newcity
Powerful words from an Iraqi, at: http://messopotamian.blogspot.com/
As long as America and her allies choose the side of the oppressed and downtrodden, as long as they remain on the side of the people, they will be invincible. When Might is coupled with Right, then expect great historical transformations.
Iraqi's know what the story is. They will be free.
Imperialism. A word that can stir millions to take to the streets in anger and hatred. Except, of course, if it's Islamo-fascist imperialism (a word coined by Andrew Sullivan).
I have yet to figure out why so many self righteous pompous buffoons on the far left shriek at Bush about US imperialism, yet have nothing to say about the genocidal imperialist war Islamists are waging. They are killing Muslims, Jews, Christians, women, and anyone they can get their hands on. Bin Laden's mentor, Abdullah Azzam explicitly stated that people must convert or die. Nice medieval mentality, that.
Yet protestors, exercising selective morality. are outraged when capitalist democracies liberate people, but sleep like children when Islamist imperialists practice sexual apartheid. If it weren't so sad, it would be hysterical, this form of play acting.
Islamist imperialist aggression against nations such as Indonesia, the Philippines, etc., is totally ignored in the west. I can't help but think this is a form of racism. Many on the left view the Muslim victims of imperialism as not worthy of democracy. As I've stated before, it's the 'white man's burden' in their view. They want these 'ignorant savages' to remain dependent on them so they can use them as a whip to chastise the west as it seeks to liberate the victims of Islamism.
Although Islam is not a race, the view that Muslims can not handle democracy is a view the left holds to with religious devotion. Nowhere does the left advocate democracy for Muslims. The head of Amnesty International in London is an organizer of the anti-Bush demonstrations, yet says nothing about the victims of Hussein's war against his own people, nor the liberation of Afghanistan.
A poll published yesterday found that 85% of Afghans approve of their liberation by the US and its allies. Yet the left ignores this. Again, the left views Muslims as children.
Opposing imperialism is not the same as opposing globalization or capitalism. Those who oppose efforts at free trade are opposing the right of individuals to choose their own lifestyles. It's no wonder the leading opponents of free trade are allying themselves with religious fanatics. Both are against the rights of individuals to make their own decisions about freedom.
Are we at war, or aren't we? It seems to me that those who oppose actions against terrorists, or states which are developing WMD's (Iraq) and have aided terrorists (Abu Abbas), think we're not. Their argument appears to be 'prove that Iraq was a threat', or something along those lines.
But the fact is, we don't have to prove anything at all. We know there are people who want to destroy us because they HAVE attacked us already. When we put an Iran or a Syria or a Saudi Arabia in our sights, it's because we KNOW they are our enemy and we KNOW they've sponsored, aided and abetted those who HAVE attacked us. It's nonsense to pretend we have to have a smoking gun in each and every case.
This is not an argument for unlimited war. But the fact is, these states have already declared war against us. When the head of the IAEA expresses concern that the UN's resolution on Iranian nuclear activities isn't strong enough, we know there's a problem.
Those who oppose US actions against the murderous thugs in Iraq, Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia are locked in a 19th century mindset. They still think war should be fought with declarations, then a phalanx of troops marching across a field firing muskets. They are trapped in a box where nationalism determines everything. Only nations go to war. Only nations are subject to international law.
It's a profoundly western way of thinking. Is there anything more western than the modern nation-state? How many of us can think of ourselves as anything but "American"?
Yet there are those who are sharp enough to use the nature of the nation against itself. Preaching the superiority of "God's law" they think of themselves as members of a trans-national identity. It's globalization written in a religious context. They seek to destroy everything in the name of their god. The far left which hates capitalism because it destroys cultures, ironically enough supports the globalization efforts of the Islamic fascists.
The far left is unable to see anything but the idea that the 'nation' should play victim to the globalizing influence of Islamic fascism. It's certainly a form of racism, this idea that Islamic fascists aren't as dangerous as western capitalists. But one wonders if, and when, the leftists will ever learn from history.
Bush is in London, and all seems well. Tomorrow is the big day of protests, so the protestors say. I guess they've got to have something to worry about. As I've said previously, anti-Americanism is a fundamentalism no less than creationism. It helps build a framework for those who can't think. All problems are defined by their relationship to the US. Globalization, capitalism, whatever their benefits, are evil, and the US is evil for pushing them.
Fundamentalism is the belief that a very simple concept can explain a whole world. Creationists have their view that the bible is literally true. Anti-americanists have their view that murder, evil, greed, imperialism, etc., did not exist until July 4, 1776.
A pox upon both their houses.
According to the "Guardian", 62% of Brits think the US is a positive force in the world...that's a surprise, and I'm sure spoiled Dominique de Villepin's breakfast...
I'm not sure what 'weblogs.com' will do for me, but I changed my settings to notify them when I publish...I guess I'll find out soon enough.
My sympathies to the friends and families of the courageous Italian Carabinieri and soldiers who lost their lives at the hands of murderous fanatics in Iraq. I remember reading about Italian soldiers in WW2 Yugoslavia putting a stop to German persecution of Jews. And, when one reads about Mussolini, you get the impression Italians didn't consider his fascism all that seriously. Italian culture, sophisticated and worldly, has always been a buffer against extremism.
It is the mark of a great nation, like Italy, that its people are willing to sacrifice themselves for their fellow human beings.
