Krauthammer's Generosity...
Democrats as Myopic Doves, Again
--Charles Krauthammer, August 11, 2006
I can afford to be far less generous. I believe the Khmer Rouge wing of the Democratic party won't be happy until untold thousands of Americans lie dead in a 21st century Killing Fields. Selfish, self-absorbed, new-age Solomon's masquerading as Pacifists.
Peace does not beget peace. Pulling out of Vietnam did not being peace to the Vietnam peninsula, it brought millions of deaths. Pulling out of Vietnam emboldened communism, and Cambodia saw a slaughter unrivaled [imho] in modern history.
How will Ned Lamont vote-- assuming he wins this fall --when the next great act of terrorism slaps America in the face? Will he vote appeasement? Turn the other cheek, the sure path to far greater death? Or will he embrace hypocrisy, and vote to extend the war on terror?
How many times does a dog's nose have to be rubbed in its own accident before it learns to scratch at the door? The Democratic party seems incapable of learning from its own past, primarily because it doesn't see its past actions and positions as colossal mistakes... And bad policy. They certainly mean well, but that's not good enough. And its certainly not an issue worth entertaining, for As the old saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
from the mind of... Eric | 3:18 PM
11 Comments:
Dems who run on "peace," they'll get whomped. But only the freak lefties are real peaceniks. What you fail to recognize, Krauthammer, too, is this:
Those of us disgusted with everything about the war in Iraq are disgusted with it because it started on a lie, has been sustained on lies and will, in all likelihood, end with a lie (we "won" -- oh, oops, the government didn't hold! Well, we tried!")
That's not "anti-war." That's "anti-stupid-uncalled-for-war-in-Iraq-based-on-lies-and-American-hubris-and-I'm-tired-of-being-embarasssed-for-my-daddy."
And Repubs who think they can hang Dems who are against the Iraq war as being "anti-war" on terrorism will find out the hard way that the great unwashed in this country aren't as stupid as Karl Rove thinks they are.
If Custer had "cut and run" he'da lived to fight another day! The ways things are going, if we have to fight a war NOT of our choosing (unlike this one in Iraq), we will be in deep doodoo.)
Thanks a lot, President George W. Custer!
My! Such Vehemence!
1. What Lie?
2. Why does the left so hate karl Rove?
3. You've used the Custer argument before but there's one incredibly stark difference between the Sioux Nation and Islamo-facism...
a) The Sioux would gladly have lived in peace with the white man, had the white man allowed it, but
b) Islamo-facists want only to subjugate the entire world and make it bend it's knee, and head, to allah.
Yes, Custer would have lived to fight another day... but he wasn't fighting Islamaniacs. Besides which, Custer was filled to the brim with god-like hubris; running would've been anathema to him. Even if he had believed reports that he was severely outnumbered, he might likely have felt his superior firepower would win him the day. No, not just hubris, but reckless pride as well!
America is fast asleep. It's time to wake up before world events slit all our throats as we dream.
It's comforting to know you (ER) aren't fast asleep, but if we (left vs right) continue to fight like a pack of dogs, it's not likely we'll notice any cats trying to sneak past. I'm not saying mistakes haven't been made, but what I am saying is the time for grumbling about them isn't now.
The Left wants to point to the right, wag its head, and whisper about how sad it is that the 'extreme right-wing' of the Republican party has taken over; ruining the country, but the Left can't seem to see the same in itself...
"How sad," whispers the right-wing extremist, wagging his head.
Um, I merely matched vehemence with vehemence.
The lie that Iraq, at the time we went in, had any connection to 9/11; the lie that Iraq had the capability to put a mushroom cloud over this continent!
Custer-Bush: I am comparing the men, not their enemies. Both think themselves greater than they are. From "Custer was filled" to the end of that paragraph applies to Bush.
The time for grumbling about the extremists in this administration is now. Right now. Or should the Dems just lie down and surrender? Or would you suspend the damn election?
