All You Need is Love?

The 9/11 commemoration speech from Governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick according to Mark Steyn included this beauty, that the attack:

“was a mean and nasty and bitter attack on the United States,” and “was also a failure of human beings to understand each other, to learn to love each other.”

Rather than learning to love each other or say an Atta it would be wiser to understand an Atta. If no further than understanding an Atta, it would be best to take an Atta at his words and anyone else that has a deranged view of the world.

Steyn sees this as do many others, as a result of our “multi-cultural” beliefs and attitudes that assumes we are all the same; just from different places. We’re not all the same, nor should we try to make those out to do us harm equal to us. If crowds of people chant “death to America,” we should consider that an indication that they don’t much care for us. When someone that fits a “profile” and is traveling from say, Saudi Arabia, we should stop and consider that perhaps this fella has some plans that we might not really like the result of and treat him as such before he boards the aircraft.

If “multi-culturalism” is the way to go, yet children in say, Palestine are reared to despise Israel and all Jews, watch “Hamas Mickey” like after school specials on TV and rehearse for school plays with the kiddies as masked men, soldiers and the like, we might want to think about the fact that these children, as unfair and evil as their upbringing is, are not too malleable to our way of seeing things.

We should certainly strive to understand other cultures and not dislike someone just because of their culture of origin, but we should view those cultures with skepticism that rely on the fanaticism of hating ours, with dreams of annihilation.

Mark Steyn’s “One Mean and Nasty War: Massachusetts tough talk” at NRO.

DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls

Please give this Post/Blog a Vote -

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Rosemary's Thoughts, Mark My Words, third world county, Big Dog's Weblog, DragonLady's World, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, Conservative Cat, High Desert Wanderer, and Adeline and Hazel, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

The U.S.’ Decline is Inevitable; So What!

On June 20^th this post, “Who Fires the First Shot?” was in reaction to two articles; one by Tony Blankley, the other by Michael Hirsh. In a sense, both painted a somewhat bleak picture of our options in our efforts at thwarting Islamo-fascists in our midst; the Hirsh piece however was more in line with not doing anything so as not to offend or apparently make matters worse.

Victor Davis Hanson hits the nail on the head this morning as he usually does in covering our continuous bleating, blaming and expectations that there is one option that we haven’t tried that would resolve all the problems; although no one ever offers it, only knocks what we’re doing. The difficulty here is that there is no “one” option is the answer. Hanson’s take and one should agree there are not good options but we have thus far taken a couple of better ones. In part from Victor Davis Hanson:

“Our present policy, however poorly managed in postbellum Iraq, arose as a reaction both to the do-nothingism of past administrations, which, by general consensus, had emboldened al Qaeda to up its ante on 9/11, and the decades of amoral realism that propped up thugs and dictators who ruined their societies but blamed the ensuing mess on Americans and Jews.

After 9/11, we did not, as alleged, invade countries serially, but removed only two fascistic governments, the worst in the Middle East — both with a record of supporting enemies of the United States, and both of whom we had bombed or sent missiles against in the very recent past.

We did not leave after such punitive measures because we felt that the last time we did that, whether in Afghanistan in the 1980s, or Iraq in 1991, or Lebanon, or Somalia, things only got worse — and after 9/11 they might well get much worse. And unlike the bombing of 1998 in the Balkans, both operations in Afghanistan and Iraq were sanctioned by the U.S. Congress, discussed at the U.N., and widely supported by the American people.

Removing the Taliban and Saddam, and promoting constitutional governments in their places, were not the only options after 9/11, but they were good choices — if the desire was to address comprehensively a quarter-century of terrorism that was insidiously escalating both in frequency and vehemence.

If both governments can be stabilized even at this late date, the landscape in the Middle East from Lebanon to the West Bank will be much improved; if not, much worse. For those who wish to give up the struggle in Iraq, go home, and stay clear of the Middle East, a final question: What would Mr. Assad in Syria, al Qaeda in Iraq, President Ahmadinejad in Iran, or Hamas and Hezbollah wish us to do — and why?”

In reading Hanson the mind wandered to a recent essay by Mark Steyn in the most recent issue of National Review, which you’re not allowed to read yet as it’s a paid subscription. The essay in the June 25 issue of National Review, “American Quagmire,” ponders the decline of a nation, based in thoughtful part by the state of the air-travel network and its having to be symbolic of something.

We, in the U.S. just like any nation past, present or future would be remiss if we denied the inevitability of the decline of our nation’s position or power in the world some day. It isn’t however at its dawn just yet so don’t be too pessimistic. Where Steyn ponders others seem to know already because bin Laden is a prophet I guess and we’re without doubt playing right into his hands; it’s always simple as that for the enemy, but never for us.

Many offer our efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere as though they are our Soviet Afghanistan and are evidence of our decline. I disagree as I seem to recall many saying the Soviet’s Afghanistan was their Vietnam; if so they crumbled after theirs and we did not following ours.

The point being poorly made here is that we can fear the decline and not do anything that may hasten its arrival; like run away from Iraq and other places and recede into our shell. Continuing with the diplomatic or sporadic ineffective strikes from “30,000 feet,” that do nothing to actually sway the direction of history except to perhaps allow us to sleep longer and delay the next fanatical attack upon us or the West in general.

In the process of the inevitable we should do everything within our power to bring down those backward cults of death so that when we do finally step down, the world is not left with the Ahmadinejads, Assads, the maniacs et al as the next ascendants. It just cannot be allowed to be and that’s that.

Trackback: http://haloscan.com/tb/blandlyurbane/5575233814663358797

DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls

Please give this Post/Blog a Vote -

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Right Pundits, The Virtuous Republic, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson's Website, 123beta, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, On the Horizon, The Pet Haven Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Colloquium, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Blue Star Chronicles, Nuke's news and views, Pirate's Cove, Church and State, The Yankee Sailor, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.