Rome, Italy — European liberals are gloating over the scenes of
anti-American discord in Iraq. But why do they think these scenes
prove that Iraq wasn’t liberated? Ingratitude toward American
liberators should come as no surprise to them. They behaved the
same, though less starkly, after World War II. Does their
anti-Americanism prove that Nazi-occupied Europe wasn’t liberated
by the U.S.?
Were the Iraq crisis left to the European liberals, a mass
murderer and menace to world peace would still be in power. This is
the bottom line, and European liberals won’t acknowledge it. They
just change the subject to the nettlesome problems in Iraq, as if
these problems were created by the U.S. rather than by Saddam
Hussein.
Vendors in Rome continue to sell the ubiquitous rainbow antiwar
flag. Have they not noticed that Saddam Hussein’s regime has
collapsed? The grime and graffiti in Rome is worthy of the Baghdad
looters that so distress European liberals. Much has been made of
the lawlessness in Iraq. Why aren’t European liberals equally
distressed about the lawlessness in their streets? They get worked
up over looting in Baghdad but do little to stop the outrageous
defacing of historic buildings and churches in their own backyard.
In Milan, “Bush the assassin” appears on an elegant apartment
building, and at least one old church has been entirely abandoned
to the graffiti gangs. In Rome there is plenty of graffiti
gibberish about fascism. The leftists dress Italian President
Silvio Berlusconi up in some of their literature as Benito
Mussolini.
Italy’s capital needs a Rudy Giuliani. The widespread graffiti
in Rome is depressing. The complaints about the barbarism of war
are coming from barbarians. Europeans liberals don’t recognize the
enemies of peace abroad or at home. There is a lot of straining at
the gnat and swallowing the camel.
Even L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, is a
tribune for foolish antiwar protests. In the copy I picked up this
week, a Good Friday homily is printed which begins with a
reflection on a Beatles song about “living life in peace.” The
homilist was Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, described as “Preacher of
the Papal Household.” He said the song “contains a longing for
something good and holy which we should not ignore, no matter how
mistaken the ways it suggests to achieve it.”
“It is clear to us today that the only way to peace is by
destroying enmity, not the enemy (should we destroy half the
population of the world dissatisfied with the way things are? And
how do we identify the enemy where terrorism is concerned?”), he
said.
Casting Christ as a pacifist — though Christ never condemned
just Roman centurions and used parables that assumed the just use
of force against aggressors — Cantalamessa said the “world order
itself demands today that Christ’s way to peace replace Augustus’s.
The modern conscience can no longer accept what Virgil put to his
fellow citizens as their calling: ‘Tu regere imperio populos
Romane, memento’ [your task, Rome, is to be ruler of the peoples].
Every nation has the right to govern itself.”
Notice the suggestion here that America is an Augustan imperium.
And notice the curious respect for the modern conscience. Since
when has the Catholic Church considered the modern conscience a
reliable guide to right and wrong?
While churchmen talked about Beatles songs and patted themselves
on the back for their modern conscience and commitment to peace,
the American military advanced real peace through the use of just
force against a wicked tyrant. The European liberals who talk the
most about peace know the least about achieving it.
