Do you agree with Newt: "you have to defeat the enemy, not 'understand' them"?

Question

09/28/2007

With some conservatives eagerly awaiting the announcement of a Newt Gingrich presidential run, the former House Speaker launched his inaugural Solutions Day in Atlanta, Georgia yesterday.

Gingrich went on to blast Columbia University for inviting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak. He said, “Overwhelmingly, the American people believe when you have an enemy…you have to defeat that enemy, not understand them.”

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22618

This is why Newt Gingrich should be the next President of the US...if only we are fortunate enough for him to step into the race

Answer 1

To an extent, in order to defeat the enemy, you have to understand them. But only to the extent you need to defeat them. There is certainly no need to find a plight to be sympathetic of with them, and I'm convinced that's what the left was trying to do by hearing out the Iranian fellow.

Answer 2

i know that this would sound unusual, yet to the excellent of my expertise, i've got not got an enemy. If I did have one, and that i defeated him/her i could evaluate celebrating as being petty ,infantile and a unfavourable game. .

Answer 3

What is there to learn about enemies when their only goal is to eliminate Americans?


I'm donating a thousand boxes of crayons to liberal parent's to give their kids so they can write those words on their walls at home.

If there's any takers 'say so' in your reply and I'll open up my email to you.

-
Newt may be right, but we already know the intentions of our enemies.

Answer 4

To defeat your enemy you HAVE to understand them. You NEED to know why they fight and how they fight. That way it will make it easier to destroy them. But knowing your enemy doesn't mean you invite them to speak at your university to get their side of the story! Know your enemy, yes. Become friends with them? Hell no.

Answer 5

Yes, defeating your enemy is more important then understanding them. But you should also try to understand your enemy's way of thinking, & why they hate you. It would be easier to defeat Al-Qaeda and the Islamic extremists if Americans understood the history of Islam trying to subjecate people.

Answer 6

"You have to defeat that enemy, not understand them," is a talking point, and reeks of being tested thoroughly by Focus groups.

I don't think it will float with the average voter, even if the Republicans might take him.

Answer 7

Think about WWII - should we have tried to understand Hitler? No thanks. No way to understand such twisted and hateful thinking. That's why that quote makes sense.

I also agree with Dan, the first poster, that you only need to understand them enough to defeat them, not to become sympathetic to them. That's where some liberals cross the line.

I honestly don't know about Newt being President - he may be too divisive to actually get the moderate vote.

Answer 8

Newt is one of the most brilliant political minds we will ever see. (The example given here is merely common sense--which is sorrowfully lacking with most politicians currently.) However, he does seem to be unelectable.......which is exactly why President Thompson should appoint him Secretary of State!

Answer 9

The libs want to understand them. They have compassion for the enemy.

The only thing we have to understand about these animals is that we have to kill ALL of them.

What the democrats do not understand is they want to kill anyone that does not pray to Alla.

The hell with Alla. Lets kill him also while we can.

Answer 10

I could not agree more with Newt.

On a much smaller level, I don't need to understand a child molester to put them in prison. I just know that their agenda is not compatible with my(or my kids) way of life. It's very simple.