Choosing sides

"The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in a time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality," Dante once said. And I agree after the terrorist attacks last week on Shiite shrines in Samarra, Iraq.\nAmong the dead were not merely morning worshipers or "bystanders," but Iraqis who have entered the fight for the future of their country. And yet, as they continue their liberation struggle, Americans seem to have shed their "can-do" optimism in favor of "can't-do" defeatism. In another time, Americans would engage in this fight at all costs. Today we shudder that doing so might earn us opprobrium for acting "inappropriately."\nIraq is now the main venue in the War on Terror. Shirking the fight there, even if it could serve our morality, would not serve our security. Neutral ground isn't tenable in this confrontation. Standing aside is tantamount to a choice, and by my lights, the wrong one. \nIt is because of this that I incline to Theodore Roosevelt's opinion that "in a really tremendous world struggle, with a great moral issue involved, neutrality does not serve righteousness; for to be neutral between right and wrong is to serve wrong." Today neutrality might serve our ease, our security, even our popularity. But these are periphery concerns as regards our security and our honor. \nIf we fail -- because Baghdad is far away and doesn't feel like our business -- we will have shown ourselves as weaklings who possess freedom but do not sufficiently value it. The shame is theirs who have their liberty and cannot care about those who don't. On the other hand, we can only marvel how those who are so beaten down possess the fortitude to rise up against their would-be oppressors.\nIf we succeed, it will be a testament to liberty, which can never just be enjoyed; it must be claimed and defended. When the tranquility of Samarra is bloodily interrupted by high military grade explosives in a wicked attempt to foment civil war, all respectable Americans should urge a redoubling of our commitment -- and the president should dispatch another division of U.S. forces to kill those responsible and then help rebuild the sullied shrines. Those who counsel retreat only help the forces of reaction by default -- and there is indeed a fiery place in hell for such spectators. This is a matter of principle that doesn't admit of any evasion. \nI have no doubt that some will argue that aiming so high is fruitless -- especially in Iraq, where many fear what will come if the sectarian divisions already underway there should continue their spiral. (The destruction of the Shi'a Golden Mosque in Samarra might be the trigger for precisely that downward spiral.) But I was raised to believe such critics resemble those paranoids who won't fly on planes because they occasionally crash. \nEmbattled Democrats are crying for help. Those who have folded their hands and watched coldly as the struggle between fascists and patriots in Iraq escalates have chosen their side -- reserving their spot of Dante's "Inferno" where the morally neutral are consigned.