Posts Tagged With: politics

No War is Inevitable, No War is “Good”

“No war is inevitable until it has begun.” – Patrick J. Buchanan, Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

The debates about the war with Iran can be quite curious in that those who pretend to be experts seem to lack the context of history. Every war seems imminent or unavoidable to them. They are appalled at the idea the United States can be pulled into war by other countries or interests. The world’s superpower cannot be convinced to do something not in its best interest, they claim.

In fact, this has occurred more times than we care to admit.

The U.S. had managed to stay out of the tragically avoidable World War I for its first couple years. It wasn’t her fight. A war rooted in antiquated alliances and ideas of empire which turned Europeans against each other in a horrific disaster. America had long held to George Washington’s plea for the nation to avoid entangling alliances (also known as the Washington Doctrine of Unstable Alliances). In his farewell address, he said:

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities… it is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements.

Britain and France’s war had become costly in lives and material, and they needed help. As Buchanan writes, “British propaganda had convinced us the Germans were beasts and we must join the good war for a new world where Prussian militarism would never menace mankind again.” But there was more. Lies about German atrocities. The sinking of the ocean liner Lusitania by a German submarine had caused outrage, yet it had been carrying munitions. The Brits also cut transatlantic cables, impeding communication with Germany. It is true, German subs had targeted some American ships, and at one point tried to bribe Mexico into attacking the U.S., but was it worth sending millions of soldiers to Europe?

At the end of the war, with over 100,000 dead, and 200,000 injured, Americans wondered what was the point of the sacrifice. They believed they had been “hoodwinked and swindled…And the next time Britain rang for help, America would take her time in answering the call…until France had been overrun and Britain thrown off the continent at Dunkirk.”

Flash forward a few decades to Vietnam. The militant anti-communist wing of the U.S. government pushed the “falling dominoes” narrative: If Vietnam fell to the communists, than so so would all of Southeast Asia. Initially, President Kennedy seemed to support this, but as time went on, his position began to shift. In October 1963, with U.S. troop presence still relatively small, he said, “We need a way to get out of Vietnam. This is a way of doing it. And to leave forces there when they’re not needed, I think, is wasteful, and it complicates both their problems and ours.”

Less than a month later, he was murdered and the warhawks continued to ratchet up the war, and stumbled face-first into an escalation trap. The communists would eventually take over Vietnam and rule to this day. Did Southeast Asia become a communist empire and unite to become some menace to the world?

No, Vietnam now is an important trade partner with the U.S., exporting tens of billions of dollars of goods to us.

There are just wars, but there are no good wars. Every war has consequences, unintended and otherwise. We must take great care to not allow ourselves to be convinced to enter a war that hasn’t first been brought to us. Not every threat is existential. Not every world leader we don’t like is a Hitler. Diplomacy is not a sign of weakness, but one of strength and respect for life.

Peace through strength means show we can act when we must, and defend ourselves when required. However, more often than not, when we are told we must go war, the exact opposite is true.

Categories: government, Modern History | Tags: , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hearts and Minds Don’t Change With Bombs

It is disturbing the war champions are in tears now the war with Iran may be over. They are so obsessed with war, they ignore the history of how these conflicts play out, or why wars should be avoided to begin with.

Regime change was always a complete fantasy. Brute force never brings about the uprising of the people. It only hardens the people as their country is destroyed. How did “bombing Vietnam back to stone age” work out? Did Iraqis welcome Americans like the French did in the 1940s? Did twenty years of war empower the Afghans to resist the Taliban? Have decades of sanctions helped the Cuban people, or made them suffer?

The other typical outcome is complete chaos; a death spiral into dystopian destruction. See Libya, Somalia, and Syria.

The thinking person is forced to ask this: Do the Iranian people want to be “liberated?” That question is hard for some to fathom, but must be asked. In spite of their repressive government, and propaganda they are told, do Iranians see us as liberators?

