-
Pick Obama’s Brain
May 16, 2013 | 61 comments
-
Remembering Herb Romerstein
May 10, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Obama’s Planned Parenthood Love Fest
April 29, 2013 | 69 comments
-
Happy Earth Day… and Lenin Day
April 22, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Bill Casey’s Centennial
April 5, 2013 | 69 comments
Special Report
Bush’s Middle East ‘March of Freedom’
In the most important address of his presidency, he promised to extend Reagan’s “march of freedom” into the Middle East.
As we watch the growing demand that Middle East autocrats and dictators step down, from Iran in June 2009 to Egypt and Libya this February, on the heels of repeated elections in post-Taliban Afghanistan and post-Saddam Iraq, the wisdom of two presidents keeps coming to mind.
First is Ronald Reagan, who warned dictators that freedom is “contagious.” As he noted in May 1982, the Soviets feared the “infectiousness” of the freedom posed by groups like Solidarity in Poland. Eight years later, with elections held in Poland and the wall down in Berlin, Reagan, no longer president, observed: “As is always the case, once people who have been deprived of basic freedom taste a little of it, they want all of it.” Looking back at the impact of Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms, he remarked: “It was as if Gorbachev had uncorked a magic bottle and a genie floated out, never to be put back in again.”
As president, Reagan had spoken of a “march of freedom” that would leave Marxism-Leninism on the “ash-heap of history.” He said this often, but most memorably in his June 1982 Westminster speech, which also founded the National Endowment for Democracy.
That brings me to the other president. The president who picked up Reagan’s mantle from Westminster was George W. Bush. Speaking to the National Endowment for Democracy in November 2003, Bush gave the most important address of his presidency, promising to extend Reagan’s “march” into the Middle East, the place most resistant to the freedom tide. What Bush said cannot be reiterated enough, and couldn’t be more appropriate than right now, as the next target by the people of the Middle East is the hideous Muammar Gaddafi; from the Taliban, to Saddam, to Ahmadinejad, to Mubarak, to Gaddafi.
Did George W. Bush foresee this? Like Reagan, he tended to speak more generally, but he was specific enough that we can say that Bush would not be surprised at current events. Bush began his November 2003 speech with this:
In June of 1982, President Ronald Reagan spoke at Westminster Palace and declared the turning point had arrived in history…. President Reagan said that the day of Soviet tyranny was passing, that freedom had a momentum which would not be halted. He gave this organization its mandate: to add to the momentum of freedom across the world. Your mandate was important 20 years ago; it is equally important today.
A number of critics were dismissive of that speech by the President…. Some observers on both sides of the Atlantic pronounced the speech simplistic and naive, and even dangerous. In fact, Ronald Reagan’s words were courageous and optimistic and entirely correct.
And if the critics needed data to back that assertion, Bush offered it: “The great democratic movement President Reagan described was already well underway. In the early 1970s, there were about 40 democracies in the world…. As the 20th century ended, there were around 120 democracies in the world.”
Dramatically and emphatically, Bush continued that last sentence with this unequivocal prediction on democracies: “— and I can assure you more are on the way.”
Bush noted that the world had witnessed, in little over a generation, “the swiftest advance of freedom in the 2,500 year story of democracy.” And while future historians would debate the reasons for that surge, Bush had his own, one that was also a motivation: “It is no accident that the rise of so many democracies took place in a time when the world’s most influential nation was itself a democracy.” That was George W. Bush’s way of saying that America, at least America under his administration, would do its best to advance that freedom.
The 43rd president, likewise dismissed by critics, then shared his theoretical — even theological — understanding of how this could happen, including in places like the Middle East, pockmarked by military dictatorships:
Over time, free nations grow stronger and dictatorships grow weaker…. Liberty is both the plan of Heaven for humanity, and the best hope for progress here on Earth.
As the colonial era passed away, the Middle East saw the establishment of many military dictatorships. Some rulers adopted the dogmas of socialism, seized total control of political parties and the media and universities. They allied themselves with the Soviet bloc and with international terrorism….
Other men, and groups of men, have gained influence in the Middle East and beyond through an ideology of theocratic terror….
Many Middle Eastern governments now understand that military dictatorship and theocratic rule are a straight, smooth highway to nowhere…. Instead of dwelling on past wrongs and blaming others, governments in the Middle East need to confront real problems…. Governments across the Middle East and North Africa are beginning to see the need for change.