The Supreme Court of MA just handed down a decision saying there is no constitutional obstruction to gay marriage. What a smart decision! Conservative reaction has, to put it mildly, been predictable from the "National Review"
(http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/corner.asp):
"BORK SAW THIS ONE COMING [Peter Robinson]
In the episode of Uncommon Knowledge that he taped last summer, Judge Robert Bork predicted today's decision in Massachusetts"
Bork goes on, in his most pompous manner, to tell us why persecution of gays would be a good thing. It's perfectly in line with his article a number of years ago in the "Indiana Law Review" stating that the right to privacy for Americans doesn't exist. In spite of all the vomiting the right does about 'limited government', the one thing it hates is....limited government. The Borkies and their cronies would be ecstatic to have government officers certifying that each of us is in bed with only our heterosexual spouses.
The war the right is making on gays is done in the name of 'protecting the family'. But, as any of the millions who've lost their jobs during Bush's tenure can tell you, economics has much more influence on family life than the idea that the guys down the block are married to each other. Yet the right wants govt action against gays, but no support for families. No health care, etc. Typical right wing hypocrisy.
At the same website above, Kathryn Jean Lopez documents a Pew Poll stating that religious bigotry against gays is correlated with Evangelical Christianity (gee, there's a surprise!) Just as these folks led the fight against women's suffrage, and equal rights for blacks and Jews, they're now in the forefront of the war to discriminate against gays. What a noble legacy. Lopez seems to actually be
proud
of this latter day blood libel.
The right is cute. I like reading "National Review"; Jonah Goldberg is clever and witty. But they have their dark side. Their willingness to scapegoat gays, while ignoring the fact that millions have lost their jobs, and health care, is typical of the American religious right.
Gee. I suppose great minds think alike. I wasn't aware, however, that the 'great mind' in this case is Natan Sharanksy writing in the "Wall Street Journal" (http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004310), where he writes:
"anti-Americanism in the Islamic world and anti-Americanism in Europe are in fact linked, and both bear an uncanny resemblance to anti-Semitism." However, back in December of last year, I wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 06:01:01 AM | robert puharic | edit ]
Are Americans becoming the new Jews? Every country in medieval Europe did, at one time or another, expel the Jews. Xenophobia, opportunism, irrational fear, and religious bigotry all contributed to Jews being seen as overly influential, and having values that undermined “Christian” culture. They became targets of opportunity for failed leadership.
Gee. Maybe I should be on the WSJ masthead...nah...me on the WSJ? They'd kill me!
Ah, it gets more and more difficult to post, it seems. I don't know how the big boys do it all the time. Personal life is so demanding that it really does constrict the amount of time one has to develop an analysis worth posting.
Speaking of blogging, though, have you noticed how incestuous blogging is? The best sites all have links referencing....each other. It's kind of like an interlocking board of directors.
In any case, as I look at the European view of the US currently, and its position in the world, I can't help feeling Europe is going through a strange type of neo-colonialism. The world's greatest threats to peace, apparently, are George Bush and Ariel Sharon. I kid thee not.
It appears to me that many Europeans are willing to completely disregard the medieval ideology espoused by the nihilistic Islamic-fascists (thanks to Andrew Sullivan for THAT terminology), in favor of focusing their hatred on the US, especially on Bush. I am no fan of Bush. I didn't vote for him, or his dad, and will not do so next year.
But, the hard core determination to ignore the brain deadening effect of Islamic fundamentalism reeks of a racist/colonialist view of the middle east that used to be so prevalent among Europeans. They don't have to pay attention to a 'fatwa' from bin Laden because he's just an Arab and Arabs have never been known to think...at least so THEY think. Thus, it's the US that's a danger.
Part of it is the collapse of Europe's ability to project power. As was said in "The Day the Earth Stood Still", the test of any law is the police force that enforces it. Western civilization is quite good at developing laws. Unfortunately, today it's only the US which retains the ability to enforce it. This split means that Europe no longer believes in enforcement, and, perhaps, the US may be coming no longer to believe in law.
But Europeans have to get their act together. Do they REALLY think Arabs are sub-human, and can be ignored? If not, why are they so persistent in doing so? Why is there no challenge to the fundamentalist Islamic hatred that pours out of Saudi Arabia, but a real revulsion to the Christian fundamentalism that Bush is supposed to believe?
I'm an atheist, and truly despise Christian fundamentalism. But the obsession in Europe with Bush's religious views while blindly ignoring the sexual apartheid so characteristic of bin Laden, al Turabi, and other fanatics, when coupled with Europe's past leads to only one conclusion: Europeans want to have the '3rd world' depend on them for protection. If they tell the thugs, like Arafat, to act responsibly, they lose the parent/child relationship.
So they'd rather shriek at the US than set expectations on middle east leaders. White man's burden, you know. We've seen it in the anti-globalization protection racket they're running. They're protecting poverty stricken 3rd worlders from all the horrors of a middle class life. A good example of this is at the "Nation" which, predictably, is STUNNED to think that Iraqis may actually WORK for a living!! (See
http://thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031110&s=shorrock).
Europe's never going to grow up, it seems. If they're not aiding and abetting slaughter, like they did in Kosovo, they're complaining that their children...Iraqis...are being liberated.
What a shame...for both Iraq and Europe.
