A few thoughts on the coming war…

…for, a war is what it is, or at least it’s what is to come, no matter how the American politicians like two twist and mince words.  But here on the Big Blog of Freedom and Justice, words are never minced.

13 years ago, we resolved (very hastily) that we must fight terrorism after it reared it’s ugly head on our own shores.  We sent troops to the Middle East, and here at home, we restricted our own freedoms (curiously enough) in the fight against – terrorism.  A stateless, vague enemy motivated by…what?

Well, we all know – Islam.  But our U.S. Government, for any number of reasons, avoids admitting so, and when they have no choice but to do so, it becomes “radical” and not typical to Islam.

Some go along with this narrative, that Islam is fundementally peaceful.  Others see, like myself, Islam to be fundementally hostile, and this explains the history of violence connected to this religion.  And we always end up getting into this debate when we discuss this part of foreign policy but you know, it isn’t actually relevant.

Because whether or not Islam is fundementally hostile, it is still a fact that this new wave of ISIS warriors are religiously motivated.  And those are the worst sort; warriors motivated by a god or an allah with nothing to loose but everything to gain.  There is no amount of diplomacy or compromise which can satisfy such warriors.

We went into Iraq and part of our mission was to train and equip an American-freindly government to handle those sorts of situations from now on.  And under the present administration, we decided they were capable to handle themselves.

And what happened next?  After staying on the low down during the years of American occupation, a new generation of Muslim warriors, with passion and zeal never before seen, rose up and once again, terrorize the less radical populace and now are a threat to the entire world, especially the Western World which is held in contempt.

So now we’re at a Crossroads.  Two options: do nothing, which is never a good option politically, even though it may be the best option; or do everything.  Sending in the bare minimum of aid and troops to keep your head above political waters will just drag us into a prolonged war with an enemy that can never truly be defeated.

Islam is an established religion; it isn’t going anywhere.  Not as if it will be this aspect which the U.S. will dedicate itself to fighting; it would be politically incorrect.  So you fight ‘Terrorism’ or ‘Extremism’ in a region where it has been rife for thousands of years.  In of themselves they are vague ideas and it would be arrogant to think we can defeat it.

The conclusion? Do everything, sending ground troops of all sorts, etc., with the intent of winning is not a reasonable goal.  As soon as you leave, the problem will just flare up again (worse than it was before) bringing us back where we started.  So the only thing to do is keep troops there forever; something no one is happy with.


Adventure in Absurdity #5 – Democracy

These days, especially among more closed-minded Americans, criticizing Democracy is like criticizing royalty or the church when those institutions held power.

Democracy, the mighty system which preserves our liberties and our American way of life!  We have become so fond of it, indeed we spend billions trying to implement Democracy in countries which are not properly suited for it.  We put special emphasis on the idea that it is everyone’s duty (and privilege) as a citizen, to vote.

The nature of my current employment brings me in contact with a lot of voters.  I hear from them what they know, and what they think.  Many of these voters I am in contact with will insist, that it is their Civic Duty to get out and vote in EVERY election.  Very well, it’s important to vote.  But then, they proceed to display an immense ignorance of candidates and issues.  And isn’t it now the norm, to go into the local voting booth, clueless on local candidates?  (and I will note, that this does not mean that they may have a contrary opinion about a candidate or issue – it means, they have none AT ALL)

How many people I have heard, insist that it is their duty to vote in every election, yet moments later tell me they know nothing about the candidates they voted for?  It’s left out that staying informed is also an important civic duty but as we see, far more difficult.

It’s not like I don’t get it. There are many elected offices, candidates for them are many.  Each candidate has a whole set of promises and stances which begin to run together. It’s hard to keep up with all the politics, and people just end up getting annoyed with all of it.  Yet, if we are to have the responsibility to vote, we must also have the responsibility to be well informed on who we are voting for.

Example: This November, Oklahomans will mozy into the polls and vote for a governor.  Most will vote for Fallin (‘oh, I guess she’s been doin’ a good job’) and some will vote for Dorman (‘He’s gonna be the governor for all Oklahomans’ – whatever that means) only because those are the big names which are discussed, the ones on T.V. and radio ads, etc., yet ignoring the fact that there are three other perfectly qualified Independent candidates in the race for the governorship.

If the main body of voters has neither the time nor inclination to properly research or inquire into candidates and their stances (beyond taking it from the donkey’s mouth) if people vote on name recognition instead of good, sound facts, then, what’s the point?  Corrupt and unscrupulous politicians can easily slide past the non-discerning eye of the main body of voters (as they very well have) by putting out pretty mailers or plastering an area with yard signs.

What to take away from this?  Without knowledge, Democracy is pointless.  But that’s not all.

Other advocates of liberty, now and through history, have never been fond of Democracy.  Korwin-Mikke in Europe has said it’s “stupid” saying that a bunch of drunkards has more pull than a professor.  His solution?  Replace the democracy in Poland with a monarchy.  Even the great Voltaire thought democracy would just perpetrate the idiocy of the masses, and he favored an ‘enlightened’ monarch (in the style of Frederick the Great, before he started playing with his armies.)

All government is equally bad.  But as for myself, I would rather have my freedom secured under a monarchy, than have my freedom subject to the will of the masses, uninformed as they tend to be.