About the Author
Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He is author of the new book The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor. His other books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (93) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Paul Kengor
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/25/bushs-middle-east-march-of-fre
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Consternated Conferences
- The Vast and the Tiny
- The Continuing Crisis
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
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.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
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?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
martin j smith| 2.25.11 @ 8:00AM
In his second term GWB began to go wobly on the "War on Terror".
First thing is that this expression" War on terrorism" must not be PCd out.
Second those involved:Radical Islam,Jihadists etc must be named as such.
Third the government agencies such as the State Depart and all law enforcement and intelligence agencies must be on board with this
Finally the Muslim community in our nation must also be on board.
No more PC BS.
One other point about GWB. To some extent his refusal to rebut the Left played into his own demise. I do not buy his rationalizations and I do blame him for his own silence. It was very damaging to the " War on Terrorism " and partly enabled the Left Socialists to take control in 08.
No more of that please !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 11:27AM
Freedom will be for men in the Mideast, not women. As you know though some autocrats will be deposed in the region, Islam is here to stay-- and that means women are property owned by the men there.
mames| 2.26.11 @ 6:08PM
Please can we give up on trying to turn the Nixonian (campaign finance reform bill, nominees for supreme court, passing over Scalia as Chief justice, spending on a level greater than CLinton, mishandling of the war effort, pandering to the TARP idea... uck!) into Reagan. PLEASE. I knew Ronald Regan and "W" was no Reagan.
mames| 2.26.11 @ 6:12PM
BTW the revolts in the middle east are just as likely to turn those countries into Islamo terrorist states as anything else. Under the influence of Islam the middle east has become the greatest cluster $% ..... in the world.
Donna| 2.25.11 @ 8:11AM
I was wondering when someone in the press was going to bring Bush into the real reason why there is this sea of change in the middle east. good job!
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 11:59AM
is Rich Lowry thumbing his nose by publishing the following?:
"John J. Miller has a cover story in the new issue of National Review that’s a compelling portrait of the accomplishments of Jeb Bush. Four years after leaving the Florida governor’s mansion, he remains one of the most impressive Republican politicians in the country, a formidable policy mind with the political chops to drive conservative reforms even out of office. So why isn’t he running for president? Bush told Miller what he’s said to others, too — he won’t run in 2012, but he’ll consider 2016. This is a mistake. Bush should run now for at least eight reasons:
1) It’s a wide-open field for a nomination that’s worth having. Rarely do you get such a convergence of a beatable incumbent president with a wide-open field to challenge him. Obama is slightly below 50 percent in the polls, with a real weakness in the middle of the country, and he’s saddled with a recovery that has yet to produce substantial job growth. Yet there is no true frontrunner in the race to challenge him. It’s hard to imagine an environment better suited for a heavyweight like Jeb to make a run."
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 12:01PM
ANOTHER Bush for president? to what purpose?
Lowry doesn't say why, only how.
richard ryan| 2.25.11 @ 8:12AM
Democracy does not equal freedom. Madison spoke about the "tyrrany of the majority" for a reason. You need a government based on a strong constitutional protection FROM tyranny (negative rights). We used to have it, until liberal/socialists began taking a huge crap on our Constitution.
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 12:09PM
You can't have it all.
It is better today for blacks; the black poverty rate was 50 percent in the 1950s. For some to win others must lose: that is what Americans want.
richard ryan| 2.25.11 @ 2:03PM
How exactly would you define "better"?
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 4:24PM
At least more of them have moved up the food chain. They play by your rules of status.
Cpm| 2.25.11 @ 6:00PM
Uh, black president for one, unthinkable in the '50's.
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 9:15PM
just that? nothing more?
Pretty shallow.
Louis Jenkins| 2.25.11 @ 8:24AM
As illustrated by our most recent lame duck congress, you can see what happens when a super majority runs the country. It would take very little for the tin horn dictator to declare himself president for life, then we would be no greater than a third world country. There will be no great men like Madison, Jefferson, or Franklin in the middle east. Instead they will become more like Iran, or Syria, always on guard for the opponents weakness. While Reagan or Bush spoke great things, I fear there are more dastardly mechanisms at work, and the US is in for a hard time.
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 12:11PM
The GOP saying Bush helped set in motion what is transpiring today means little or nothing. If women aren't free, and Islam has no intention of freeing them, then freedom is empty.
