Monday, February 26, 2007

From Hanoi Jane to Jihad Jane: It's the March of the Peace Fascists

I haven’t spoken at an anti-war rally in 34 years, because I’ve been afraid that because of the lies that have, and continue to be spread about me and that war, that they would be used to hurt this new anti-war movement. But silence is no longer an option. I’m so sad that we still have to do this, that we did not learn the lessons from the Vietnam War.- Jane Fonda, last month

My Cindy Sheehan video post "expires" tomorrow.

Anti-war movements don't stop wars. Peace protests do not end suffering. They enable even more violence to take place. Nor are such movements popular with the American people. Jane Fonda and her peace cronies learned all the wrong lessons from Vietnam.

The anti-war movement of the 60's and 70's give themselves far too much credit for Vietnam. Not only do I question their actual effectiveness (at least in the manner in which they saw their influence), I also question their motives for protest back then.

Something to note: By the end of 1971, under Richard Nixon, the draft had ended. There were major peace protests throughout 1968 and into 1971. Operation Linebacker II was the most intense bombing of the war, and took place during Christmas of 1972. Any protests? Any peace movement marches? Nada. Zippo. Zilch. The peace protestors remained largely silent, because the popularity of the movement was motivated by self-interest in not wanting to serve. After the draft ended, so too did the majority support for these idiotic marches, which only fueled more violence; not less.

Richard Nixon committed himself when he became president to the idea of "Vietnamization", which was to train more and more South Vietnamese troops to become self-sufficient; and consequently, part of the plan was the steady troop withdrawal and intensified bombing. In '72, when Nixon was running for re-election, and after Operation Linebacker II, he finally got the North Vietnamese onboard with the Paris Peace Accords. Part of the package included two secret agreements: one was billions of dollars in reparations, after the war. But the North did not get it, because they had broken their agreement by invading the South. The 2nd secret agreement was with the South Vietnamese. He gave them a solemn pledge, in writing, that if the North broke agreements, and invaded the South, America would get back in, and provide whatever aid the South needed; even troop support. Unfortunately for the South Vietnamese, Nixon was driven from office by the Watergate scandal. When the North Vietnamese invaded the South, an unelected President in the form of Gerald Ford pleaded with Congress to enforce our agreements and honor our pledge to our South Vietnamese allies. In 1975, more than one million innocent Vietnamese fled in terror from a massive invasion by the North. Congress and the anti-war movement did nothing to alleviate the suffering.

As a constant reminder of what President Ford deemed to be his failure, he kept the U.S. Embassy (Saigon) stairs in his library. It wasn't President Ford's failure: It was America's failure.

And it is the Mother Sheehans, the Michael Bergs, the Hollywood know-nothing liberals, and the Jihad Janes who wish the same fate to befall Iraq. Uh-uh. Never again. Not on our watch.

The compassion of pacifists such as Jihad Jane, is in the abstract. It is in the childish naivete. They never ask of themselves, "What happens now?" "What will be the end results and consequences of my actions?" This is the typical mindset of liberal d0-gooders: they back "feel-good" policies, without ever pondering if their actions actually bring about the desired objective; often, they have the opposite effect.

Feminists, human rights advocates, should be at the forefront of ensuring that democracy succeeds in Iraq. But instead, they are a dead weight....a ball-and-chain every step of the way when it comes to doing what it actually takes to create a better world. Rather than blaming the violence on the violence makers, they blame it on us, the true peacemakers.

The anti-war left is angry for what got us into this war; you want to debate it? Fine. But don't undermine and endanger the mission and lives of American soldiers. Real anger should be leveled at the radical Islamic militants; at the ones who have nothing to offer the Iraqi people other than a dismal future of suffering. The Left needs to get over themselves and quit wanting a Bush defeat more than they want an American and Iraqi victory. How does a premature withdrawal from Iraq make America safer; and how exactly is this showing compassion for the Iraqi people?


The terrorists and insurgents bombing the Iraqi people don't want America to leave; if they did, all they would have to do is stop the violence, and the American military would eagerly come home. What they want is an American defeat.

Back then, at least, we did not have an enemy that threatened to attack our homeland; today, we have enemies who are trying to do just that. They are on the defensive. Let's keep them that way.

On March 17th, the Peace fascists will be on the march, again. But so will we. Usually, it's the tantrum-throwing Left that is good at making noise and making an embarrassing spectacle of themselves. But on March 17th, we will see who makes the most effective noise and sends the clearest message to our enemies and allies.

I will post my "A Gathering of Eagles" post, soon.

Hat tip to Michael Medved for the history lesson

Labels: , , , , ,

6 Comments:

Blogger Mike's America said...

Speaking of peace fascists on the march:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/96/225008801_ff32ab51d7_o.jpg

Monday, February 26, 2007 8:48:00 PM  
Blogger Marty said...

Peace fascists? Sigh.

