VietNam Redo
After reading Michael Hirsh's column in Newsweek regarding his reaction to President Bush's speech before the veterans of VFW, I am completely aghast at his flippant remarks regarding the most basic points in history regarding the Vietnam War. The amazing lengths that the Left will go to defend the indefensible continues to astound me. Mr. Hirsh's commentary was nothing more than intellectual laziness of the highest order and frankly it stank to high heaven! Gee, we must be getting to close to a Presidential election.
I have often stated here on these pages that the War On Terror can and cannot be compared to World War II due to several important points:
1) Declaration of War: WWII had one and this war does not. I believe it makes a huge difference in terms of committing the ENTIRE nation to the task at hand and getting it done as quickly as possible.
2) Collateral Damage: WWII was liberal on carpet bombing and this war is not. Yes, we do have "smart" bombs thus we don't need to blast everything in sight just to hit the side of the proverbial barn. Even so, we are way too cautious in killing "non-combatants" that we have forsaken "total war".
3) Strategic Offensive: WWII demanded the unconditional surrender of our enemies and this war does not. Yes, there are "non-state" actors i.e. OBL and Al Qaida, however its states like Iran, Syria and Pakistan that harbor these very same "non-state" actors. We have decided to fight defensively instead of offensively against our enemies since the 2006 mid-term election.
I have also stated here that this war is nothing like Vietnam because unlike in Southeast Asia we have gone on the offensive in SouthWest Asia by actually invading the strongholds of our enemies in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, I have had to change my stance since the mid-term election of '06 and the exit of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld the following day, and as a result our presence in Iraq has indeed been a virtual Vietnam deja vu'! However, is this because of President Bush or because of traitorous Democrats? Well, clearly its the latter. This is why:
1) Media - the similarity to Vietnam is more apropos to them in regards to the coverage of this conflict by the leftwing Networks and Newspapers than it is to President Bush's decision to invade Iraq. Like Vietnam, the Networks and Newspapers have clearly taken a position on this war and they want the USA out of Iraq. They are not simply "reporting the news" as they are "making the news" with their leftwing slant and soft glove approach to Islamic terrorists. For the media, the death of every AMERICAN soldier is one step closer to a Democrat victory in the White House. The media exhibit a "Stockholm Syndrome" in regards to the Islamic Terrorists that no amount of murder or mayhem is attributed to them but is ultimately America's fault. Their coverage amounts to pro bono work for the Democrat Party.
2) Democrats - Like in Vietnam, they want America to abandon our allies in Iraq and ultimately in Afghanistan. They don't care about the ramifications of withdrawal since clearly it didn't bother them that so many were butchered by Communists in Laos, Cambodia and in both North and South Vietnam. Democrats have an affinity with and love of Communists of all stripes. This is primarily due to the fact that Communists are anti-Capitalist, anti-Christian and anti-American. Subsequently, the Islamic Terrorists too fit this mold very nicely but with a Moslem religious twist. Thus, Democrats go out of the way to PROVE that the USA are the "Fascists" to support their "multicultural allies" when its the Islamic Terrorist who are indeed the lovers and believers of Islamo-Fascism. The Democrat Party is no longer the Party of FDR and JFK but simply wimps and traitors who can't tell the difference between the murderer (Islamic Terrorists) and the murdered (those killed by Islamic Terrorists).
3) The Lie - The Left is in denial and have been since Vietnam. They deny that Communists were culpable for their own actions in SouthEast Asia and today they deny that Islamic Terrorists are culpable for their own actions in Mesopotamia. The Left then said America was at fault when in fact it was the Communist North Vietnamese that were the invaders of Laos, Cambodia and South Vietnam. The Left today says America is at fault for murdered civilians on the receiving end of Islamic Terror in Iraq when in fact it's State actors like Syria and Iran and their proxies that are the criminals and culprits perpetuating misery in Baghdad and its environs. America, though not perfect, is more perfect than they and yet the Left cannot and will not admit that America is right to defend the defenseless from the thugs of Islamic radicals today and from the Communist thugs of yesteryear. They have distorted history to fit their Lie as a tonic to soothe their conscience otherwise they may go mad with the realization that they themselves have contributed to another victory to an implacable foe that need not be.
President Bush may be the architect of the invasion but its the Democrats who are the architects of retreat! Under President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld tens of millions were liberated from brutal regimes. Under Democrats, tens of millions will be imprisoned in a Taliban like vice and bludgeoned with the hammer of Islamic revenge in which the blood of innocents will be upon their hands because when evil reared its ugly head the Left did nothing. Democrats have completely been corrupted by their own lies and cowardice that they are unworthy of being called Americans.
They want to "fight" Islamic Terrorists in a judicial fashion using police instead of the Army and Navy. And yet, we know the leftwing stance on criminals today: Pardon or look the other way whichever is the least effective means of keeping law and order. We can no more tolerate their stance on domestic criminals as we can with international ones like Osama Bin Laden. Their solutions are not solutions at all but simply accommodation of evil.
