29 November 2006

Americans fighting democracy

These past few days and weeks and months we have seen elements of the media, politics and some various religious and other groups supporting non-democratic means of solving the world's ills and for 'ending the conflict in Iraq'.

Now, those wishing to see how I view the conflict and those trying to put 'Realpolitik' into play can go through my various posts on this view that complex problems need simplistic solutions:

1) My view of 'Post-Warism' and how those purporting simplistic solutions to richly diverse, but simple to understand drives is not only wrong-headed, but will wind up in long term failure.

2) Previous to that I looked at 'Realpolitik' and 'pragmatic global geostrategy' or whatever the formulation of that is these days, and find that the entirety of this post-WWII outlook never really did address much of anything save to keep those practitioners of it in power. This worked out so well that entities and modes of thought sprang up, such as asymmetrical warfare and non-Nation State warfare, that could not be dealt with in the 'Realist' mindset as these ideas break, radically with the very premises that 'Realists' put forth in diplomacy and foreign policy. Also, these practitioners could not deal with it 'then' and still cannot come to terms with it to this very day.

3) Previous to that I looked at what it really takes to create an Army or Armed Forces and use the US as the example of the deep and hard work that must go in to creating a force that is a reflection of its Nation. I then leveraged this against how Arab Armies are ALSO a reflection of their societies which are generally autocracies using tribal, religious, ethnic or any means to rule the People of a Nation as a sub-human underclass. This little lesson appears to escape the 'Elite' and 'common wisdom' prevalent in those putting forth simplistic notions of what it actually TAKES to create a Armed Forces that represent a Free People.

4) Before all of those I wrote about the actual Strategy in Iraq that the MNF is using. Not the hand-waving 'there is no strategy' idea that the Left and Right keep on asserting, but the actual on-the-ground movement and what that means for long-term implications sort of strategy. The activities taken reflect a strategy and that strategy aims to AVOID every single pitfall of the simplistic solutions that have been employed by other militaries across this planet and have been long-term FAILURES. By avoiding the 'easy failure mode' and committing to a different way of fighting in a different conception of fighting, a long-term basis for society is being MADE. And that new society needs to wipe out those who are fighting according to their *own* unreal viewpoints of how life works.

5) Prior to the above I wrote about the Toxic Memes of Jay Garner that would and DID fail when HE was on the ground. His world-view could not take in what was actually going on and he continued to cling to it so hard that he was moved aside to let folks in who could deal with the actual situation as opposed to the 'real' one. That started the entire chain of articles off, as I realized that no media source, no military source, no diplomatic source and no political source actually wanted to deal with the real state of the real world, instead of the 'Realistic' approach that was so blandly put forth.

Due to that lack of long-term understanding amongst the 'Elites' and talking heads and newspapers and magazines, we have a much more generalized theme being put forth which is deadly to democracy, freedom and liberty. Each of the simplistic notions for 'ways to stabilize Iraq' that do not DEAL with the underlying realities that I put forth above are doomed to failure. The examples of those solutions and their manifest inability to do *anything* good is seen by such wonderful places as: the Balkans, Somalia, Haiti, Lebanon, the Koreas, East Timor, Kashmir. And by using ONLY the actual Federal Government as the limited solution choice and further limiting the choices to select from as those of the very late 20th century, and then THOSE weeded down to what is or is not 'politically acceptable' starts to so narrowly constrict democracy that we lose the MEANING of democracy. In point of fact that starts sounding like the Imperialist Islamic enemies of the United States and the entire Nation State system that allows freedom and democracy to manifest itself.

It is now time to attack those simplistic solutions.

Solution I - Tripartite Division of Iraq
Worked great on Poland now, didn't it?

To anyone who knows history I do hope that DID sting and that you realize that this is the EXACT same solution that was put forth to mollify Empires. Worked great, didn't it? Want to flip forward a few decades and see how that turned out for the Polish people?

Division of another Nation along ANY lines is anti-democratic to the People involved when it is put upon them by another Nation or set of Nations, especially when it is done to a Free People, as the Poles have considered themselves since the 10th century or so. Doing that to a Nation that has stood up a democratic Constitution and has held multiple democratic, multi-party elections should be *anathema* to ANY American.