Wordsmith, I still don't understand why a young strong guy like you who supports what we are doing in Iraq isn't joining up to help. I don't get it. If it is that important to you that we "win" (whatever that means) then why are you refusing to lend a helping hand and be all you can be? What are you waiting for? It makes no sense to me. You think you support the troops, but in reality you don't. You deceive yourself. You don't have a clue.

My son is done. Now it's your turn.

Monday, February 26, 2007 9:40:00 PM  
Blogger MonicaR said...

Oh get over it Marty - that's an old one. Your talking points are expired and they're on to the new ones now.

Word - are you going on the 17th? Troll and I are trying to get a babysitter for that day. I hope that we can go and if you are there we would love to meet you.

Monday, February 26, 2007 10:17:00 PM  
Blogger MonicaR said...

Oh get over it Marty - that's an old one. Your talking points are expired and they're on to the new ones now.

Word - are you going on the 17th? Troll and I are trying to get a babysitter for that day. I hope that we can go and if you are there we would love to meet you.

Monday, February 26, 2007 10:18:00 PM  
Blogger The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Marty,

It's strange that you should pop in here at this particular moment. You're one day early. I've had 3 things I wanted to post about on or before February 27th. One of these had to do with the chickenhawk charge. The other is an announcement. The third, can wait.

Since my chickenhawk post might not get finished, as the whole charge is stupid to me, I'll just cut-and-paste what I've posted in various comments sections before:


Ok...dammit. I guess I'll just have to type this out as I go. It looks like if I saved a response to file, I don't have it at hand now, where I can find it. I have a lot to say on chickenhawks, but don't want to spend it all, justifying myself to you.

First off, you have no idea what I do or don't do, in terms of support. There are many ways to support the troops.

Second, I don't disparage anyone who doesn't "sign up". Military service is not for everyone. There are other ways to support the war effort, patriotically, without ever putting on a uniform. Will you disparage those in uniform who do not serve on the frontlines, as a combat infantryman? The majority of soldiers never ever get to fire a shot at the "bad guys". Do the opinions of those in direct combat trump the voices of the military chaplains, the mechanics, the cooks, the intelligence analysts, etc. sitting back at the base?

Frankly, I could give a rat's ass if all the pro-war Republicans are cowards. That they are afraid of combat and afraid to die. I'm ok with it. Because do you know why? Because many of these so-called chickenhawks appreciate the troops, for the very fact that these men and women are placing their lives in danger to keep the rest of us safe. They are the warriors of society that keep my children safe and make my way of life possible. And because of that, I have a deep sense of gratitude and appreciation for what our men and women in uniform are doing on our behalf.

Go to any conservative blog, and 10 times out of 10, I wager, these blogs are deeply appreciative of what soldiers do on a routine basis.
We don't take their service and sacrifice lightly. I can't say the same thing about many of the lefty blogs I've visited.

What do they post on Memorial Day or Veteran's Day? Most of what I saw, were just anti-war/anti-Bush screeds. Nothing to really say, honoring soldiers; just using the occasions to disparage the current war, and use the memory of soldiers for political fodder.


Do you believe in fighting fires? Do you believe in criminals being stopped, Marty? Because that's dangerous work. I think last I heard, Los Angeles was experiencing a shortage of LAPD officers. Why aren't you out there, supporting law enforcement by signing up? Why do they have to be the ones to place their lives in jeopardy with every car they pull over; with every home they investigate for disturbance of the peace? Why do they have to be the ones out there, protecting society from being victimized by career criminals?

Do you know what the most dangerous profession is, Marty? It's being a fisherman. I believe being a logger is the second most dangerous, but I can't remember, precisely. So, do you like to eat seafood? Are you a chickenhawk of the sea, for not risking your life out on fishing boats? Perhaps you do catch your own fish...perhaps not. Why should I care? I don't.

The chickenhawk argument doesn't fly with me, Marty. Not one wit. Because it's no argument at all. It is merely a ploy, designed to shut down debate, as one soldier put it.

That's all for tonight. Please return back tomorrow, for a new post. Maybe I'll combine the chickenhawk thing and an announcement, into one post.

Politics aside, I'm glad your son is home, alive, Marty.

Monica,

I have a previous commitment on the 17th, so I will be in town. Hopefully, there will be something local that I can take part in.

I hope you and troll can go! I think it will definitely be the place to be.

Monday, February 26, 2007 11:40:00 PM  
Blogger Mike's America said...

Yeah "smarty" I'll just echo Monica's comment:

"Oh get over it Marty - that's an old one. Your talking points are expired and they're on to the new ones now."

Get some new material. Besides your son (who I hope makes more sense than YOU do) What have YOU done to serve your country?

Sorry, but behaving like a peace fascist slinging around allegations against everyone with a viewpoint that dissents from your own doesn't qualify.

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:58:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

© Copyright, Sparks from the Anvil, All Rights Reserved