Archives
7:38:00 PM EST
Those Who Would Appease Our Enemies
Those Who Would Appease Our Enemies
There are those Americans who are actually hoping we fail in Iraq. A fairly significant minority of Americans believe we should not have gone to war in Iraq. These Americans believe in some unrealistic doctrine of appeasement, thinking muslim fanatical terrorists can be dissuaded from their conquest of the world in a global 'jihad', by a stated position of "equality of nations". Thus, because they oppose the war (actually any way) they are put in the contradictory position of jumping on and pointing out every mistake, every setback, every difficulty, of our effort in Iraq. Does this make them appear anit-American, even treasonous?
This philosophy of appeasement overlooks the real world fact that most of the muslim world resents us, hates us to our core, and greatly desires to destroy us entirely. The growing socialism throughout Europe is adding to the anti-American feeling there, and those people, too would delight in seeing us fail, not only in Iraq, but in anything we attempt. They even in December released prisoners they held for years that are known enemies of our country with designs to attack us again.
Most of the antiwar, appeasement-driven people claim we as a country should not go to war as a national, political philosophy. Some few feel that it is anti-Christian to wage war. It seems that mostly the antiwar people are liberal-minded politically, preferring not to "kill" the enemy, but to "befriend" them and "talk" to them to prevent their harming us.
This seems to fly in the face of the nature of the people of God in His dealing with them. He gave the 10 commandments including, "Thou shalt not kill"; yet He commanded His own people to conquer other peoples and occupy their land, bringing "nothing' back alive. It would seem to be the nature of God to eliminate evil; yet the appeasing, antiwar doctrine would forgive Saddam for killing 100s of thousands of "innocent" people, and then berate and condemn our own government for removing the tyrant and attempting to neutralize Al Qaeda.
The liberal wing of our country is causing the enemy to, not only FEEL they have allies within our country, but to KNOW they have them and to USE these "friends" to their advantage. They know the words spoken publicly by our democratic leaders undermine our war effort makes it more likely they can recruit more homicide/suicide bombers and delay America's complete success in Iraq.They delight in the fact that more American soldiers die as a result of the antiwar sentiment weakening us and delaying our reaching our objectives.
How long will it be until we redefine treason to include those who cause more of our soldiers to die and endanger our homeland by their outcry and opposition to American policy in our fight against terrorism?
ManWalking50
NOTE: There are two other blogs by Christian writers who are supporters of our war effort and yet their highest priority is God...you will enjoy their writing if you will click on their sites seen at the left of this entry.
Looking Ahead: In the coming days the entry will be made titled, "Some Things I'd Like to See". It covers a range of interesting things from major changes I think we need to minor changes, but I think it will be things that touch all our lives.
Looking Back: In this journal entry I wrote about anitwar, appeasers. You may feel that way, and I mean no offense by pointing it out. In fact, some of you may want to look back to a comment made this week by one appeaser and antiwar proponent, who is very anti-Bush and anti-conservative republican (and, as you will see, anti-ManWalking50). You may see his comments under the entry of December 12, 2005, "What Are Some Positive Results of an American Victory in Iraq"?
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EACH READER OF THIS CITIZENS LINE BLOG!
Written by manwalking50 Blog about this entry |
Add to del.icio.us | 
digg this
-
As R.E. Lee wrote, " . . . [T]he consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of the ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it."
Prophetic, or what? Here is a history of all major statements about and from Iraq during 2005, especially from the Bush Admin: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n01/wein01_.html
Notice that in April 2005 Bush compared his war to "Lincoln's war on slavery." Ironically accuate considering Lincoln didn't war against slavery. He was willing to make slavery permanent, and the South was willing to give it up as long as they could retain freedom. Lincoln refused. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson6.html
1/10/06 12:47 PM
Manwalking50 would be wise to learn the difference between Paleoconservative and Neoconservative to determine which of the two is "anti-conservative." Here are imperfect but starting differences, though currently a little biased to make Paleo's falsely look racist and Neo's Trotskyism hidden.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Which one opposed FDR and LBJ? Which one supported them? Which one supports small government and which one believes in no limits or criticism of government?
Ben Franklin said, "He who would trade a little liberty for security deserves neither." What does Manwalking50 deserve?