Yesterday will be remembered as one of the darker days in American history, and indeed, the world at large. It is a day where the Worlds lone superpower, the United States of America, officially rebuked her troops, and the idea of defeating terrorism.
Story: "The Democratic-controlled House issued a symbolic rejection of President Bush's decision to deploy more troops to Iraq on Friday, opening an epic confrontation between Congress and commander in chief over an unpopular war that has taken the lives of more than 3,100 U.S. troops.
The vote on the nonbinding measure was 246-182, and within minutes, Democrats said their next move would be to challenge Bush's request for $93 billion in new funds for the Pentagon.
"The stakes in Iraq are too high to recycle proposals that have little prospect for success," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leader of Democrats who gained power last fall in elections framed by public opposition to the war.
"The passage of this legislation will signal a change in direction in Iraq that will end the fighting and bring our troops home," she vowed after the vote, in which 17 Republicans joined 229 Democrats in a wartime rebuke to the president."
What does this accomplish? A radical emboldening of the enemy, and a swift kick in the back of the legs to the our soldiers.
What lesson of history is being forgotten here? Vietnam. In the early years, the combined power of the United States Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force was cleaning house in the jungle, only to be restrained by the 'leadership' back home. We lost that war because of the idiotic, shortsighted, political considerations of the politicians back home.
And so, we withdrew in shame, with our soldiers dying as they ran. And once we were gone, millions of Cambodians and Laos were killed in a genocide.
Fast forward to today. We took Iraq down in one of the most brilliant military campaigns in world history, only to be assailed for destroying some museums.
We began the process of building a new infrastructure, one that took more then 50 years to build in the US, and the military and the contractors were assailed by the left, saying we weren't moving fast enough. We have killed tens of thousand, possible hundreds of thousands of terrorists, with the loss of 3000 US soldiers. That is one of the most miraculous death tolls in world history, fighting an enemy for 3 years, on their turf, on the ground, in an urban environment, and only losing 3000 US Soldiers?
And yet, that is to many to lose in this war on terror, to be protecting the United States from another 9/11. Because you know what else?
That is another lesson the liberals have forgotten, the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Why did the Muslim Nazi Osama Bin Laden think he could pull it off? Because the US was soft on the warlords in Somalia, 'Black Hawk Down' we know it as in the common tongue. Because we withdrew after a little bloodshed, rather then knocking the Warlord and his cronies into hell.
And so, we come to today, where again, the politicians back home stand up, spit in our soldiers face, turn around, and shake the hand of evil.
But not all is lost in our house, you don't mess with Texas.
"Rep. Sam Johnson of Texas to close their case - and the former Vietnam prisoner of war stepped to the microphone as lawmakers in both parties rose to applaud his heroism.
"Now it's time to stand up for my friends who did not make it home, and for those who fought and died in Iraq already," he said. "We must not cut funding for our troops. We must stick by them," he added, snapping off a salute as he completed his remarks to yet another ovation."
Other Congressmen stepped up to the plate:
"Fighting fires, Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C.
"Just as we know our fire chiefs would call up additional firefighters to contain a spreading fire, we must give our troops in Baghdad the chance to suppress violence and stabilize the region, which protects American families. In conclusion, God bless our troops and we will never forget September the 11th."
Wilson voted for the increase."
"Frontiersman Davy Crockett at the Alamo, Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo.
"Picture Davy Crockett at the Alamo. He has his back to the wall. Santa Ana has got thousands of troops. So he gets his BlackBerry out. He checks with Congress. Congress says, 'Hey, Davy, we really support you but we're not going to send you any troops.' That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me."
Akin supported the increase. "
In the end, the strength of the majority won this battle, and emboldened the enemy, assailed the troops, and have begun to deny the president any authority in Foreign Policy.
On the brighter side of things, in a place I usually deride as a haven for liberalism and rash, unthinking actions, we have the US Senate. The republicans there plan to block the bill.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
I would agree that now we are in Iraq we need to finish, (wheather we should have gone in the first place is questionable, but no longer matters) but as to Vietnam, by what right are we global policemen? Such ideas violate the policies our nation was founded on. America's foriegn policy with other countries was originally buisness transactions ONLY. Under that policy you simply don't make enemies.
What a mess... Unfortunately, I don't see things getting any better anywhere in the near future.