That said my solution to take out Syria and leave a 'rump State' behind is not anti-democratic if that is made the stated OUTCOME of the conflict. I do not see it as carving up a rogue and rotting Nation that is spreading maggots over the Middle East, but I DO see it as rescuing the Kurdish Peoples there and giving the Kurds their own means to survive in the Middle East and offering an 'escape route' by having the culture of Iraq shift from Arabist in-fighting in the South to Kurdish Stability in the North. Together, as a Nation and Peoples joining as ONE the People of Iraq can have something to join together in and work *towards*. This is an attempt to EXPAND liberty, bring actual stability in the form of a People who WANT stability, and give a harsh wake-up call to the Arab South that the 'Past Glories of Islam' have a strong Kurdish flavor to them. The choice of the People, not doing the fighting, will then be clear and stark and well defined: Join with the Kurds to END this squabbling or sink into a quagmire of bloody death sponsored by outsiders. What remains of Syria can quietly *rot* so long as it no longer spreads that rotting beyond its borders.

Some folks just don't want to 'Give Peace a Chance' by doing the hard work NECESSARY to actually find a way to BUILD IT. Consider this the start of the long-awaited reunification of Kurdistan which was promised to the Kurds back in the 1920's, and just having to realign those National boundaries so as to give the Kurds that thing. A tearing down of a 'Berlin Wall' sort of deal. So that the West can be seen as MEANING what it says in the long run to a People who were carved asunder by PREVIOUS Empires.

If you think that a division of Iraq *will* work, can you please state historical examples of such using reminders of Poland and the Balkans of how similar concepts have failed over centuries? Because each of those caused far more problems than they 'solved'. And then explain why a democratic Nation of Free People should do this sort of thing.

Is democracy worth fighting for? Those wishing to impose a solution obviously no longer think so. And those who have stopped thinking that democracy is good for 'others' will start to truly generalize that at home as well as abroad. The concept of democracy is for the People to decide and when helping another People through tough times you do NOT throw democracy out the window as the 'first thing to go'.

Solution II - Run Away!
I handled that meme in-depth in my The Long Term Consequences of Defeat article.

The long and short of it is, that when the United States, as a Nation, befriends a People after rescuing them from a tyrant, you help them to stand up as a People to make their own decisions. And you do not leave them until their Government that is duly elected by the Free People of that Nation ask you to do so.

Leaving Friends and Allies to twist in the previous gale of Communism brought us millions dead, hundreds of thousands of refugees and an expanded push by the USSR to defeat the US via proxy war. That led to the USSR getting stuck in Afghanistan and the US being unable to deal with Nationalist Radical Islam and non-Nation State IslamoFascism. That brought multiple and repeated attacks upon the people, armed forces and actual soil of the United States. Running *then* has changed the world for the worse *now*. The barbarian butchers who do not fight war by civilized means have actually attacked here and home and their agents continue to flow into this Nation, barely checked through the normal screening processes and unchecked across the Southern US border.

Running emboldens the enemies of Freedom and Liberty and condemns millions of individuals, who we told that these were good things to fight for, to lives of chaos, destruction, loss of freedom and liberty and the resumption of those trying to build an Empire. Running in the face of those being murdered because they seek to be free is abdicating freedom and liberty at its source: Our collective belief in it.

When the Nation takes up a responsibility to help a People out from under a tyrant or rescue them from dire peril, it is dishonorable and disgusting to then throw them back into a worse situation and run from them so that freedom can die there because of the few scratches we have taken as a Nation. The winds of Communism are nothing compared to the enveloping maw of the maelstrom of Empire that seeks to make everyone subservient and slave to that Empire. Because when you do, you are admitting that Freedom and Liberty are not worth fighting for at ANY PRICE because YOU have no belief in it for individuals.

Running in a battle is cowardice.

It usually gets you killed, too.

Solution III - Find a Dictator!
Now isn't that a grand thing for the Republic of Free People to think of?