Here’s some history the commentators leave out:

The U.S. toppled the Iranian government in the 1950s, installing a leader not known for his stellar human rights record — like torture and executions — which led to the Islamic Revolution. We supported Iraq (yeah, we helped create Saddam) in their war with Iran that caused hundreds of thousands of casualties. Add to that decades of economic sanctions.

Think Iranians might have tough time seeing the U.S. as a friend, regardless of how bad their rulers may be?

This reminds us of how Germany was oppressed, starved, and economically gutted by the Allies after World War I. Did Germany become a submissive, third world state? No, the perfect environment was created for the Third Reich to rise. People wonder how the Germans let the Nazis take control, but if you understand what happened after World War I, it is no surprise at all. Oppression and violence from the outside unites people, even if their leaders are disreputable.

Maybe, someday, change will come to Iran. No doubt there are people in Iran who dream of revolution. Most organic, true revolutions happen from within. One might say the Iranian government prevents this from happening. Or the Iranians are unarmed and scared. These arguments only take us so far. The American colonials were exponentially outmatched by the British Empire. Yet they won.

Also consider we left many other Middle East countries alone, not telling them how to live or govern, and they shifted westward in their society. Our closest allies — economically and strategically — in the region are not democracies. Even though we may want to, it’s not up to us to tell others how to live.

Forcing change from the outside is doomed to fail. From within, hearts and minds will change. Maybe slowly, but they will change.

Categories: government, Modern History | Tags: , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Law of Unintended Consequences

“A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” – Ronald Reagan

Every war is bound by the Law of Unintended Consequences. If you study history, you know this. Most of our “leaders” don’t study history, or if they do, they don’t have the IQ to understand it. Let’s take a look how this applies to the war with Iran:

Law of Unintended Consequences Example 1:

Countries see what is happening in Iran and Venezuela, and other recent debacles like Libya and Iraq, and are asking, “How can we avoid being attacked or invaded?”

Simple: Get some nuclear weapons.

This has been the position of North Korea, now more solidified in recent weeks as the war with Iran unfolded.

We’ve been technically at war with North Korea since 1950. Their leaders have been evil, dangerous, oppressive, and killed millions. On the scale of evil and threat, they rank much higher than Iran.

One thing the leaders of North Korea are not: stupid.

So because of a new war allegedly over nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles (the threat of missiles and nukes was quickly refuted), we will likely have more proliferation of a horrific weapon that should never had been invented — a weapon that was an unintended consequence of World War II.

Law of Unintended Consequences Example #2:

It is clear some things in this war aren’t going as planned or hoped (and hope is bad way to conduct a war).

Fuel and other shortages are already occuring around the world. Military planners have long warned this would happen in a war with Iran. To alleviate the fuel shortages, sanctions were lifted on Russia.

The country we are at war with via Ukraine.

Since we effectively handed over funding to Russia, Ukraine attacked their refineries, putting the world at risk.

Russia is providing weapons and intelligence to Iran. North Korean troops are in Ukraine. Weapons and troops that deter China are being pulled from the Far East allies Japan and South Korea.

We are one mistep from global meltdown.

Or maybe the World War has already begun.

If cooler heads don’t end the war now, the chances of this spiraling out of control increase exponentially by the day.

And many consequences, known and unknown, will impact many, many generations.

Categories: government | Tags: , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Orwell’s Revenge

After President Trump’s advisor, Kellyanne Conway, made an odd comment about “alternative facts,” others quickly noted the similarity to the concept of “newspeak” in George Orwell’s classic, dystopian novel 1984. Newspeak was the language used to control and shape the thoughts of people. To be fair, terms like “fake news” and “alt-right” are also Orwellian, as well as how many in the media and Washington (from both sides) try to manipulate people and thoughts. Thanks to all of this, Orwell’s book, along with similar classics like A Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451, went to the top of bestseller lists.

And that made me laugh.

