So....what's wrong with nationalism?
Like the 1980 U.S. Hockey Team victory over the favored Soviet Union, an injection of national pride.
Marie's Two Cents
Illuminating the untempered soul and the blunt mind by hammering out sparks of Clarity and Truth on the Anvil of Debate.
"Sometimes, you go to war with the media you have, not the media you wish you had"
ger·ry·man·der (jr-mndr, gr-)tr.v. ger·ry·man·dered, ger·ry·man·der·ing, ger·ry·man·dersTo divide (a geographic area) into voting districts so as to give unfair advantage to one party in elections.n.1. The act, process, or an instance of gerrymandering.2. A district or configuration of districts differing widely in size or population because of gerrymandering.
the real story here isn’t “Thomas” or “Beauchamp” or even the accuracy of his “reporting”, but rather The New Republic’s crass effort to besmirch the war effort with the former “Thomas Diarists”. It’s interesting that Beauchamp writes, “My pieces were always intended to provide my discreet view of the war; they were never intended as a reflection of the entire U.S. Military.” While it’s hard to take this claim at face value, in TNR’s hands they served exactly that purpose.This may have already happened, as one Malkin reader writes in,
TNR isn’t the New Yorker; it doesn’t publish articles solely for their artistic merit. Rather, as we learned yesterday, TNR under Franklin Foer’s command aims to “explicate ideas.” The idea in need of explication regarding the "Thomas Diarists" was just how sociopathic and depraved our military has become. TNR made no effort to put Beauchamp’s writings into context of the 160,000 men and women who, unlike Private Beauchamp, are serving honorably and nobly in Iraq. What’s more, Franklin Foer’s subsequent comments that Beauchamp’s tales represented “mild practical jokes” implied that the diaries were really just the tip of iceberg regarding American malfeasance in Iraq.
The simple fact is that up until now the American left has done everything possible to discredit the war effort in Iraq. Except for one thing – they’ve at least publicly professed to “support the troops.”Once again, as I’ve said all along, you can’t “support the troops” while publishing agitprop that suggests the troops are a bunch of sociopaths. The Nation went after the troops a couple of weeks ago; the “Thomas Diarists” were The New Republic’s tepid entry into the field. As regards the accuracy of Beauchamp’s charges, I’m sure we’ll be hearing from his superiors before the sun sets in Iraq.
Michelle Malkin also points out the following lines of poetry written by Scott Thomas Beauchamp, which ends with a John Kerry moment of "look-to-the-future-political-self-interest" reason for military service:
I’m active Army & an Iraq vet.
I just pulled up “Scott Thomas Beauchamp” on the secure “Army Knowledge Online” website. It lists his current rank as “PV2″. (That data is kept accurate via pay records on that website.)
In his Sep 06 blog post he listed his rank as “Private First Class”. That indicates that without a doubt he was busted at least one rank as part of Article 15 proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and he likely has a strong ax to grind with his chain of command.
I cant do it without getting through this army experience first, which will add a legitimacy to EVERYTHING i do afterwards, and totally bolster my opinions on defense, etc, and of course its making me a lot less lazy, just because im not use to being lazy any more, etc.Malkin has much more.
Iraq is not a breeding ground for terrorists, but a burying ground. General Petraeus, from my interview with him this morning:Even though the MSM likes to highlight every U.S. soldier that dies in Iraq (not to honor the fallen, but to will the American public into defeat), underscore the negative setbacks, and selectively reports on the bad news, we are not "losing"; unless it's in our own fevered minds. Perception and perspective is everything.[A]s you know, we try to avoid body counting, but inevitably, obviously, it is something we keep track of, because we're trying to have some sense of the damage we are doing to al Qaeda-Iraq, its affiliates, other Sunni insurgent groups, and also certainly to the Shia militia extremist elements. And the answer to that in a general sense is that they are losing many, many hundreds of their, of these different elements each month, certainly since the onset of the surge.
At first, he said, they would only target Shia, but over time the new al Qaeda directed attacks against Sunni, and then anyone who thought differently. The official reported that on a couple of occasions in Baqubah, al Qaeda invited to lunch families they wanted to convert to their way of thinking. In each instance, the family had a boy, he said, who was about 11 years old. As LT David Wallach interpreted the man’s words, I saw Wallach go blank and silent. He stopped interpreting for a moment. I asked Wallach, “What did he say?” Wallach said that at these luncheons, the families were sat down to eat. And then their boy was brought in with his mouth stuffed. The boy had been baked. Al Qaeda served the boy to his family.Iraqis love their children.
Over here, the fact of al Qaeda murdering children is just that: it’s a fact. How they chose to commit the murders is a variable that changes from incident to incident. I’ve written often about how Iraqis, as a rule, love and greatly value their children. This makes the children especially vulnerable as targets for terrorists. That is a brutal fact.Al Qaeda drinks and uses drugs here. This is not propaganda. This is not even news, it’s a fact that I wrote about back in 2005.Religious extremism- that has no equal in any other major modern religions- has made human beings into human aberrations. Even Iraqis once allied to them are seeing who the real killers of Muslims and Iraqis are. And it's not us.
Al Qaeda’s ultimate failure in much of Anbar and now in parts of Diyala relates back to one of the pillars of success—or failure—in this war: Values. People who understand how to tamp down this war realize the critical pillar that values can play into success or failure in counterinsurgency, or COIN.
Abu Ali said that on 1 April 2007, he and his people attacked al Qaeda in Buhriz for their crimes against Islam. He also said something that many Muslims have said to me: al Qaeda are not Muslims. (Both Sunni and Shia have said nearly the exact same words, at times on video.) Abu Ali said they fought hard against al Qaeda, and on 10 April, they asked the Americans to join the attack. It worked.