"Some gotta win, some gotta lose,
Good Time Charlie got the blues."
canuckistani| 2.25.11 @ 3:47PM
Amen. It is interesting Louis chose those three examples: slave owners all, suffragettes none.
The US revolution was not for the "enslaved", but for exclusively the white men we lionize today. For us to condemn the revolutionary choices of another tribe, we should first compare it factually to our own.
Alan Brooks| 2.25.11 @ 4:37PM
Notice how they practically worship Reagan? but they don't want to dismiss Bush too much, so they are careful to write:
"Bush had his good points (even though he was no Reagan)"
"Bush did the most he could do, given the constraints, in Afghanistan and Iraq (even though he was no Reagan)."
What gets me is they defend Bob dole's candidacy by saying even though Dole had been injured in WWII, he was good enough to be president, and cited FDR as a disabled president. However, FDR was far more gifted than Dole.
Brian Mc| 2.25.11 @ 8:26AM
When you compromise towards the center in order that we all might "Just get along" you get 'wrong'. A bus load of teachers was celebrated on the radio this morning; on their way to Madison from my hometown. My hope is that no one attempts to get along with them, once they get there. What if an equal number of taxpayers showed up in the rotunda in Madison? Who would shout the loudest? Who might draw the first weapon? Democracy isn't always pretty, and why we don't have one here. A 99% vote count for a particular candidate in some obscure third world country does not prove democracy is at work there. As a matter of fact, those are the sorts of results these but takers would like to see here, in their favor, of course.
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.25.11 @ 8:49AM
"Dubyah",
God bless him.
A decent man, who could not quite get his hands around the underlying tragedy of the middle east.
"The soul slavery of Islam, combined with Sharia Law."
The underlying tragedy is that the only "constitutional republic" the Muslim mind can envision is a constitution wholly locked in to Sharia Law.
Heart-breaking, but there it is.
All American American| 2.25.11 @ 9:18AM
I think we need to start a new campaign: Just say NO---to Democracy!!!!! Good Lord our country is not supposed to be a democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic!!!!! We need to stop with the democracy stuff---democracy is two foxes and a chicken deciding what to have for dinner.
Or maybe this analogy is more relevant: Democracy is 100 muslims and 10 Christians deciding what system of govt to establish, shariah or a Republic.
Anyway I still can't believe we have these "democracy in the ME" drivel on "conservative" sites. They don't want "democracy"--they want shariah. Please, please, please for the love of all that we hold dear stop with the nonsense that we can somehow turn 7th-century barbarians into Tom Jefferson in a generation. Or two. Or ten. It ain't happening. Read the koran and the traditions. Educate yourself. Then stop fooling yourself.
Ignorance of islam is not going to protect you from it.
ralph| 2.26.11 @ 7:19PM
AMEN AND AMEN
David| 2.25.11 @ 9:26AM
What is different about the communist countries and the Middle East is one system was godless and the other is entirely predicated on a god called Allah, whose adherents kill and force others to accept their way of life in his name. There will never be a free Middle East as long as Islam is practiced. Period.
David| 2.25.11 @ 9:30AM
Ken, you are absolutely correct. I read your comments after I posted mine. Do people really believe that we are going to get an Egyptian government more friendly and helpful to America and the West with Mubarak out of power? I seriously doubt it.
To the All American American, here here. Stop the BS about democracy, also know as, MOB RULE.
All American American| 2.25.11 @ 10:30AM
David, thank you. We'll see if the neocons are still cheering "democracy" when the muslim brotherhood is voted into majority power in Egypt. I have a feeling they won't--instead maybe they'll see another country in which to send American troops off to die? That's my guess.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.11 @ 6:01PM
I'm not celebrating the "Democracy" movements in the Arab world because I think they wil lead to Theocracies. I also support Israel. I also support small government and limited taxation. But I have seen a lot of Ron Paul supporters use the term "neo-con" to unfairly label pro-Israel and anti-Islamofascist writers. The foremost Ron Paul supporter on this site has used the term "sand monkeys" to refer to Jews, and his antisemitism and Paul's aren't too far apart.
I don't support the "freedom" movement in the Islamofascist countries because I doubt that this will work, but I prefer neo-cons to Paulites any day.
