Category Archives: War

You Can Lead a Filly to Water But …

Democracy, Foreign Policy, Sarah Palin, War

On Freedom Watch tonight, Judge Napolitano tried his best to encourage Sarah Palin to gracefully bow out of her interventionist foreign affairs stand, and concede that Libya is best left to the Libyans. After all, the governor had just been discussing the dire need to scale back government activities and reach. Nevertheless, eight minutes or so into the conversation, Palin said “yes” to the question, “Do we have any business inserting ourselves into yet a third Muslim country’s’ affairs.” (HERE)

You can lead a filly to water but you can’t make her drink (or is it think?).

“Arab nations,” admits Patrick Buchanan, “have never produced freedom, prosperity or progress on a large scale.. They will not [succeed now]. The great Arab revolution will likely fail. And when it does, those other passions coursing through the region will rise to dominance. And what are they but ethnonationalism, tribalism and Islamic fundamentalism?” (HERE)

Perhaps if the Judge had put it Pat’s way, Sarah might have reconsidered urging more sacrifices to Moloch.

UPDATED: Were Walid Phares Jewish, He’d Be A Pharisee

Anti-Semitism, Foreign Policy, Middle East, Neoconservatism, War

Dr. Walid Phares is the Fox News Channel’s Middle East and Terrorism Expert. He has been advocating a muscular military response in Libya. Somewhere on the Fox News’, moving-pictures-only website (in this vicinity), there is an interview in which Phares says that, “If the opposition in Libya cannot cross the Syrt line on the coast and head towards Tripoli, it is clear that there will be stalemate and only international intervention would end the crisis. The US must consider the fact that if the crisis stretch too long, even the uprising areas could be infiltrated.” (The excerpt is from Dr. Phares’ more script-friendly website, here.)

Pharisee,” which originally referred to a “member of an ancient Jewish sect that emphasized strict interpretation and observance of the Mosaic law in both its oral and written form,” has also come to mean a “hypocritically self-righteous person.” (FreeDictionary.com)

I wager that if Walid were a Jewish neoconservative, and not an Arab one, he’d be accused of being “a fifth columnist; a person with dual loyalties, a ‘binational.'”

UPDATE: Tom, I fail to see why you think my post is such a harsh criticism of Phares. It shows you how lukewarm and insipid public discourse has become if a sharp dig at the good doctor’s interventionism—or more likely, at the non-reaction to his militarism—is considered a devastating blow. Nonsense.

I like Phares on some counts; not on others. He just gets a pass because he is not a Jewish interventionist. If he were a Jew, the usual suspects would accuse him of recruiting poor American boys to die in order to safeguard oil for Israel, or something like that. I can never get conspiracy theories straight, as they are so unintuitive to me.

No To Strafing Libya

Foreign Policy, John McCain, Military, Neoconservatism, Reason, UN, War

“No-Fly Zone” is one of those Orwellian coinages; it conjures a protective shield from high-above. But why not ask the Iraqis about this manna from the heavens? Before the US invaded Iraq, it had been bombing the place illegally—and immorally—over the unilaterally established No-Fly Zone. Not such a comfort if you’re on the ground. I’ll give the Obama Administration this: at least one of its officials has called a spade a spade. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, a holdover from the Bush era, has explained what a “No-Fly Zone” over Libya actually entails (See CBS):

“A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses.” He added that it couldn’t be done by a single aircraft carrier off the coast. “It’s a big operation in a big country,” Gates said. … In other words, there is no need to establish a no-fly zone, at least for now, and no desire within the military to do it period. The U.S. military has long experience with no-fly zones — more than a decade over Iraq — and knows what it takes, not just jets but tankers and early warning aircraft.

The neoconservatives were champing at the bit to take the battle for Libya away from the Libyan people and put it where it belongs: the US military. Steven Hayes of the Weekly Standard made a weak case on FoxNews. Essentially, the US needed to quickly and self-righteously compensate for its lackluster reaction (here’s mine) to the Egyptian revolt.

Fumed McMussolini: “We are spending $500 billion not counting Iraq and Afghanistan on our nation’s defense. Don’t tell me we can’t do a no-fly zone over Tripoli. (FoxNews) Impeccable reasoning, as always, from the senator. To wit, even if the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan were essential to the defense of the realm—and they are certainly not-–why does it follow that Libya is too?

Sen. John McCain should know a thing or two. In all, he lost five jets during his time. (As Steve Sailer once quipped, “To lose one plane over Vietnam may be regarded as a heroic tragedy; to lose five planes here and there looks like carelessness.”)

There’s one more pesky detail. CBS again: “Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the same subcommittee that the Pentagon has no confirmation that Libyan strongman Muammar al Qaddafi is using his air force to kill civilians.”

Fibbing our way into occupying a country: Remind me why that sounds familiar.

UPDATED: ‘We Need To Do A Lot Less & A Lot Sooner Around The World’

Constitution, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Ron Paul, War, Welfare

Rep. Ron Paul: “There is no authority in the Constitution for the welfare state, the warfare state, and the police state. … If you learn about, fight for and promote free-market economics, I can guarantee that you will sleep better at night; you will enjoy your life, and you will feel like you are doing something worth while. Defend liberty.” This innocent, impish, almost awkward man can make those tears well in your eyes.