Before the tape was running, I asked Abu Ali why he and the 1920s turned against al Qaeda in Buhriz. Speaking through LT David Wallach, a native Arabic speaker, Abu Ali said that “al Qaeda is an abomination of Islam: cutting off heads, stealing people’s money, kidnapping . . . every type of torture they have done.”In the aftermath of major combat in Operation Arrowhead Ripper,
The recent stories of baked children came to mind. I asked if Abu Ali had heard about children being baked. Ali said no, he had not heard such a story, but he would not be surprised if it were true because al Qaeda had done so many crimes, such as cutting off a man’s head, putting it up on a stick and parading it around town.
The big news on the streets today is that the people of Baqubah are generally ecstatic, although many hold in reserve a serious concern that we will abandon them again [*cough*Harry Reid whiteflag RepublicansDemocrat surrendermonkeys *cough*- ws]. For many Iraqis, we have morphed from being invaders to occupiers to members of a tribe. I call it the “al Ameriki tribe,” or “tribe America.”
4. Or it could be our modern media world (cable, blogs, talk radio), means that no president can make it through two terms without getting banged up...I think Lewis touches upon something vitally important, in the changing world: the information flow. Before President Bush took office, we had never had the kind of access to information at our fingertips, the likes of which we now possess. It has been a mixed bag of good and bad; and I think the nature of warfare is forever changed, due to today's technology in the hands of ordinary folk.
Bush Derangement Syndrome is not something that "used to" exist. It is alive and well -- and apparently growing. While Peggy says that no one thinks anymore that those afflicted with the syndrome are unhinged. I do, as do many others, and I deeply lament that Peggy is giving cover to the vicious, indefensible assaults against Bush from the left since 2000.Donald Lambro has a good piece on why history will likely vindicate President Bush.
But how many countries will continue to cooperate with the United States when they know that the terrorists are in this for the long haul, while the U.S. can abandon them to their fate at any moment, whenever it becomes politically expedient at home?Here is an excerpt from Part II of Sowell:
What has gone right is that the Iraq war is already over. Our troops won it. But our politicians may once more lose the peace -- and with disastrous consequences for us and for the world.Sometimes, Dennis Prager can be the Caliph of Clarity:
Peace has not been achieved in Iraq, though pacification continues -- always at a cost in American lives -- and shows signs of progress, much to the dismay of those who have bet their political future on an American defeat.
Defeatists have not yet had the courage to directly ensure defeat by cutting off the money to continue military operations in Iraq.
That would be taking responsibility for the defeat.
The sad truth is that moral courage is rare -- whether among private citizens or among political leaders. Even opponents of the war have to admit that, given the polls, it takes no courage for a politician to call for American withdrawal from Iraq. Whether or not you agree with those who want American forces to stay in Iraq, that is a far more courageous position in today's America -- just as, right or wrong, it admittedly took more courage for a politician to oppose the war when America deposed Saddam Hussein's regime.Should America fail in Iraq, I will not hold President Bush up as the cause for failure. He has remained firm and unwavering, even as those around him seem to either blow with the breeze, like paper tigers knocked down by windbags; or suffer the contagion of "Bush fatigue" under the constant, unrelenting onslaught of BSD from the MSM. It's shaped perception, even amongst those of us who remain supportive of our President. We may still support our efforts in Iraq, but we are not unaffected by the saturation of negativity and pessimism.
And how often in history did the right thing not take courage? And how often was the right position the most popular position?I may be ridiculed for being in the minority position, amongst the 20-30 per centers....that I am out of touch with the mainstream. Good. I am proud to stand in the company of those who understand the consequences of withdrawal and defeat; of those willing to do what's right, even when it's not what is popular.
And the Speaker During the Price Spike Was . . .Hat tip: Thomas Lifson of American Thinker
An eagle-eyed Senate GOP aide, perusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Web site, calls attention to her assertion there that "Americans are paying more than double for gas than when President Bush first took office."
She says the average price per gallon when he took office in 2001 was $1.47 and had reached $3.22 by May 21.
So that means gas prices went up by $1.75 a gallon over six years. But more than half of that increase, 90 cents, our source says, has come in the past six months -- the six months that she's been speaker of the House. Our source says the average price per gallon on Jan. 3, the day before she became speaker, was $2.32.
Maybe Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) can lend her a bike.
If that's not enough bit of self-hatred, please convince me on how the following bit of "intellectual thinking" is "supporting our troops":
On this July 4, we would do well to renounce nationalism and all its symbols: its flags, its pledges of allegiance, its anthems, its insistence in song that God must single out America to be blessed.
Is not nationalism -- that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder -- one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred?
These ways of thinking -- cultivated, nurtured, indoctrinated from childhood on -- have been useful to those in power, and deadly for those out of power.
National spirit can be benign in a country that is small and lacking both in military power and a hunger for expansion (Switzerland, Norway, Costa Rica and many more). But in a nation like ours -- huge, possessing thousands of weapons of mass destruction -- what might have been harmless pride becomes an arrogant nationalism dangerous to others and to ourselves.
And those on the left wonder why they are constantly stigmatized and baggaged with labels like "un-American", "unpatriotic", and accused of "not supporting the troops"?
We see in Iraq that our soldiers are not different. They have, perhaps against their better nature, killed thousands of Iraq civilians. And some soldiers have shown themselves capable of brutality, of torture.
Yet they are victims, too, of our government's lies.