As I scanned through the news sites this morning I came across this from the Concord (NH) Monitor:

State flags fly at half staff today, but several Pearl Harbor survivors said they have no plans for commemorating the event. There are only about two dozen survivors left in New Hampshire, and some are too ill or frail to talk much about their experiences.

“I’m one of the few that can walk,” McLean said.

Another survivor, Ralph Kirkman, 85, of Concord, said, “I think people have lost interest. Us guys are pretty old to do anything about it.”

It’s a shame that these great veterans think people don’t remember the day that will live in infamy for so many of them. I haven’t forgotten and don’t know too many who have. Then again I am a patriotic American.

Then I read this editorial from the Union Leader:

THE JAPANESE attack on Pearl Harbor 65 years ago today was supposed to teach America the importance of remaining vigilant and of never underestimating real and potential enemies. The lesson did not stick.

After the Great War, isolationists sharply reduced American defenses. If only we didn’t have so many weapons, we would be safe. No one would see us as a threat. Instead, our weakness invited attack.

At the end of the Cold War, President Clinton ushered in a new dismantling of the military. During his time in office he shrank the U.S. military by nearly 40 percent, according to analyses by the Heritage Foundation.

When the United States was again hit with a massive surprise attack, it had a weakened military not capable of the massive response needed. After seeing our retreat in Vietnam and Somalia, those who attacked us believed that we did not have the resolve to fight back.

This past week the Iraq war officially became longer than U.S. involvement in World War II, underscoring the truism that one does not win a war by fighting it with timidness and half-measures. We are on the verge of proving our attackers of five years ago right — if they kill enough of us, we will lose our will to win.

More than 2,300 Americans died at Pearl Harbor. Nearly 3,000 more died on 9/11. And still so many of us fail to realize that weakness invites aggression; strength and determination deter it.

I got to thinking…the winds of weakness are coming over America once again. With the Lemoncrats (TM) in charge of the House now, and that Iraq Study Group report upon us- have we forgotten the days of our infamy? Does December 7th and September 11th have any pull at all, anymore?

I think not.

More than 30 pages of the report consist of biographies of commission members and lists of people they interviewed; we counted just five pages devoted to the matter of U.S. troop levels in Iraq — most of it dismissing out of hand the idea that more troops might be necessary to fight the Sunni and Shi’ite jihadists who prey upon Iraqis.

The Iraq Study Group report starts out elegant and energized. Dig into it deeper though and we soon realize this is nothing more than a blueprint for cutting and running. The premise this group worked off of was to find a way to cut and run, to put it simply.
No where in the report is it mentioned that there could be a need for MORE troops.

Even more troubling is the fact that panel members said their mandate was primarily limited to finding a a way to stabilize Iraq alone, (although they could consider the regional context) rather than assessing it in the context of the larger U.S. war against international Islamofascism.

It offers no legitimate methods to “change the course” in Iraq; it does advocate appeasement offerings to Iran and Syria…Do the people who authored this study remember Neville Chamberlain? And the results of his policy towards an aggressive and determined Germany back in the 1930’s?

…in critical areas, the report goes in precisely the wrong direction. For example, it calls on Washington to “engage directly with Iran and Syria” in order to “obtain their commitment to constructive polices toward Iraq and other regional issues.” After noting the obvious — that engaging Iran is “problematic” — it calls for a diplomatic campaign to persuade Tehran to join an “Iraq International Support Group” to help resolve Iraq’s “political, diplomatic and security problems.” If Iran refused to help, the panel warns darkly, then its rejectionist attitude could “lead to its isolation.” More likely, such a campaign would embolden Tehran, which would see such a move for what it really is: an act of desperation.

Yes. Engage Iran and Syria- as if they are honest brokers in the region. Do the authors of this report know their history? Have they forgotten Iran in 1979- the hostages and resulting turmoil for the Middle East? And have they disregarded Syria’s very active role in shaking things up in the region through it’s continued violence towards our friend, Israel? Do those who wrote this report consider Israel a friend? I doubt it. I also doubt they take the threat of Islamification seriously.

The image of the day is all over the blogs and it’s fitting:

I’m hoping that President Bush still understands the threat. I’m hoping that he will take a few of the ideas in the ISG report and act on them, and the rest- I hope he disregards out of hand. Lately I haven’t seen too much from him that gives me a sense of this hope, but today he said these things:

*The violence is not an accident or a result of faulty planning. It is a deliberate strategy. It is the direct result of outside extremists teaming up with internal extremists _ al-Qaida with the Sunni insurgents and Iran with the Shia militia _ to foment hatred and to throttle at birth the possibility of a nonsectarian democracy.

* The primary victims of the sectarian violence are the moderate majority of Iraqis, Sunni and Shia alike, who want a future of peace.

*The primary beneficiaries are Sunni and Shia extremists, inside and outside of Iraq, who want chaos in that country so they can take control and further their ambitions to dominate the region.

*And so they’re supporting extremists across the region who are working to undermine young democracies. Just think about the Middle East.

*In Iraq, they support terrorists and death squads who are fomenting sectarian violence in an effort to bring down the elected government of Prime Minister Maliki.

*In Lebanon, they’re supporting Hezbollah, which recently declared its intention to force the collapse of Prime Minister Siniora’s democratically elected parliament and government.

*In Afghanistan, they’re supporting remnants of the Taliban that are seeking to destabilize President Karzai’s government and regain power.

*In the Palestinian territories, they are working to stop moderate leaders like President Abbas from making progress toward the vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.

* But one thing is for certain: When people if people come to the table to discuss Iraq, they need to come understanding their responsibilities to not fund terrorists, to help this young democracy survive, to help with the economics of the country.

*And if people are not committed if Syria and Iran is not committed to that concept, then they shouldn’t bother to show up.

Watching President Bush speak today, I got the sense that he is not going to fall prey to the ISG’s recommendations regarding Iran and Syria. He knows there is too much at risk here- the stability of the entire Middle East and, the world. Cutting and running will lead to more 12-7’s and 9-11’s— days that MUST forever be considered our infamy.