Category Archives: War

You say Foley; I Say Iraq

Florida Rep. Mark Foley, a Republican, “abruptly quit Congress on Friday after reports surfaced that he had sent sexually charged electronic messages to boys working as pages,”reports the Washington Times. Foley is under the FBI’s criminal investigation, although it’s not clear what federal or state laws, if any, he has violated. (The Law Against Lowlifes in Politics?) It appears the agency is searching for that law. (The country’s journalists are incapable of writing a news lead, much less properly fleshing out a story.)

Foley, like Debra LaFave, another paragon of the public-sector, claimed one of those bogus illnesses: alcoholism (at the root of the diseasing of behavior is the eradication of good and bad). To quickly establish the presence of mitigating factors, Foley checked himself into a rehab facility. However, he doesn’t have slut appeal; so it probably won’t work.

If Democrats weren’t so dumb, they’d comment tersely on this sordid affair, and then move on post haste to the real corruption: Iraq. (Condi Rice—as fleet of foot as ever in evading responsibility for anything, really—has used the distraction to deny her contribution to the lack of preparedness for the 9/11 onslaught. She’s resurrecting the same excuses I deconstructed in “Hold their Feet to the Fire.”)

The Republicans don’t deserve to govern because of Iraq (and immigration), not Foley. But neither do the Democrats (a pox on both their houses). As for traditional conservatives, (as opposed establishment Republicans), at the very least, they ought to consider President Bush’s positions on mass immigration and the national identity, the debt, and the growth in the size and power of government inimical to conservatism. However, they rarely pipe up these days about the accretion of the state under Bush. If only their concept of good government extended beyond pious homilies to family values, faith and fetuses.

When Wrong is Still Right

Bush, Iraq, Islam, War

In reply to James Huggins’ letter, posted here, whose stance has been to consistently bash those of us on the Right who opposed the war in Iraq for daring to be right (there’s a nice quote about that tactic. Someone please find it): Now that Iraq is broken, as we said it would be, these individuals continue to heap scorn on us. “What are ya gonna do; let’s be pragmatic. What’s done is done, so unless you have something constructive to say, shut up and let’s get on with the job.”

What job? Does it not occur to you that sometimes things are irreparably broken? Do you really think we can solve the problem of Iraq? Are there no limits to hubristic and delusional thinking? Are there no limits to the defiance of the laws of nature, such as that central planning has NEVER worked; freedom must rise from the roots, it cannot be imposed from the tree tops? Violate rules a school child learns on the playground, and you’ll come up shortalways. And is it worth losing one more American life to the Iraq Moloch? Oh, I forget, we only value fetuses, not fully grown human beings, thousands of whom are hobbling around on prosthetic limbs, lives ruined. Cicero said, “The first law of history is to tell the truth.” Let Huggins and the rest quit the Hussein-equals-Hitler inanities and admit that, while he was by no means a pleasant fellow, he kept Iraq as together as it will ever be. The trains ran on time and Shia and Sunni lived in relative peace in THE SAME NEIGHBORHOODS. There was no civil war (or “civil strife,” as the euphemism goes). In fact, the Iraqis I had met before the war were generally well-educated and had their act together. That simple thing comes from having an infrastructure: law and order, schools, universities, electricity, potable water, hospitals. Mark my words: this war, over which I am constantly castigated, will be responsible for the loss of a generation of young Iraqis. Mark my words (you heard it here first), in a few years time, the lost Iraqi generation will be a topic for discussion among the talking titmice.

Ibn Saud said: “It may be accepted as an incontrovertible fact that it will be impossible to manage the people of Iraq except by strong means and military force.” A prescription Saddam had mastered. The Sultan of Najd (born in 1876; died in 1953) knew of what he spoke.

Lebanon & The Partisan Punditocracy

Islam, Israel, Jihad, Just War, Lebanon, Terrorism, War

Once again, American pundits have fallen into camps on the matter of Israel’s leveling of Lebanon. With few exceptions (mostly in the silenced libertarian camp), the issues remain unexamined; everyone is a hack, rooting for a party to the conflict, and ignoring the principles being sacrificed in the process.

The “argument” I most detest—a holdover from that theater of triumphs, Iraq—is the false dichotomy set-up: “What would you have done in Israel’s position?” the custodians of intellectual debate ask plaintively (and deceptively).

How about not destroy an entire (rather modern and open) society, for starters?

Facetiousness aside, whereas in the US it has taken a couple of years for media malpractitioners to catch up with libertarian prescients vis-Ã -vis Iraq, Israelis are already saying exactly what I said in “Call Off the Israeli Air Force!“: precise, limited and delimited, ongoing strikes.

Writes Yoel Marcus in Ha’aretz, “Israel was right to launch Operation Change of Direction. The big mistake was in not limiting it to a reprisal raid with a time frame and specific dimensions.” A far cry from the crazed recommendations the “sofa samurais” in the US have been issuing.

As I’ve said, develop a different kind of warfare. Big, bloated armies of conscripts are no match for lean mean voluntary militia. Also fascinating about the robustness of debate in Israel is this: I wishfully wrote that the Israeli Air Force ought to have refused when it “was told to carry out air raids on Lebanese roads and residential real estate.” And sure enough, some magnificent men have shown such independent-minded judgment. Read about it in this Observer article, “Israeli Pilots Deliberately Miss Targets.”

Commentators often evince an astute ideological understanding of the conflict—one I may even share. But the notion, for instance, that Hezbollah is a Jihadist organization that would like to see Israel destroyed does nothing to address whether there is utility or justification in destroying Lebanon. (And by that I imply the need to use western precepts such as Just-War ethics and reason. We are fighting for the West, aren’t we? Or is that just a hollow slogan!?)

From believing Hezbollah is spearheading jihad, it does not follow that one ought to pummel Lebanon and kill many more innocents than guilty. Hezbollah, moreover, represents a small segment of the Lebanese population and government, contrary to the Palestinian Authority, where the jihad agenda is widely shared on the street and by the state apparatus.

The gains from the Israeli assault have been minute and probably temporary, as is evident from the steady stream of Hezbollah-powered rockets (140 just today) launched into Northern Israel. To claim Israel is effectively dealing with the guilty in Lebanon is pie-in-the-sky.

Again, it’s interesting that quite a few military men in Israel as opposed the armchair ideologues abroad, agree with the above propositions. In Israel’s defense, and in deference to that country’s people, the debate over this war there is already in full swing.

Here in the US, it’s still safer to shut up about the “miracle” in Mesopotamia and the Leader who led us there, Peace Be Upon Him.