Category Archives: Neoconservatism

Updated: ‘He One Holy Roller’

Constitution, Democrats, Ethics, Federalism, Individual Rights, Iraq, Law, Morality, Neoconservatism, Political Philosophy, Republicans

Another of my archaic titles (it hails from the Beatles’ “Come Together“).

Speaking at Notre Dame, “America’s leading Roman Catholic university,” President Obama called on the factions warring over abortion to come together and find common grounds.

“So let’s work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term.”

I agree. In their lyrics, the Beatles exhorted, “Come Together Right Now Over Me.” Make it, “Come Together Right Now Over the Constitution.”

There is no warrant in the constitution for or against abortion, adultery, homo-or hetero marriage, etc.

Quaint, I know, but to the federal government were delegated only limited and enumerated powers (Article I, Section 8):

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Yet pro-life advocates want to force their way on the rest through a constitutional amendment. And pro-choice agitators wish to compel the country—and their countrymen who oppose the procedure—to pay for abortions.

Obama is no constitutional scholar although he is touted as one. But he should know that the Constitution proscribes his meddling and prescribes, via the brilliant Tenth Amendment, a perfectly good solution: Leave it to the states and the individuals concerned (and let them pay out-of pocket).

Would that pro-life types fussed as much over fully formed, innocent human beings (such as those who’ve perished in Iraq) as they do over fetuses. Republicans sure showed their contempt for life in their enthusiasim for the carnage visited on Iraqis.

Come to think of it, the culture of life never seems to extend beyond a claim of dominion over another human being’s body.

Update (May 19): I’ve posted this Iraq notice before, but judging from the letters received, retention is non-existent. So here goes again:

A note to the neoconservatives who frequent this site, and post their ill-formulated fulminations vis-a-vis the war on Iraq: That war is not going to be adjudicated again here, not ever. I chronicled the invasion of Iraq at great length, applying fact and every ounce of reason in my possession to repudiate and denounce that war crime. The case is closed! Neoconservative ideologues stand in the dock for aiding and abetting a war crime. The lazy neoconservative can read my archive on the topic. While I can imagine these ideologues urgently need to make peace with their maker, or consciences, for their role in a crime of such moral and material magnitude, they will not do so on my private property!

Clinton Cops To ‘Collateral Damage’

Bush, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Neoconservatism, Propaganda, The Military

Under Bush and his backers (who have NO claim to the tea-party movement), it was verboten to mention that nation-building or democracy-spreading—whatever the term du jour to describe America’s assorted missions and monster slaying—costs the people upon whom these “blessings” are visited.

Bush backers in the media became indignant—still do—whenever it was suggested that America’s bravest inadvertently, and unintentionally, killed scores of innocent civilians.

Today, after one of those expeditions that resulted in “collateral damage,” US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that “Washington ‘deeply, deeply’ regrets the death of Afghan civilians killed by an air strike.”

But what are you going to do about it, Madam? Why not terminate the “mission” to Afghanistan?

That “mission” I summed-up in “A War He Can Call His Own“:

Nations building is Democrat for spreading democracy. Spreading democracy is Republican for nation building. These interchangeable concepts stand for an open-ended military presence with all the pitfalls that attach to Iraq.

Americans are currently training the Afghan army. As in Iraq, it’ll take years if not decades before the training wheels can be removed. The men of the 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions have made magnificent progress in pushing the Taliban back. But the gains are short-lived. The Taliban invariably regroup. Their stake in that country is simply greater than ours. Always will be. Then there are the costs and the casualties. When Special Forces target the Taliban, they frequently infringe on tribal territory instead. Civilians die. Tribal elders are enraged, and rightly so.

Nation building in that country also entails policing a corruption-riddled police force. Afghani officers of the law are “uniformed thieves.” They run the opium trade by which the impoverished Afghani farmers survive. Somewhere on the food chain sit the drug traffickers. We mediate between them and other crime bosses, or war lords, as they are known. When we supply impoverished farmers with basic supplies, the Taliban first fleece these long-suffering folks and then punish them for collaborating with the Americans. By swooping down to save the locals from the Taliban we cripple them with kindness and deepen their dependency.

