Isolationists and the moral requirement to act

At a recent dinner I got into an argument with a couple of libertarians (well one was a libertarian, I’m not quite sure what the other is) (and I would like to point out that I was nicer there than I am here). It started somehow with a discussion of Ron Paul and my saying that he was an isolationist and Anti-Semite (he is). The rebuttal came that all the quotes attributed to him aren’t true. Well I’ve read his chapter on “Zionism” in his book Liberty Defined. After reading that I feel comfortable calling him an Anti-Semite, don’t believe me, go read it yourself, it should be in most Barnes and Nobles in the Current Events Section…just don’t buy it, just read it there, there is no need to encourage such degenerate filth as Anti-Semitism by giving it money. Then of course I was then told that he never said we were responsible for 9/11. Let me quote to you from the Republican debates back in 2008:

 

Ron Paul: They attack us because we’ve been over there, we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East. I think Reagan was right. We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics.

Now, I’m only a simple English teacher, but that reads like a simple conditional clause. “They attack us BECAUSE we’ve been over there.” Any logical interpretation to this would suggest that he is saying that IF we weren’t over there THEN they wouldn’t attack us. But I’m just using simple things like grammar and logic to interpret Ron Paul’s words. Perhaps if I drank the Kool-Aid his followers have I might see the mystical other way to interpret those words. “We’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years” suggest if we had just left that nice Hussein alone, we wouldn’t have had any problem. If we had just let him invade Kuwait and subjugate the people there obviously the world would be a better safer place. You believe that don’t you? Now I’ll grant you oil would be cheaper, but we would have let tyranny expand further in the world (not exactly worth the cost of saving a quarter on a gallon of gas). The next two sentences are kind of non-sequitor, but I’m going forgive more of it because when speaking on the spot it takes a while to collect your thoughts (if you have any). But my favorite is the last sentence is “We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics.” Ignoring the racist overtones of the suggestions that Arabs are too stupid to be rational, it suggests that because we can’t understand Middle Eastern politics we shouldn’t get involved. Which leads to the question, because it was almost impossible to understand the insanity of communism, should we have just let the rest of the world fall to Soviet expansion? Because we couldn’t grasp the pure evil of National Socialism should have just ignored it until it came to our shores (oh, wait that’s effectively what we did!)?

But let’s ignore Ron Paul for the moment and go back to my conversation. I pointed out that yes my interlocutors had a point that we have botched and screwed up a lot in our recent endeavors overseas. The monster that was Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama seems to have no idea of how to conduct foreign affairs (although each retarded head of that beast has its own unique flaws—cowardice/indifference/idiocy/evil). But no matter how bad our screw ups, not doing anything would have been far, far worse.

My opponents tried to then point to Israel as part of the problem and our help in creating it. That if we just didn’t back it we wouldn’t have had all these problems with terrorists attacking us. Really? So to protect ourselves we should betray the only democracy in that part of the world. Our survival is more important than the lives of others. What a moral stance isolationists take. This is preposterous for two reasons. The first is sanity. While I do not believe in an inability of Arab cultures to create democratic regimes, I believe that those cultures have become infected with a perverse belief system (to call it a religion would be overly generous). And those who subscribe to this sick ideal hate us not because we support Israel, or because we have economic prosperity, or because we support the Saudi regime, or because we supported the Shah or this or that…they hate us because the kind of evil they subscribe to is based on hate. Hate of that which is different and until everyone is under the yoke of their perverse system they won’t have their blood lust satiated (even then it will just turn more on itself until nothing that resembles anything human remains). If Israel falls, they will still hate Europe. If Europe falls, they will still hate the US. If we paid exorbitant tribute to them they would still hate us. There is no dealing with this or any evil. P.J. O’Rourke offered one of the most insightful comment of the century when he noted that “Evil is an outreach program.” By its nature it can do only one of two things spread or die. The only sane option is that we choose the latter, because it can never be appeased, never satiated, never halted. Your only choice with evil is to surrender or kill it. The second reason is that it’s evil. To withdraw support for Israel would be condemning thousands if not millions to death. I think the blood of 6 million Jews is enough on the hands of our country. (And yes I will maintain we are responsible for the death of the Holocaust victims because we knew that something was going on, we knew how evil Hitler was, and we did less than nothing. I say less than nothing because we didn’t just ignore the problem, we denied Jews attempting to escape entry on numerous occasions condemning them to torture and death. That’s the legacy of the so-called greatest generation, electing leaders who turned a blind eye to genocide.)

I was then treated to a statement about how I shouldn’t support Israel because they have a very liberal/pseudo-socialist economy. Which they do. I will admit that. But I would also point out two things. One, liberal economy with democratic-republican system is still better than psycho-evil-fascist-theocracy any day. Second, I will actually say something nice about socialism so get ready because this is a once in a decade event. Socialism is an excellent economic system when at war. (And by war here I mean more the Von Clausewitz concept of total war where you are in a life or death struggle.) When you are at war you have to control industry, resources, and capital if you’re going to survive. And guess what, Israel has been in this state of total war since the first day they were created. I may not like their economic system, but I understand why it’s necessary.

