Joe Sobran was a thinker. As a result, he was not welcome by the War Party/NeoCon movement.
And the War Party/NeoCons still are fearful and consequently dismissive of those who question the US' foreign policy--which, you might have noticed, has resulted in almost continuous war since the first Bush.
Southern Avenger, via St Louis Catholic, took some excerpts of Sobran's thought. They're worth knowing, as the TEA Party's next move will soon be made.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
So are you calling neoconservatives unpatriotic?
You read his article.
Make up your own mind.
Are you calling for continuous war?
Good stuff.
At the risk of being squishy here..
Is there not some alternative, someplace in between. Or are the only two options continuous war or isolationism.
I see all of these issues as far more nuanced. And the narrative seems to focus on the Middle East exclusively. While we ignore the looming economic threats of our pending entitlement crush and the debt/natural resource/manufacturing crisis with China.
Just sayin'
Nuanced, yes.
While the US has interests which must be protected, it is NOT our job to run a cop-shop, nor to "build democracy" (which happens to be utterly foreign to the Muslim mind.)
We have troops all over the globe, and we have them in places where there are productive economies (Germany anyone?) We have them, STILL, in Kosovo.
Empires are extremely hard to maintain forever.
As to the Far East, we should keep our eyes on the Taiwanese ball, but does that require troops in Korea AND the Philippines?
Hmmmm.
I agree with questioning why we have troops and bases where we do all over the world. Germany is an outstanding example.
Seems that the EU was able to build that welfare state and superior attitude because the US paid for their defense for 60+ years. Time to shut that stuff down.
With the far east - you forgot about Diego Garcia and Japan - but I thought most everything was out of the PI now. The Japanese and Korean citizens regularly protest our presence there. I'd be perfectly happy with pulling back to US territory like Guam and Hawaii.
As far as places like Kosovo (and Korea for that matter).... It would truly suck for the citizens there, but since those actions are UN sanctioned, I say let the Blue Helmets have at it. It would be a great way to show the rank corruption and incompetence of the UN in action and a good reason to stop send them so much money.
The Middle East still gets funky unless we finally tell the environmentalists to pound sand and start using our own natural resources to jump start our economy and industrial sector again. I guess I just don't see any ability to be "pure" from a foreign policy standpoint in the near future until we can do that. Foreign policy and our economy right now are horribly twisted around the same axle.
Actually I've advocated a troop presence in the M.E. precisely because that's where the oil is.
But jut enough to protect the oil. All the rest should come home.
We can get them back there if we have to.
With regard to Chesterton's point about taking down gates in the road: just what is the US national interest in the Philippines?
If you dig up your copy of Donovan's Reef, you'll get to hear John Wayne singing bits of the old song "The Monkeys Have No Tails in Zamboanga." It's true -- I've been there, and they don't. But why were any of us there to begin with? Is there a reason we should still be there now?
I really don't think we have a presence in the Phillipines anymore. They shut down the naval presence in the 1990's and I can't find anything recent with any reference to the PI anymore. Pretty sure they pulled what was needed back to Diego Garcia.
No, ma'am, that's not right. You will find what you're looking for if you search for JSOTF-P.
But SpecOps does not a major presence or base make.
Is it your assertion that we pull back all those folks too?
That brings me back to my original question of is there something in between perpetual full-on war and isolationism?
Well, the JSOTF-P has two small bases: one in Manila, and a camp inside of WESTMINCOM in Zamboanga. As I said, I've been there; and a few places further south.
But you mistake me. I'm not arguing to remove them. I just want to make sure that, before we argue for removing them, we are sure we remember why we put them there at all.
Initially the US was in the Philippines under TR.
Continuing presence in W Pacific has to do with McArthur's monitum: maintaining a perimeter defense.
(By the way, I note that Diego Garcia has not yet tipped over and fallen into the water despite the Navy arrival.)
The question is twofold: "where", and "how much" is the strategic necessity.
Smart missiles, smart bombs, and unmanned airships have changed the tactical underlay to strategy, as have methods of warfare.
Clearly, PRChina is restive. But are they acquisitive? And if so, what do they seek to acquire?
I think you know that I'm sanguine about China; but as to that question, here's a website in China with a map that will probably help.
So do you mean sanguine as the optimistic or bloody definition?
Just wondering.
It might be reasonable to be either, but I meant the optimistic one. The rising military cadre in China is much more aggressive and anti-American; but I lived in China for a while with my wife, and I absolutely don't get that sense from the people. I think China's heart is with its stomach these days: after the terror of Mao, what they really like is the idea that they're getting rich and comfortable.
Plus, you have to factor in the one-child policy. It plays in two different ways. First, they only have one son -- their only child -- to send to war. It's different than when they might have had fourteen sons, and trouble feeding them some years.
Second, because of the one child policy, China is headed for a demographic collapse that is going to seriously test their economic structure. In other words, I think they'll be too busy with their internal problems to successfully push out to the second island chain -- perhaps not even the first.
However, they may will win the part of that first line that is in the South China Sea. That's going to be a major source of friction with Japan and South Korea (and Taiwan). So, we'll see.
The Neocons gift to Christians World Wide
http://www.prisonplanet.com/christianity-may-be-eradicated-in-iraq-and-afghanistan-says-chair-of-u-s-religious-freedom-commission.html
Post a Comment