History will judge them harshly.
I have often stated here on these pages that the War On Terror can and cannot be compared to World War II due to several important points:
1) Declaration of War: WWII had one and this war does not. I believe it makes a huge difference in terms of committing the ENTIRE nation to the task at hand and getting it done as quickly as possible.
2) Collateral Damage: WWII was liberal on carpet bombing and this war is not. Yes, we do have "smart" bombs thus we don't need to blast everything in sight just to hit the side of the proverbial barn. Even so, we are way too cautious in killing "non-combatants" that we have forsaken "total war".
3) Strategic Offensive: WWII demanded the unconditional surrender of our enemies and this war does not. Yes, there are "non-state" actors i.e. OBL and Al Qaida, however its states like Iran, Syria and Pakistan that harbor these very same "non-state" actors. We have decided to fight defensively instead of offensively against our enemies since the 2006 mid-term election.
I have also stated here that this war is nothing like Vietnam because unlike in Southeast Asia we have gone on the offensive in SouthWest Asia by actually invading the strongholds of our enemies in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, I have had to change my stance since the mid-term election of '06 and the exit of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld the following day, and as a result our presence in Iraq has indeed been a virtual Vietnam deja vu'! However, is this because of President Bush or because of traitorous Democrats? Well, clearly its the latter. This is why:
1) Media - the similarity to Vietnam is more apropos to them in regards to the coverage of this conflict by the leftwing Networks and Newspapers than it is to President Bush's decision to invade Iraq. Like Vietnam, the Networks and Newspapers have clearly taken a position on this war and they want the USA out of Iraq. They are not simply "reporting the news" as they are "making the news" with their leftwing slant and soft glove approach to Islamic terrorists. For the media, the death of every AMERICAN soldier is one step closer to a Democrat victory in the White House. The media exhibit a "Stockholm Syndrome" in regards to the Islamic Terrorists that no amount of murder or mayhem is attributed to them but is ultimately America's fault. Their coverage amounts to pro bono work for the Democrat Party.
2) Democrats - Like in Vietnam, they want America to abandon our allies in Iraq and ultimately in Afghanistan. They don't care about the ramifications of withdrawal since clearly it didn't bother them that so many were butchered by Communists in Laos, Cambodia and in both North and South Vietnam. Democrats have an affinity with and love of Communists of all stripes. This is primarily due to the fact that Communists are anti-Capitalist, anti-Christian and anti-American. Subsequently, the Islamic Terrorists too fit this mold very nicely but with a Moslem religious twist. Thus, Democrats go out of the way to PROVE that the USA are the "Fascists" to support their "multicultural allies" when its the Islamic Terrorist who are indeed the lovers and believers of Islamo-Fascism. The Democrat Party is no longer the Party of FDR and JFK but simply wimps and traitors who can't tell the difference between the murderer (Islamic Terrorists) and the murdered (those killed by Islamic Terrorists).
3) The Lie - The Left is in denial and have been since Vietnam. They deny that Communists were culpable for their own actions in SouthEast Asia and today they deny that Islamic Terrorists are culpable for their own actions in Mesopotamia. The Left then said America was at fault when in fact it was the Communist North Vietnamese that were the invaders of Laos, Cambodia and South Vietnam. The Left today says America is at fault for murdered civilians on the receiving end of Islamic Terror in Iraq when in fact it's State actors like Syria and Iran and their proxies that are the criminals and culprits perpetuating misery in Baghdad and its environs. America, though not perfect, is more perfect than they and yet the Left cannot and will not admit that America is right to defend the defenseless from the thugs of Islamic radicals today and from the Communist thugs of yesteryear. They have distorted history to fit their Lie as a tonic to soothe their conscience otherwise they may go mad with the realization that they themselves have contributed to another victory to an implacable foe that need not be.
President Bush may be the architect of the invasion but its the Democrats who are the architects of retreat! Under President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld tens of millions were liberated from brutal regimes. Under Democrats, tens of millions will be imprisoned in a Taliban like vice and bludgeoned with the hammer of Islamic revenge in which the blood of innocents will be upon their hands because when evil reared its ugly head the Left did nothing. Democrats have completely been corrupted by their own lies and cowardice that they are unworthy of being called Americans.
They want to "fight" Islamic Terrorists in a judicial fashion using police instead of the Army and Navy. And yet, we know the leftwing stance on criminals today: Pardon or look the other way whichever is the least effective means of keeping law and order. We can no more tolerate their stance on domestic criminals as we can with international ones like Osama Bin Laden. Their solutions are not solutions at all but simply accommodation of evil.
History will judge them harshly.
posted by Bruce R. McConnell | 9:29 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home