These are books on how governments, politicians and the media manipulate, control and monitor (Big Brother) the thoughts, beliefs and actions of the people.

Do the politicians and media really want the people reading these books? Do they want you to realize, that on a daily basis, that they have become what the Orwells of the world warned us about?

They may just have opened Pandora’s Box and there’s no closing that.

P.S. I had wondered if people even read these books in school anymore; perhaps these sales show they have not. It is also amusing to see the media and politicians lecturing us on truth, such as Dan Rather, who got himself in trouble for pushing “fake but accurate” news (talk about Orwellian). The media and politics are riddled with truthtwisters – perhaps Orwell will help more people realize this.

Categories: Books, Critical Thinking | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Freedom vs. Politics

The United Sates was founded by immigrants. Generation after generation of immigrants came here to escape oppression, war, violence and to seek a better life. Both those immigrants, and the citizens that live here, don’t want the evils and problems that they left behind to follow them here. The laws of our nation have kept those concerns at bay.

Yet now, politicians who only care about clinging to power and making a name for themselves (from both parties, by the way), seem to show little concern who is entering the country.

If you want border control or background checks, you’re called anti-immigrant. If you oppose en masse amnesty to illegals, you’re a racist. If you don’t support unlimited refuge to hordes of people, you aren’t humane.

If you believe any of these things, see how being humane is working out for Europe here, here or here.

Violence. Rape. Terrorism. Cover-up.

But don’t just believe the media reports, see it in their own words or this impassioned message from a German girl. Continue reading

Categories: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

America: Miracle or the Titanic?

So I ran across The 5000 Year Leap, subtitled A Miracle That Changed the World: Principles of Freedom 101, at a book sale. Here, in one volume, is an accessible volume on the principles that went into writing the U.S. Constitution. The chapter I opened today reads:

3rd Principle: The Most Promising Method of Securing a Virtuous and Morally Stable People is to Elect Virtuous Leaders

Isn’t that a novel idea?

Continue reading

Categories: Critical Thinking, History | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

Losing History

President Obama has caused quite the controversy by making comparisons of ISIS’s campaign of terror to the Crusades. I will let others debate what, how and why he said everything that he did. Since this site does touch on history time to time, I will discuss his comparison. How do I put this nicely?

It’s absolutely ridiculous.

The Crusades are often brought up primarily by those looking to attack Christians or knock them down a bit. They have fed the perception that the Crusades were all about expanding empires and destroying Islam. The problem is that this perception isn’t history.

It’s revisionist history.

During the early history of Christianity, its population was centered in what we typically refer to as part of the Middle East (technically the Near East and Asia Minor). It’s hard for some to imagine that a country like Egypt was once predominately Christian. What is left out of drive-by comments about the Crusades is the part about the Muslim Conquests that swept through the region, conquering nearly all of it. Princeton scholar Bernard Lewis wrote:

At the present time, the Crusades are often depicted as an early expansionist imperialism — a prefigurement of the modern European countries. To people of the time, both Muslim and Christian, they were no such thing. The Crusade was a delayed response to the jihad, the holy war for Islam, and its purpose was to recover by war what had been lost by war — to free the holy places of Christendom and open them once again, without impediment, to Christian pilgrimage.

Were the Crusades full of tragedies, horrible events and misguided people on both sides? Yes, because all war is a horrible tragedy. That doesn’t mean we rewrite history for our agendas. We let history, the good and the bad, speak for itself. We learn from it, so we don’t repeat it. Or, as George Orwell said, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”

The revisionism of the Crusades is such an obvious one, it’s sad to see world leaders repeat it. We’ve lost respect for the importance of history. Instead, we have replaced it with superficial study, politics and the tendency of too easily believing everything we hear. We are in danger of losing the messages our ancestors have left for us.

The very messages that can preserve humanity’s future.

crbks

Categories: Critical Thinking, History | Tags: , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.