I blame the left. I blame the weak politicians on the right for giving in to the left.
I was at my graduation ceremony last night for the LPR (Leadership Program of the Rockies), and our keynote speaker was Dennis Prager. Mr. Prager said something that inspired my column today: "Instead of learning from the Great Wars that it is our job to Fight Evil, Europeans learned that it is Evil to Fight." (this in response to a report that German soldiers are ordered not to fire on Taliban troops, despite their actions, unless fired upon first)
The Europeans became pacifists in world and internal affairs, in hopes of a unification of Europe. They have their unification, but at the cost of the downfall of all that is and ever was Europe. There is no spine in Europe, no one to stand up for values that have shaped Europe over the last 2000 years... and no desire to act as the same atrocities that occurred in Germany and Poland in the second World War are taking place throughout Africa, Pacific Island Nations, and throughout the Middle East... as such, America is left to do what is right... and be the police to the world.
Prager also said that it is better to do what is right and be hated for it, than to do what is wrong and be loved. If you are loved by all, then you have done something wrong... you have sacrificed your principles... This is true for the military intervention in the case of genocide... Rwanda, Congo, and other African Countries have seen more sheer numbers of dead due to Genocide than all military and civilian deaths in World War Two worldwide... yet the world, and namely Europe, does nothing.
They do nothing because they refuse to be hated as the United States has been seen as being hated around the world... and in their silence, they sin. Their very inaction is a crime against Humanity.And the American left is under the same spell... it is more important to them to be loved around the world than to stand up and do what is right. Send aid to Darfur, but not the military necessary to stop the Genocide. What good is aid when you are murdered by a machete, raped, and burned in your home with your entire family?
No... the left is more interested in appearing to be doing the right thing... but no action is taken for fear of being hated... because they, much like the European Pacifists, have learned that to Fight is Evil.
Deep in the gut of every man, woman, and child around the world is a feeling... a pinch... you know the difference between right and wrong.
If you see someone committing a crime against humanity, you know it is wrong. And if you get that pinch, but do nothing, you too have committed a crime. You are at fault for not doing all you could to help... to stop the rape, to stop the killing, to stop the violence... even if it means giving your life to save another. That is the American Way... not Pacifism... not sitting by and watching as the world burns around us.
I don't care how the conflicts started... All I care about is how they are ended.
If you went in to a doctor to cure your lung cancer, and instead of curing you he continually blamed you for smoking... you should find another doctor!
So if it is our job to stop genocide in Africa, and prevent it in Iraq by up and leaving, we should do the job, not obsess on how we got there in the first place.
How do we save as many lives as possible?
By doing what is right.
The left, somewhere along the way, have learned that it is evil to fight.
The truth is that it is our duty, our moral authority, to stop killing, raping, and inhumane acts around the world... all things that we can consider evil... it is our obligation as a free and enlightened society to fight evil. That is real change!
You are sad. Par for the course for conservatives.
ReplyDelete"ben" - How is it, do you think, that I am "sad". Your comment has no context, no substance, and nothing to back it up. That is par for the course for Liberalism! Empty thoughts. Please try again.
ReplyDeleteha ha! nice riposte there.
ReplyDeleteCan guns kill an idea?
If we just shoot enough people, will Islamic Totalitarianism go away?
I agree with you on Sudan. Why are we in Iraq instead of Sudan? Sure, Saddam was a bully, but he killed people on a completely different scale than is going on in Darfur. I also think ousting the Taliban was something that needed doing, and earlier. South Korea, Myanmar, many peoples need help. But we do need an international consensus for legitimacy in these police actions. Otherwise, like in Iraq, what's to stop us from invading countries for our own benefit, in the name of fighting terrorism or stopping genocide?
Jessi - Two points:
ReplyDeleteFirst - guns can stop IT if we kill the RIGHT people, and take away the will of the enemy to fight. It is basic warfare. I have posted on this in the past. We need to have the resolve to kill the idea of Totalitarianism, just like we did with Facism in WWII.
Second - International consensus is a pipe dream. The US cannot survive with a strategy of "Do whatever you want, just don't attack us". If so, the entire world will fall into this sinkhole, isolating the US as the only freedom loving land... Freedom and Liberty cannot survive if surrounded by it's enemy... which is why the battle is now, not later. If we need to stand up and do the right thing, let us... the others will follow... or not. Consensus is not needed to do the right thing. (notice that more people are dieing in Afghanistan than in Iraq because of a resurge of IT there... Iraq is stabilizing.. we need to do the right thing on both fronts of this battle)
Secretly assassinating the right people could help. But killing people the way we are doesn't squash totalitarianism (I just can't call it IT -- I work in IT) but promotes it! More Muslims are drawn to extremism when they see persecution of their religion. We have to be very discriminating in our targets, and we are not. That specific kind of targeting could be done within the penal code, without a blanket license to do whatever we want. It could be done without stomping all over the Constitution and millions of civilians.
ReplyDeleteAnything our government does needs some sort of check on it, to restrain the government from taking action for its own benefit. In the case of individuals, the courts can provide the balance, determining whether a detention is lawful. In the case of rogue nation-states, all we have is the international community.
Freedom and Liberty can survive surrounded by the enemy. But they can't survive if we offer them up on the altar of Security.
Yes, Iraq has spread us too thin. We need to finish the job in Afghanistan, and we haven't.
"Freedom and Liberty can survive surrounded by the enemy." - This is just not true. If the entire world was, then, turned against us, and we were an island of freedom in a repressive world of Islamic Totalitarianism (Rightly dubbed IT :) ), Freedom and Liberty would not long survive!
ReplyDeleteIt is in our best interest to ensure that Europe does not fall to IT, and that secular nations replace IT controlled nations. Saddam was actually a stabilizing force in the region. Killing him and turning the country over to the IT was the source of our problem. The people are repressed now more than under Saddam... unless we can promote free trade and capitalism (which a great article just came out about that, I'll be blogging on it later)
Great discussion...
That is a rational view of the Iraq war.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is to our advantage to promote secular societies worldwide. I think we should do this through diplomatic means whenever possible, and military means (with some international consensus!) when genocide is involved. Maybe other conditions too.
However, I think it is counterproductive if we compromise our own principles to do so. (freedom of religion and thought and speech, freedom from oppression and mistreatment by our government)
And I still don't think you can kill an idea with guns. You kill it with better ideas!