So seeing they weren’t going to make headway on the Israel point, because it will be a cold day in hell before I turn my back on Israel (in case you’re wondering it will be a cold day in the Arctic before Obama or just about any non-Jewish Democrat turns their back on Israel) my dinner companions tried to go with history. They tried going to our support of the Shah as the reason that Iran hated us. No, actually it was their embracing a religious lunatic. Under the Shah, bad as he was, Iran was Westernizing, it was becoming exceedingly civilized and would likely have naturally done away with the Shah and adopted a democratic system, or at least something less corrupt if the Ayatollah hadn’t taken over. Besides as bad as the Shah was, there was a lot worse….like the Ayatollah. We backed the lesser of many evils and it took a gutless wonder like Carter to do nothing when the country fell to absolute insanity. (One wonders what would have happened if Reagan had won in 1976 the first time he ran…oh wait, I don’t have to wonder, the armed services would never have atrophied due to lack of care that Carter gave them, they would have gone in, rescued all the people in the embassy and killed everyone who was about to plunge Iran into 30 years of medieval nonsense and tyranny. Then the terrorists of the world would have had no one to turn to in order to fund their constant attacks on the U.S., Europe, and Israel. Thanks Jimmy it’s amazing you won a Peace Prize for being the person most responsible for letting tyranny and terrorism thrive. I hope the Ant-Semitic bastard that Jimmy Carter is, and yes he is a goddamn Nazi at heart and I don’t mean that in any exaggerated or hyperbolic way, rots in hell.)

Then they tried to go back further all the way to WWI. Saying that our involvement in WWI was wrong. That we should have stayed out. Yes, when the Ottoman and German empires are engaging in such horrendous behavior that words like genocide and crimes against humanity need to be invented because nothing else quite fits how sick these people are…yeah we shouldn’t have chosen sides. And dare we forget that it’s our isolationist behavior during the treaty talks and after the conclusion of the war that caused WWI…it wasn’t because we were too involved in world affairs. (I’ll also blame Wilson’s gross incompetence in his stupid 14 points plan).

The fact of the matter remains that even at our worst when we get involved in world affairs it is always better than when we don’t.

When we are involved we stop the genocide of the Ottoman Empire. When we don’t the Reich takes its place. When we are involved fascism dies. When we aren’t communism thrives. When we are involved we have Mi Lai. When we’re not we have the killing fields of Cambodia. When we’re involved we have slow progress in Iran. When we’re not we have them reverting to barbarism. When we’re involved we have Afghani’s killing Russians! When we’re not we have the Taliban take over. When we’re involved at least now that there is a way for people to get out of Afghanistan even if we’ve screwed everything else up over there. But then again all of the enemies time and money seems to be concentrated over there and not here (it’s cynical but it’s true). The world is better when America acts even on our worst day than any day we don’t act to draw a line in the sand and tell evil that it will not move one step further (even when we don’t succeed).

To deny this is to be like Ron Paul who best belongs with Neville Chamberlain and the apologists of the 1930’s who seek only Peace in our Time. When you try to deal, to reason, to appease evil you will always find that our time only lasts a few days. The only sane, rational, and morally correct way to deal with evil is to oppose it. Better to do with it with forethought, planning, and a somewhat cold calculation that innocent dead today is better than twenty at the hands of tyranny. No matter the cost the only sane reaction is to oppose evil and tyranny with everything we have. To do less is to sign our own death warrant.

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, American Exceptionalism, Anti-Semitism, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Conservative, Death, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Fear, Foreign Policy, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Happiness, Israel, liberal arrogance, Libya, Long Term Thinking, Natural Rights, Obama, Patriotism, People Are Stupid, politics, Racism, Tyranny, War on Terrorism

7 responses to “Isolationists and the moral requirement to act

  1. Dirty Sex & Politics

    Yeah!!! What you said!
    Israel has been on my mind tremendously this week. I realized I didn’t know enough concerning the struggle for their land and the entire Palestinian issue. I’m with you. I would die before I turned my back on Israel like during the war in which you referenced. I never knew about the “St. Louis” ship of Jewish refugees sent back to Germany and most to their deaths. The Holocaust museum in DC spends a large part of the exhibits on the apathy of the world. Although I do think there were many who were fighting to save the Jews. And many who died for it. BUT, back to your excellent writing, I agree with your views on Ron Paul. I’m so curious as to why so many people like your dining companions are lacking that same apathy of years past. How could this begin to happen again. A Palestinian state means Israel is no more. Period. They hate, because they hate. And you are right, there is NOTHING we can do to change that. Even without Israeli support or no more bombing, they would still wish us dead.

  2. Pingback: In an argument with a Ron Paul supporter? send them here… | The Conservative New Ager

  3. Pingback: Ron Paul vs. Mitt Romney…or Vicious Psychopath vs. True Conservative | The Conservative New Ager

  4. Pingback: A Visual Summary of the Situation in Israel | The Conservative New Ager

  5. Pingback: The Call For Common Sense Gun Law & Other Such Silliness | The Conservative New Ager

  6. incredibly excellent article.

  7. Pingback: The Problem of Syria | The Conservative New Ager

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s