol borders, and force banks to identify suspicious customers, can also be some of the most useful tools in the war on terror'."

Mr. Will goes on to relate that in a Jan. 29, 2004 candidates' debate in South Carolina, John Kerry said that although the war on terror will be "occasionally military," it is "primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world."  Can you believe this, such a conservative pundit actually giving credit to a normally thought meandering liberal democratic presidential challenger?

It is a great morale booster to lean there are respected conservative writers out there who are driven to speak out against the George Bush- neo conservative, asinine "stay the course" tragic pigheadedness.  I offer a closing example from a book Mr. Will cites, "The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11" by Lawrence Weight:

The theme is that better law enforcement, which probably could have prevented 9/11 is central to combating terrorism.  F-16’s are not useful against terrorism that issues from places like Hamburg (where Mohamed Atta lived before dying in the North Tower of the World Trade Center) and High Wycombe, England.

Buz Cormany