And, you got to quit thinking everyone who opposes this president and his policies, and everyone who isn't a rock-ribbed Repub, is "THE LEFT"!
The extremists in the GOP are destroying it from the inside, dishonorably; this president is not the conservatrive either of us wish him to be; you want him to be conservatibve beacuse you're conservative; I want him to be conservative so I will know where he stands. The Dems will defeat a self-weakened GOP in November.
Murtha... Extremist
Reid... Extremist (though admittedly dour)
Pelosi... Extremist
Dodd... Extremist
Durbin... Extremist
Kennedy... Extremist
McKinney... Extremist (and thankfully gone)
Lamont... Opportunistic Extremist (and a political idiot)
I could go on and on, and you could come up with a list of your own... all of which accomplishes nothing. 'Extremist' is a meaningless word in the mouth of an ideologue... Of which we both are.
Even if your Custer analogy was in reference to Bush, that still doesn't negate my analysis. Running will only embolden the Islamaniacs; they will view it as weakness and stretch out their hands to hurt us again... Drive the knife in deeper.
I am surprised that you seem so... angry... about my liberal use of the term "Left". Especially since-- to my mind at least --you are not a 'Freak Leftie' as you aptly labeled 'the real peaceniks'. And don't think I don't recognize the short-comings of those on the Right more extreme than I... In this I am as hypocritical as many on the Left... they are useful idiots, but to be watched, and not given too much control.
It is this 'anti-war' mantra coming from the Left to which I so strenuously object. I can't help but see it as the height of folly and an invitation to every Islamaniac in the world...
"America is weak... America will not fight... America's might is a fraud... America has no stomach for conflict... America is lulled to sleep by comforts and idolatry... America is indeed a paper tiger... Come and have your way with us."
Mushroom clouds are on the way, Brother... They are on the way. Have we forgotten Iran? The proverbial cat sneaking past those distracted dogs?
...
"Or should the Dems just lie down and surrender?"
That's what many in that august party advocate, and are actively trying to do even now. But the election will go on... That's the way we do things here. Win or lose, Republicans will continue to support the war on terror, even if the Dem's manage to pull us out of it. I will post left and right on it how great a mistake the Left is making, and you will post in like manner (left and right) telling me I should 'keep quiet... [we] Republicans had our chance, and we blew it.' Such is life... All things must pass... This nation, too, shall see an end. Sooner, perhaps, rather than later. And don't think I believe it will be the fault of Democrats that it happens.... It will be my fault. It will be your fault. It will be the fault of every American who chose to play politics rather than see to what was best for this nation and its people.
Personally, I don't see that Bush lied about anything. He said in his address to the nation shortly after 9-11 that this war would be long and difficult. It has been. Everyone believed our casualties would be in the tens of thousands... Everyone knew going in that the war would not end with Afghanistan. Anyone who says otherwise is either a liar, or without a firm grasp of the English language and all its subtlety and nuance, and a modicum of common sense.
You can't kill an idea. Not unless you can replace it with a greater, more perfect idea... What then shall we offer Muslims in replace of Jihad and world conquest? The continued life and well-being of their wives and children?
You tell me-- What should we do? How do we as Christians balance doing what is right against doing what is obviously wrong? There is no easy answer to this. No one gets the moral high ground here.
"Pulling out of Vietnam did not being peace to the Vietnam peninsula, it brought millions of deaths. Pulling out of Vietnam emboldened communism, and Cambodia saw a slaughter unrivaled [imho] in modern history."
Be fair, though. Neither did warring.
What WASN'T tried was non-violent resistence. Or even some attempt at Just War.
We tried war and it failed miserably. We tried pulling out and that led to many deaths.
We need another way.
And you're right, You can't kill an idea. Not unless you can replace it with a greater, more perfect idea.
Bombing Iraqis, or Lebanese or Iranians will not instill in them a better, more perfect idea.
As Christians, what should we do? How about a bit of good news? A better way.
No more. No less.
Here's the fault line, EL.
