Obama & Co. celebrate with the Catholic Church. Terrorists making heroes. Canada strikes back. Plus more.
(Page 2 of 3)
This would be like, say, the otherwise good man who would nevertheless apply for an opening as Adolph Hitler’s valet; I think that the term is “compromise.” Worse, Cardinal O’Malley’s arguably one of the American Church’s better shepherds!
Unless and until the majority of the Catholic leadership in this
country becomes more of the ilk of Bishop D’Arcy, with the
testicular fortitude to defend the Gospel from the treachery of
its enemies, be they Fr. Jenkins, President Obama, the abortion
industry itself, etc., a thoroughly fraudulent form of
Catholicism will continue to hold sway, a very bad thing both for
the Church and for the country.
— Francis M. Hannon, Jr.
REAL AMERICAN HEROES
Re: James Bowman’s Brothers at War:
I would submit that counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations have actually restored the heroic to warfare. To be brutally honest, modern mechanized warfare was highly depersonalized and in many respects, anti-heroic. As reviews of almost all first person memoirs since World War II show, combatants rarely saw the enemy, or engaged him at close quarters; most killing was done in a random, impersonal way by artillery and mortars. Whether one lived or died was very often a matter of chance, and under the brutal pounding, all men came up against their limits.
In contrast, as we now conduct and understand it, both counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency have an intrinsically heroic orientation, beginning with the main objective in both cases: protection of innocent civilians is placed ahead of force protection; i.e., the soldier is posited as the defender of the weak and defenseless, even to the point of sacrificing his own life. That’s heroic, inspirational, even — and the men performing the job in Iraq and Afghanistan instinctively understand this, which is why support for the war is so strong among the troops fighting it, and why retention rates have been so high.
Second, counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency are intensely personal. Long-range fires from artillery, aircraft and armored vehicles count for little. Most of the fighting is at close range, with small arms — and sometimes hand-to-hand. This is a necessary concomitant of placing the protection of civilians ahead of protection of soldiers: knowing that terrorists are hiding out in a building, it would be easier and safer by far to blow it to bits with a 500-lb bomb, but that could kill or injure civilians inside the building, and in the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, the correct approach is the most dangerous and difficult — to enter the building and clear it room by room, whenever possible using “less than lethal” means, such as stun grenades. It doesn’t get more heroic than that.
Finally, in both counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency warfare, soldiers live amongst the people whom they are protecting and form close bonds with them, which provides a tangible sense of accomplishment, a source of manly pride.
Paradoxically, then, the war on terror has regenerated the
warrior ethos among American troops in a way that a prolonged
conventional war would not. The heroic stature of American
soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines has reached such
proportions that even jaded intellectuals cannot deny it, and
indeed, if exposed to the military for any length of time, become
seduced by it. And that may be why so many academics and
intellectuals will go to any length to avoid exposure the the
heroes in our midst.
— Stuart Koehl
Falls Church, Virginia
AND A BRIDGE TO SELL YOU TOO
Re: Quin Hillyer’s From a Crotchety Old Man:
I’ve invented a new device called Mirabile Dictu that facilitates
direct interpersonal communication. It works as follows. The
Bluetooth peripheral is held in the four hands of any two people
wishing to communicate, who stand face to face. They plug its
four earphones into their ears and fit its two microphones over
their mouths. When one person speaks, every word is faithfully
sent to Google, Wikipedia, Slashdot, YouTube, and the Drudge
Report, where they are delayed 0.1 millisecond, before being
returned over the Internet to the ears of the intended recipient.
It does not record or modify the message in any way, and it costs
only $199. It will be available at Amazon and via e-mail at
— David Govett
HE’S READ HIS ORWELL, THOUGH
Re: G. Tracy Mehan, III’s Obama Ignores His Toqueville:
Professor Feldstein, “I suspect that the administration officials
who drafted this proposal did not understand that it would have
this perverse effect.” Professor, your naivety is showing. Obama
and his administration know full well the consequences of their
policies. Their priorities are not what is best for America, but
what is the most effective way to transform our proud land of
liberty and capitalism into a slavish land of socialism — in the
name of equality. But remember, some are more equal than
— Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York
LIKE THE CHAFF
Re: James M. Thunder’s The Destruction of Notre Dame:
While one is surprised at ND’s invitation to Mr. Obama, let us
please bear in mind that this is Catholic duplicity; one day they
are for something, another day they are against it; there are so
many fifth columnists there it just makes one dizzy! How sad for
ND that they will be seen as supporting the most ruthless
abortion leader in US leadership. May God have mercy on us
— Ron Henderson
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online