What part of 'rights of the individual' and 'representative democracy' go with Dictatorship?

And dictators have made the world such a nice place, now, haven't they? Freedom all over the Globe because of them! Right?

When you seek a 'man for good for our time' you are seeking a temporary solution that may make things a bit better for a few months or a year, but then devolve into authoritarian or totalitarian States. Lovely concept that some are putting forward with this, isn't it?

Maybe we need one of those dictators at home as We have proven so incapable of dealing with the world that no good solutions are put forth. Why not? If you propose it for one democracy, then it should be ok with Ours now, right?

Solution IV - Put the Iraqi Military in Charge!
And the fingers all point to Turkey as such a fine example of that! And they now have multiple, internal terrorist groups being funded by al Qaeda and Iran and home-grown Kurds so that bombings and assassinations are frequent there.

When their Army *does* step in, note that they just kill off the worst of those and the rest then spread and fester after 'normality' is resumed. There does, finally, come a time when the Turkish Military will be so divided inside itself that it will not cohere to do that thing. To date they have used a harsh brand of Nationalism to keep themselves whole as a military organization. But they still reflect their population and culture and that harsh Nationalism is being diluted by IslamoFascism and the time will come, possibly soon, when this temporary solution will get washed out in a large scale internal struggle.

Putting the Iraqi Military in charge is a direct 180 degree turn BACK to the Saddam era in conception and to the normal state of affairs in the Arab world. Say, that is so stable now, isn't it? All those other Arabs haven't been funding terrorist groups, insurgents and the such like now, have they?

The concept of a 'professional military' that adheres to its Nation and is under the control of the Civil Government is what we are trying to BUILD to COUNTER the rest of the Arab and Islamic view of the world. That means that when you put them in control, you have just broken every word given by the US to the Iraqi People and demonstrate that our holding these due process means of establishing a Government are just hot air and not firm ideals held by the Nation.

And remember, if you like it in Iraq, then why not here at home? We have whole slews of problems that are killing people due to illegal drugs, prostitution, and some number of folks here illegally that are diminishing the Nation and stealing good jobs from Americans who are ALREADY out of work. Why not put the military in charge as our elected leaders have proven so incapable of dealing with these things?

Or is it only dictatorship and authoritarianism abroad that you support?

And not the universal ideals of liberty, freedom and just government of, by and for the People.

Solution V - Lets call in the Enemy to HELP!
Now there's a concept for you!

Yes, the very folks supporting the end of Nation States and the building of Empire should be called in so they can tell US exactly what WE should do to help them on that path.

Such swell people are those proposing this!

My guess is that they would really love to have an Empire that opposes the United States and threatens liberty and freedom on a Global scale as that is what such a concept will get you.

Somehow that doesn't seem to be holding to much of anything in the way of universal ideals for humans, and much in the way of universal slavery.

Want to know how this sort of thing works out?

Ever hear of 'The Sudetenland'?

'Peace in Our Time'?

It is appeasement. And leads to worse ends *sooner* rather than later.

None of these conceptions actually attempts to address the ideals that the United States holds in making it possible to have Freedom and Liberty.

And the #1 most reprehensible thing I hear are those who purport that the lives of those lost fighting to gain and retain liberty are lost 'in vain'.

'It isn't worth the cost.'

Strangely, those that founded this Nation paid a higher and dearer cost than has ever been inflicted upon the United States thereafter. 10% of the Nation dead. 15% fled to other places.

And 75% who mourned that cost and realized that Liberty and Freedom come at a very high price.

The cost of not doing so is to lose both Freedom and Liberty and the goal of democracy which is to support BOTH. Using those dying to create a Free Nation is cowardice on Our part in not supporting those who fight to be Free.

In this grand and global village, we hear the outcries of those being slaughtered by barbarians wishing to rule by force.

I find it strange that there are those in a Nation of Free People willing to start pulling out the shackles so that more can be enslaved and killed. While the enemies of the People are measuring Our throats and limbs and see those same shackles as a fine fit.

For us.

No comments: