In any case, much is different today, but there are eerie echoes between Goldwater's tocsin and the West's approach to the global Islamist challenge, especially among the global collectivist-left (many of whom are literally in bed with our enemies).
I'll have more on the U.S. homefront in upcoming posts. For example, I want to share my thoughts on Jamie Glazov's new book, United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror.
In the meanwhile, Con Coughlin has a chilling report out of Britain at the London Telegraph, "Britain is Fighting a War – And We Are Too Soft on Our Enemies":
It's not just soldiers who win wars. Governments also have a crucial role to play – and to judge by the response of most Western governments to the threat we face from radical Islamism, we are simply not competing on equal terms with the enemy.Read the whole thing, here.
No one can claim that we in Britain don't understand the nature of the threat we face. In recent months, there has been a succession of reports highlighting the increasingly pernicious influence British Islamists are having on the Nato-led campaign to bring stability to Afghanistan.
After senior officers confirmed last year that British Muslims were fighting with the Taliban in southern Afghanistan, it was revealed that RAF Nimrod surveillance planes monitoring Taliban radio stations were surprised to hear insurgents speaking in strong Yorkshire or Midlands accents.
More recently, officers based at the main military base at Lashkar Gah revealed that they had found British-made components in roadside bombs used to attack coalition forces in southern Afghanistan, sent to Helmand by Muslim sympathisers in Britain. This week three British Muslims, part of a terrorist cell whose leader was convicted of plotting to kidnap and behead a British soldier on video, were jailed at the Old Bailey for supplying equipment to the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
The active involvement of radical British Muslims in the Afghan insurgency has led senior officers to claim that they are engaged in a "surreal mini-civil war" in Afghanistan. And yet, for all the compelling evidence that British-based Islamist radicals are actively participating in a jihad against Britain and its coalition allies, the Government, together with those who have opposed our involvement in the War on Terror from the start, seems determined to give the Islamist radicals the benefit of the doubt.
I'm reminded of Snooper's warnings for today's domestic enemies. And I'm not reassured by the new administration in Washington, which seems not unlike many of those back in the '50s, identified by Goldwater, who "never believed deeply that the Communists" were in earnest.
16 comments:
The moronic trolls of America's moonbat fruit loop brigades are at war with us here at home and we cannot be soft.
I came back from The War and found America asleep while we bled and died.
What for?
Thanks for visiting, Snooper!
Neoconservatives like yourself will not consider immigration and border control (it is for "defeatists" and "racists" like the previous commenter on this blog and true conservative Mike Tuggle) so what is your point?
For more war over there and more immigration here. Imperialism.
Professor,
I posted an article that coincides somewhat with your piece here entitled, "Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste."
Here's the link:
http://nosheepleshere.blogspot.com/2009/03/never-let-crisis-go-to-waste.html
Prof Douglas...I see your trolls are the same caliber mine are. The dumbest of the dumb.
Prof. I posted the same thing.
The Islamic hounds who protested and spewed their filth at the homecoming of British soldiers wasn't done out of principle (if that word should even be used). They didn't do it because they believe in free speech or are against war. On the contrary, because they deny the very right to others and if they had their first chance they would deny to everyone. Secondly, they are full supporters of war. It just isn't the West's idea of war.
It is an insurgency connected with the global jihad. They are enemies of the state and the British should act accordingly.
.
American Power,
Mr Goldwater has been shown to have been wrong in his assessment of the nature of the threat of the Soviet menace and seriousness of the ‘elite’. Your harkening back to a political thinker who has been proven to have been wrong, leads one to wonder about your abilities to observe with a clean eye and to analyze with clear thought. Perhaps you may want to try to find another ‘serious’ reactionary conservative thinker.
Mr Goldwater’s beliefs from the 1960s not withstanding, if the Communists were in earnest or not, does not matter. The Communists were doomed to fail and Mr Goldwater and his ilk were not able to see it at the time.
The Islamist Radical menace is also doomed to fail even if they are in earnest or not. The issue many seem to be missing in their hysterical fear of the “Islamist radical menace” is that the use of violence against established western societies and governments will not succeed.
The approaches to the nature and the seriousness of the perceive menace the western liberal elite have employed have been proven to be quite effective in defeating the threats. USA, the government of USA, or the majority of the people of USA were never at risk during the 11 September 2001 misguided and ineffectual attacks in New York and Virginia. The ‘troubles’ in Northern Ireland pose no risk to Ireland or Great Britain. Again history has shown this to be true.
Is it possible, it is you and your fellow alarmists who are wrong? Is it possible it is you who really do not understand the moral strength of the people of USA and their current administration in Washington?
>@:o?
.
You seem to be making baseless assumptions, Ema. What is the basis for your belief that the Soviets were "doomed to fail"?
Ema wants to have it both ways.
The Soviet Union was doomed to fail because its economic system was structurally deficient; therefore all the measures taken by conservatives over the years to combat Soviet activities was not just futile but immoral.
However, the only possible just paradigm for an economic system is central control by Government based on socialist ideals -- that is, the structure of the Soviet Union's economy. Morally we are obliged to institute such a system here in the United States, and conservative opposition to that is not just futile but immoral.
Ema and friends try not to allow the two assertions to be put forward that close together, lest somebody notice the inherent contradiction.
Regards,
Ric
Emma seems to be suffering from the standard leftist pathology whereby (given a moment to reorient in the face of new events) history can be made to conform to a glorious progressive narrative.
Jousting with left-wingers is boring due to their predictability. But the fun starts when one asks them to name things - hell, anything - they've ever been egregiously in error about. Few can rise to the challenge.
.
Anonymous,
"But the fun starts when one asks them to name things - hell, anything - they've ever been egregiously in error about. Few can rise to the challenge."
It is obvious that I was egregiously in error to think you, as well as Akatsukami, Snooper, and Ric Locke might be able to focus on the subject of the original post.
Ema Nymton
H@;o?
.
Great posting, Donald...
AubreyJ.........
Sheesh, Emma, where to start?
"Your harkening back to a political thinker who has been proven to have been wrong..."
While it was true that the Soviet Union was essentially a bass-ackward third-world empire, it just happened to be one that possessed nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.
Ever heard of a book called Red Star Rogue? This book, which was a followup to an earlier publication titled Blind Man's Bluff, but written after more information had been declassified, made a very convincing case that a rogue Soviet boomer captain had once tried to execute a ballistic missile launch against this nation, and had positioned his boat to make it appear to us that the attack had been carried out by the Chinese.
Fortunately, the missile exploded in its launch tube and sent the boomer to the bottom. The wreckage was later recovered by the Glomar Explorer and once examined, the evidence indicated that the boat had, in fact, been attempting a missile launch when it went to the bottom.
Imagine just what might have happened to this world had that missile launch been successful.
The USSR was hardly a paper tiger.
"Perhaps you may want to try to find another ‘serious’ reactionary conservative thinker."
I just love it when a lefty uses that term. But then again, the first rule of liberalism is to accuse the other side of being what the left itself actually is.
I am just surprised you didn't get around to the obligatory "NAZI" and "FASCIST" charge, too. That accusation always cracks me up, given that nazism/fascism and communism (what you on the left fondly refer to as "progressivism") are nearly identical ideologies.
In all cases, the government is tyrannical and the individuals get screwed.
"The Islamist Radical menace is also doomed to fail even if they are in earnest or not."
Tell that to the Spanish, the French, the British, a whole lot of people in Asia and most of those residing on the continent of Africa.
The Islamists are quietly regaining the areas of the world they once controlled, and are now expanding their influence right here in North America.
Been paying attention to the influence the 7th Century barbarians are wielding over the Canadian government?
The Islamists declared war on civilization fourteen centuries ago. The stated goal of this political movement disguised as a "religion" is ultimately world domination. They are not interested in peaceful coexistence with infidels.
I believe that, not only are they currently winning, but they will ultimately realize their goal, and will do so much sooner than most people think.
They will win not through the use of terrorism and force so much as they will ultimately out-populate their rivals.
Seen the recent birth rates in Europe and Canada?
Another reason I believe the Islamists will ultimately prevail is my sense that Western society has lost the will to not only protect others from tyranny, but to even defend itself in a fight for its own survival.
Seven decades ago, the civilized world rose up and kicked evil's ass.
Now, facing an evil even more threatening than fascism and Japanese imperialism combined, our government has decided to no-longer refer to those who want to kill every last man, woman and child in America as enemy combatants.
The Organizer is is showing weakness to not just our Islamic enemies, but to our potential rivals as well.
Right now, both the Russians and the Chinese are toying with Obama much as a cat toys with its prey. Obama's missteps on the foreign policy front have been embarrassing, to say the least, but haven't managed to get anyone killed. Yet.
He has now dissed our strongest ally twice, and appears to be gearing up to throw the Israelis under the bus.
Maybe when we eat a city or two, people in this country might actually wake up to the threat the Islamists actually pose.
Some, like Thomas Sowell, feel we no longer have what it takes:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODNlMmY1MzdmYjkzNmZmMDY3Y2EyNWI0NzQ1ZGI3YmQ=
I am on the fence here, myself, as I could see it going either way.
I can tell you this; I don't think that the lefties of the world are going to like Islamic domination all that much. While the Islamists have a modicum of respect for we conservatives, they generally kill liberals.
-Dave
Ah, Ema has no arguments to make, but is only doing a copy-and-paste from the Big Book of Petulant Left Talking Points. We can safely ignore it.
...it's quite amazing to hear someone in all seriousness say, the Soviets were 'doomed' to fail. It shows the incredible naivete, the arrogance, that posesses some generations that arrive after the fact. How many future books will be written based on the premise that America was immoral in its aggressive response to German and Japanese fascism when in fact these movements were, after all, 'doomed' to fail. Sadly, that kind of ignorance isn't based on IQ, it's based entirely on hubris of self.
The west as viewed by Islam is part of the old colonial system and therefore will never be accepted by those in the rampant nationistic camp. Israel of coarse, is at the top of the list. This is much more than a religous struggle, but is part of a bigger struggle---a protracted conflict a part of the overall systemic revolution a continuing process. The old and the new orders are in constant conflict, with no one knowing the outcome of the struggle--there will be a new order, but the shape of that new system is always a mystery and never pre-determined by the events on any given day or series of days, the conflict is too broad and the mere scope of events too vast for a mere individual to understand. Sounds confusing in someways. Greek city states--to Roman Empire--to dark ages--to colonialism--to rampant nationalism--to ????, who knows. Just a thought. I'm new to this blog, but like what I see and will definately return. I see my old friend at Saber Point has visited you often in the past. Come see me at Penny Patch Politely Patrician sometimes. Mine is a young blog less that 5 months old, but growing.
Post a Comment