Pacificism is Immoral
About once a week I have a Conservative hissy-fit over the editorials The Leader publishes on their Opinion page. I might add that before the Bush/Kerry election I was having meltdowns on a daily basis. I guess it’s no mystery to anyone who reads The Leader that our “hometown paper” has a very decidedly Liberal bias which is nervy considering they publish to a Red County. If pro-Bush news and editorials were food, we Conservatives would have starved to death during the campaign. Which is a perfect segway into a January 29th editorial The Leader published headlined: “Lessons still not learned from Auschwitz”.
The main point of the editorial, written by someone/Liberal from the editorial staff of the Philadelphia Inquirer, was “lessons the world was supposed to learn from Auschwitz were never learned.” He supports his thesis by listing the genocides that came after the Holocaust when “Never Again” was international foreign policy:
“Pol Pot’s forces seized Phnom Penh in 1974 and oversaw the killing and starvation of 1.5 million Cambodians who did not fit the Khmer Rouge’s warped political vision.”
“In 1994, at least 800,000 Tutsis died in a frenzied, 100-day slaughter by extremist Hutus in Rwanda.”
“A genocide bleeds on at this moment in the Darfur region of Sudan. A 100,000 killed.”
Up to this point in the editorial, I’m in complete agreement—these genocides “are not lesson enough.”
Then our writer takes a hard “Left” turn by stating-- “Not enough has been done to aid innocent Muslims in the United States and elsewhere who have been attacked for the crimes of extremists claiming allegiance to Allah. How sad it is to note that on Jan. 28, 2005 never again seems as far from being realized as it was the day after the horrors of Auschwitz were revealed for all to see.”
Now I’m fuming for three reasons: 1.) His accusation that “Not enough has been done to aid innocent Muslims in the U.S. who’ve been attacked for crimes of extremists” is just plain ludicrous and wrong. He implies that we’re on the verge of committing genocide against American Muslims. But he can’t help himself because he views all Conservatives as racist and he just had to get that bigot shot in his editorial. 2.) And the next editorial foul against Conservatives is the complete omission of a current event that has everything in the world to do with “stopping genocide” and that’s the Iraq War. If you’re writing about shaming the world about not doing enough to prevent genocide, then shame on him for not acknowledging the 1.4 million Iraqis that are missing or the 400,000 found in mass graves put there by the murderous regime of Saddam Hussein. If that’s not genocide then what is? 3.) Let’s admit what stops genocide. It’s not diplomacy it’s not sanctions or police actions….it is war.
That’s why our Liberal editorialist did not mention the Iraq War. Liberals hate war for any reason including genocide. But it was war that stopped the mass murder of Jews. In 1974, American forces pulled out of Viet Nam because Liberals hated that war and said there would not be a slaughter if the U.S. withdrew. History recorded the genocide and wrong headedness of Liberal Viet Nam foreign policy. The current Darfur genocide is currently an example of failed Liberal policy as practiced by the United Nations. Since the inception of the UN, 30 million people have died as a direct result of its anti-war policy. The UN will stick its head in the sand before it’ll admit that the only viable solution to genocide is war.
Then there’s Iraq and we all know what the Liberals think about that. They’d choke on their own spit if they had to admit Saddam Hussein committed genocide. So they don’t admit it, but prefer to deflect world opinion away from genocide to anti-Bush rhetoric on how he lied about WMD and wag their “you’re a bigot” fingers at Conservatives to keep the world from catching on that maybe, just maybe they’re the real bigots. They abhor war so much they inadvertently sanction genocide by refusing to admit that many times war is the only solution. The Left should take a sabbatical on this quote: “Pacificism is immoral”—it’s their lesson and they need to learn it if they really want genocide stopped.
The main point of the editorial, written by someone/Liberal from the editorial staff of the Philadelphia Inquirer, was “lessons the world was supposed to learn from Auschwitz were never learned.” He supports his thesis by listing the genocides that came after the Holocaust when “Never Again” was international foreign policy:
“Pol Pot’s forces seized Phnom Penh in 1974 and oversaw the killing and starvation of 1.5 million Cambodians who did not fit the Khmer Rouge’s warped political vision.”
“In 1994, at least 800,000 Tutsis died in a frenzied, 100-day slaughter by extremist Hutus in Rwanda.”
“A genocide bleeds on at this moment in the Darfur region of Sudan. A 100,000 killed.”
Up to this point in the editorial, I’m in complete agreement—these genocides “are not lesson enough.”
Then our writer takes a hard “Left” turn by stating-- “Not enough has been done to aid innocent Muslims in the United States and elsewhere who have been attacked for the crimes of extremists claiming allegiance to Allah. How sad it is to note that on Jan. 28, 2005 never again seems as far from being realized as it was the day after the horrors of Auschwitz were revealed for all to see.”
Now I’m fuming for three reasons: 1.) His accusation that “Not enough has been done to aid innocent Muslims in the U.S. who’ve been attacked for crimes of extremists” is just plain ludicrous and wrong. He implies that we’re on the verge of committing genocide against American Muslims. But he can’t help himself because he views all Conservatives as racist and he just had to get that bigot shot in his editorial. 2.) And the next editorial foul against Conservatives is the complete omission of a current event that has everything in the world to do with “stopping genocide” and that’s the Iraq War. If you’re writing about shaming the world about not doing enough to prevent genocide, then shame on him for not acknowledging the 1.4 million Iraqis that are missing or the 400,000 found in mass graves put there by the murderous regime of Saddam Hussein. If that’s not genocide then what is? 3.) Let’s admit what stops genocide. It’s not diplomacy it’s not sanctions or police actions….it is war.
That’s why our Liberal editorialist did not mention the Iraq War. Liberals hate war for any reason including genocide. But it was war that stopped the mass murder of Jews. In 1974, American forces pulled out of Viet Nam because Liberals hated that war and said there would not be a slaughter if the U.S. withdrew. History recorded the genocide and wrong headedness of Liberal Viet Nam foreign policy. The current Darfur genocide is currently an example of failed Liberal policy as practiced by the United Nations. Since the inception of the UN, 30 million people have died as a direct result of its anti-war policy. The UN will stick its head in the sand before it’ll admit that the only viable solution to genocide is war.
Then there’s Iraq and we all know what the Liberals think about that. They’d choke on their own spit if they had to admit Saddam Hussein committed genocide. So they don’t admit it, but prefer to deflect world opinion away from genocide to anti-Bush rhetoric on how he lied about WMD and wag their “you’re a bigot” fingers at Conservatives to keep the world from catching on that maybe, just maybe they’re the real bigots. They abhor war so much they inadvertently sanction genocide by refusing to admit that many times war is the only solution. The Left should take a sabbatical on this quote: “Pacificism is immoral”—it’s their lesson and they need to learn it if they really want genocide stopped.
posted by sallyann | 5:49 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home