You see the war in Iraq as a legitamite field of the war on terror. I see it as our first, and ongoing, strategic blunder in the war on terror. For that ALONE, I was Bush and Cheney impeached for dereliction of duty.
Re: "America is weak... America will not fight... America's might is a fraud... America has no stomach for conflict... America is lulled to sleep by comforts and idolatry... America is indeed a paper tiger... Come and have your way with us."
I've never heard anyone say this kind of thing except righties who claim they've heard it from a lefty.
I've never heard this articulated by anyone on the Left either, but I believe this is what this nation's collective wishy-washiness tells the Islamaniacs-- Osama said as much after seeing America run from Somalia. He said he realized America was a 'paper tiger'...
No I don't recall ever hearing those words come out of an American's mouth, but our enemies-- if they have any intelligence at all --listen just as intently to our actions as they do our words.
This gets down to a major disconnect I see between the two sides of the political spectrum. Those only the right primarily see fighting terrorism as a military/religio/political exercise. Those on the left view the struggle in terms of culture/economic/social justice issues. That's why GOPers don't see Dem ideas about using America's economic might as serious suggestions about fighting terrorists. And Dem's don't understand why this administration didn't tend relationships with other democratic nations to fight Islamofascists. Both sides are serious about fighting this decisive issue, neither side can agree about how though.
For my money I agree with the left's position on this issue. It will be by raising literacy and economic prospects for the majority of the middle east that radical clerics will lose their hold on the populace. When muslims care more about the next American Idol than about the Israel-Palestine issue, then the middle east will be stabilized.
BenT's plan could work, provided...
1) We controlled the education in every muslim nation.
2) We had thirty+ years in which to do it.
But then, perhaps not. America is pretty good at producing bigots even though it's not taught in our public schools. Children get just as much indoctrination at home as they do in school or from the television. (MTV IMMEDIATELY leaps to the forebrain!) And when it comes to ideological issues, children tend to follow in their parents footsteps.
With no attempt at being nasty here, from my perspective, I see the Left (the Progressive Party) continually trying to build the better mousetrap... Nothing wrong with that. The Left has a lot of deep thinkers, and social scientists. They reason that this or that should be sufficient to win over a social segment, a populace, an ethnicity. Again; Nothing wrong with that.
The Right also has its deep thinkers and social scientists. But the Right seemingly-- to me at least --has more of one thing than the Left, and that's a healthy supply of pragmatists.
The Left looks at the current situation in Lebanon, and says, "A Cease Fire will bring about a hope for peace." Well... Maybe, Maybe not. Consider who we're talking about here-- Jews and Muslims; Oil and Vinegar; Ketchup and Peanutbutter.
The Right looks at the current situation in Lebanon, and says, " 'Cease Fire' in arabic means 'Reload' ". And this is true; it's happened every time it's been tried. The Right looks at the current situation in the Greater Middle East and sees a level of fanaticism so powerfully dangerous, any thought of social engineering is looked upon with askance.
Social engineering is not a viable option ONLY because we can't guarantee we will affect every single muslim, but with the level of conflict already occuring around the world, there is no guarantee that we are not ALREADY too late. Quite simply, we cannot dismiss our experience of cause and effect in historical and geopolitical events. Based of what has gone before, there is no reason to believe this time will be any different. Therefore. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst...
Pragmatism-- The Right's got it in spades. If the Left has any, they're keeping it under tight wraps.
Lefty Christian pragmatists feed the poor around them, hold the hands of those who are afraid, offer prayers for all, and strive to be kind to one another.
Further, pragmatically, our strategy in the Middle East is failing. We can't bomb away terrorism, especially when those bombs are falling on civilians.
How do I know, pragmatically speaking, that bombing away terrorism won't work? Because, without a doubt, it wouldn't work here. Terrorists could not bomb the US in to submission, am I correct? Will you testify on my behalf, brother Righties?
Can I get an "amen"?!
Post a Comment
<< Home