Know what scares me? I have often tried to take a long view of America's position in the world, as well as its internal condition, and compare it with biblical examples of what happens when God judges a nation.
When Israel was hauled off to Babylon in the days of Daniel, believers such as Daniel suffered right along with the unfaithful. Of course, we know that God had His purpose and sovereignly used Daniel for His glory in Babylon. But the point is, the fact that there were faithful believers in Israel (a minority) did not keep judgment from falling on Israel.
Are we any different in America? We wonder how much of the country could be so brain dead and faithless to what is right. Look at how immorality is increasingly not just tolerated, but celebrated in our culture. Much of the church gives it a "ho hum." What if God is in the process of "giving over" America as described in Romans 1?
I hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised. May He enable me to be a faithful Daniel no matter what happens.
Thank goodness we have a president like George Bush who will ignore all the nonsense congress spews out.
there is only one solution: Dresdenization.
if we wont do it, we need to get out.
total war, or no war, is the only way to fight a war.
i spelled this out once...
last month it was.
Under, I'm glad you believe we need to finish the job.
However, I'd like the point out how flawed isolationism is.
I would like to point you to an essay I wrote, outlining the historical response to terrorism by the United States.
http://pushbackignorance.blogspot.com/2006/12/historical-response-to-terrorism-and.html
Now, Thomas Jefferson, one of our founders, went to war with an overseas crimnal empire, in another sovrign nation's territory. Until that time, we were 'just contucting buisness'.
Now perhaps you have ignored the lessons of the War of 1812. We were innocently going about our buisness, and England began impressing our merchant saliors into Her Majestys Royal Navy.
So, we went to war, and got our capital burned for our troubles.
Perhaps you don't remember the Mexican war, where a group of texans were attacked on US soil, just conducting buisness. We went to war with that, and it was one of our 'founders' driving us onward.
The policy of Isolationism is flawed, and the greatest example is Pearl Harbor. We did not do anything to the Japanese, and at the end of the day, 3000 americans were dead. Likewise, by the end of 9/11, 3000 americans were dead without provocation.
So, because we cannot sit by and watch the oceans protect us, we must take the fight to evil in the world, where ever it might rest. The communists in the jungles of Vietnam, or the Sands of the middle east, we need to do our job and fight the evil that seeks to destroy us.
Daweed, very true.
Raben, they definatly will now be getting better if the house continues on this direction.
Sola, God was going to spare Abrhams city if but 5 people were found ritcheous. There are still many christians acting as lights in this nation of ours.
Bryan, I hope Bush stays the course. His current pandering to Nancy Pelosi has me worried.
Gino, can you put a link up to that post? I'd like to read it.
http://suchislifeblog.blogspot.com/2007/01/what-i-want-to-hear-but-wont-so-wont.html
here is the link.
but, as for japan.
yes, we did provoke them through trade sanctions. we made it clear that we were a threat to their empire building. they struck first, but not until we provoked them diplomatically.
i have another post about minding our own busness,too.
december,it was.
First of all, that was a very will written paper, but there are a few things I would like to point out.
First, it is not isolation that I am talking about, I simply mean that the U.S. govenment has absolutely NO authority in foriegn countries. If an american buisnessman choses to build a buisness in another country, we don't go bail them out of they get attacked or in trouble, its their risk.
1812: the roots of that go back to the American Revolution which is highly debateable wheater or not it was just.
Concernign the American-Mexican war, you must also remember the viewpoint of the mexicans, to them we were stealing part of their land, they simply wanted it back. What did they get for their troubles? the Loss of new mexico and california.
Pearl harbot is perhaps the greatest example of all, as gino points out, we did provoke them. In fact it goes even futher than that. Before pearl harbor we supplies england with war goods, we gave money to england and china to fight japan, we sent supported russia with oil, we reduced and/or cut off vital war supplies (iron, oil, etc.) to japan, and lastly we sent destroyers into the Bungo Straight, japanese home waters. Remember all this was BEFORE pearl harbor.
My last point is that for a country to fight evil, it must first be good. What % of our government is truly christian? I would say it is the job of the individual to spread the gospel, not the government. If you read John Locke's 2nd treatise of government (possible the single most influentual work in the founding of our nation) you will find that the purpose of the government is to protect property, not impose religious beliefs. and CERTIANLY not protect the rights of other countries. Government by consent only.
Post a Comment