Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:34:03 +0000 – First, President Obama sends a message to the Muslim world, effectively apologizing for the policies of George W. Bush. Excuse me, but shouldn't the Muslim world be apologizing to America for their contributions to the radicalization of their brethren that led them to kill 3,000 Americans on 9/11?
Then, Secretary of State Clinton criticizes the country she represents and does it on Mexican soil, no less. She blames the demand for drugs in America for the drug cartels and violence in Mexico. She is partially right about this. Demand does lead to supply.
Great nations don't apologize unless they are guilty of a serious moral affront (The Holocaust, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor are two that come to mind as worthy of apologies).
Some conservatives -- notably the late William F. Buckley, Jr.,-- called for legalizing drugs as a means of taking the profit out of them, which would inevitably, he argued, reduce the violence and eliminate the need for addicts to steal in order to buy drugs, many of which are corrupted by the time they get to the street.
There are many downsides to such an approach, but it is worth serious debate. At least that would qualify as a serious policy proposal. Great nations don't apologize unless they are guilty of a serious moral affront (The Holocaust, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor are two that come to mind as worthy of apologies). Don't look for the mullahs to apologize for anything they do. Don't expect Saudi Arabia to apologize for spreading a virulent form of Islam around the world (including inside America).
Apologies and confesisons might make some Americans feel better about their country, but in a dangerous world it sends a signal to our enemies that we are weak. And weakness invites terrorists to attack us again.
Cal Thomas is America's most widely syndicated op-ed columnist. His latest book is "What Works: Common Sense Solutions for a Stronger America". Readers may email Cal Thomas at firstname.lastname@example.org.