Another of the contradictions of occupation: The Pashtun population we patronize happens to disdain the central government we hope to strengthen. So it goes: We help local groups we believe to be patriots but, at the same time, end up establishing an authoritarian protectorate. Pakistan anyone?

Clinton Cops To 'Collateral Damage'

Bush, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Neoconservatism, Propaganda, The Military

Bush backers in the media became indignant—still do—whenever it was suggested that America’s bravest inadvertently, and unintentionally, killed scores of innocent civilians.

But what are you going to do about it, Madam? Why not terminate the “mission” to Afghanistan?

That “mission” I summed-up in “A War He Can Call His Own“:

Nations building is Democrat for spreading democracy. Spreading democracy is Republican for nation building. These interchangeable concepts stand for an open-ended military presence with all the pitfalls that attach to Iraq.

Americans are currently training the Afghan army. As in Iraq, it’ll take years if not decades before the training wheels can be removed. The men of the 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions have made magnificent progress in pushing the Taliban back. But the gains are short-lived. The Taliban invariably regroup. Their stake in that country is simply greater than ours. Always will be. Then there are the costs and the casualties. When Special Forces target the Taliban, they frequently infringe on tribal territory instead. Civilians die. Tribal elders are enraged, and rightly so.

Nation building in that country also entails policing a corruption-riddled police force. Afghani officers of the law are “uniformed thieves.” They run the opium trade by which the impoverished Afghani farmers survive. Somewhere on the food chain sit the drug traffickers. We mediate between them and other crime bosses, or war lords, as they are known. When we supply impoverished farmers with basic supplies, the Taliban first fleece these long-suffering folks and then punish them for collaborating with the Americans. By swooping down to save the locals from the Taliban we cripple them with kindness and deepen their dependency.

Another of the contradictions of occupation: The Pashtun population we patronize happens to disdain the central government we hope to strengthen. So it goes: We help local groups we believe to be patriots but, at the same time, end up establishing an authoritarian protectorate. Pakistan anyone?

Update II: To Bug Or Not To Bug Abu Zubaydah’s Cage (That’s Not The Question)

Iraq, John McCain, Just War, Neoconservatism, Republicans, Terrorism, The Military

The excerpt is from this week’s column,“To Bug Or Not To Bug Abu Zubaydah’s Cage (That’s Not The Question),” now on Taki’s Magazine:

“…torturing the torture issue has thrown the country off-scent, to the great advantage of the puppet masters.

The torture kerfuffle is secondary to – and subsumed within – the broader category of an unjust war, waged by George Bush with Democratic assent. Talk about a bipartisan effort; a pox on both Houses!

You can make the case for harsh interrogation techniques in desperate, dire circumstances. But how on Earth do you justify lugging an army across the ocean to occupy a third-world country that is no danger to you and has not threatened you? You don’t, and you can’t.

Forgotten in the faff over “enhanced interrogation” tactics is the invasion of Iraq. Of this war crime, most Democrats are as guilty as Republicans. The torture fracas is like manna from heaven for both parties and their media lapdogs, who cannot be coaxed out of a coma.

Whether to bug Zubaydah’s cage or not: This is a limited, small, relatively safe distraction that allows complicit journalists, jurists, politicians and pointy heads to skirt the real issue – the need to prosecute Bush, Cheney, Clinton, Kerry for invading Iraq.”

Read the complete column, “To Bug Or Not To Bug Abu Zubaydah’s Cage (That’s Not The Question).”

Update I (April 24): Some of you have asked about Abu Ghraib. The thesis of the column applies equally to the “GI JOE MEETS GI HO” episode. Get them all on the prosecution of an unjust and illegal war. Incidentally, it goes with out saying that a pox ought to be visited on both Houses—Congress and the Senate.

Update II (April 25): A note to the neoconservatives who frequent this site, and post their ill-formulated fulminations vis-a-vis the war on Iraq: That war is not going to be adjudicated again here, not ever. I chronicled the invasion of Iraq at great length, applying fact and every ounce of reason in my possession to repudiate and denounce that war crime. The case is closed! Neoconservative ideologues stand in the dock for aiding and abetting a war crime. The lazy neoconservative can read my archive on the topic. While I can imagine these ideologues urgently need to make peace with their maker, or consciences, for their role in a crime of such moral and material magnitude, they will not do so on my private property!