Clint| 2.25.11 @ 7:45PM
We Tea Party Patriots will put Our Tea Party Senator Dr.Rand Paul and Our Tea Party Favorite Dr.Ron Paul,The New Chairman Of The House Monetary Sub-Committee up against Your RINO-CINO Ruling Elite, any day Plastic Israel Firster Fanatic NutBag Tool Job.
America First Trumps Your Personal Fixated Israel Firster Agenda.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.
Rise Up.
stmichrick| 2.26.11 @ 8:29PM
Clint is showing the media what they want to see in the Tea Party. Those kind of inane comments will get him purged before long. He doesn't get it.
Clint| 2.26.11 @ 8:40PM
Tell it to Your RINO-CINO Traitor Arlen Specter.
All American American| 2.26.11 @ 9:31AM
OT, I'm not a Ron Paul guy. I think his views on domestic issues/spending are pretty much right on, but his vision, if you want to call it that, on foreign affairs esp with respect to islam is naive at best.
When I use neocon I am referring to the GWB-type, "compassionate" conservative, big-govt, never saw a country that didn't need American troops there, Rockefeller republicans.
VBMax| 2.25.11 @ 11:12AM
Yep, Bush also supported democracy in Gaza and Hamas got elected as a result.
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.25.11 @ 9:35AM
David,
thank you.
But you drilled in on a crucial point as well:
""What is different about the communist countries and the Middle East is one system was godless and the other is entirely predicated on a god called Allah, whose adherents kill and force others to accept their way of life in his name. There will never be a free Middle East as long as Islam is practiced. Period""
Mike W| 2.25.11 @ 9:37AM
The neo con loons never try quit trying to resurrect Bush's legacy. Face it - the man was probably a decent enough guy but he lacked the mental firepower to tell his idiot advisors that invading a Middle Eastern country with no tradition of democracy with the hope of installing a bastion of freedom in the Middle East was a crazy idea.
He was a get along, go along guy with the likes of Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz, etc.
Don't forget that Bush coddled Gadhafi in 2003 after he quit trying to develop WMDs.
Cpm| 2.25.11 @ 6:05PM
Gadhafi didn't just quit it, he turned over all his WMD toys. Sounds like a win to me.
Mimi| 2.25.11 @ 9:38AM
Paul...Thanks , for the trip down memory lane...When the country was in "GOOD "" hands.
George W. and yes Laura served this country so well ! He also had good people around him.
What is occurring in the Middle East has an unknown outcome NOW and it is a TRAGEDY we in America do not have the Leadership or even advisors... to be a credible asset to LIBERTY! Our 2008 mistake has left us NAKED and impotent!!!
The reformation of HISTORY eventally lead to compatibility of Religion and government in the Christian world. Will Islam get there? Will accommodation of civil Libertyand freedom of worship abiide together. America is the show-piece to help aid the cause for all of HUMANITY!
canuckistani| 2.25.11 @ 2:24PM
The only thing you have to think about is the bitch fest the populace drums up every time the price of gas goes up, the dithering when an oil company hoodwinks the country with spills and coverups and the expected demonizing of any administration that attempts to bring reason to the equation.
You want moral equivalency? The US hegemony in the ME is most secure when a reliable dictator is open to bribes and controls the restless natives. Dealing with a narrow elite is far more manageable than unwieldy bolsheviks with the unpredictability of elections to consider.
What is happening now with these regime changes only damages stability and forces the US to rebuild relationships from the ground up.
Watching Junior hold hands with King Fat Bastard of Saudi clarifies the situtation more than any other zinger a neocon or any other "patriot" can conjure - that the heavy lifting will be difficult for the impatient an unnuanced amongst our leaders and mental giants on this site.
I, for one, do not see positive outcomes for US reach in the wake of these tulmults. We have no track record for the natives to cling to as representative of benevolence to the masses.
If the new regimes can limit their reactions to bogeyman portrayals by Tel Aviv, the new world order includes an axis of independent powers aligning to secure capital and materiel movement without US interference, with China quite happy to provide tacit support for whatever they choose to do.
The American people will not give a hoot about what a camel jockey is doing to another camel jockey, if the price of gas stays below $4. They'll just want the gov to get it for them.
David| 2.25.11 @ 9:51AM
Mimi, we did not know what we were going to get in the Mid East when Bush was prez either. Please recall that elections were held in Lebanon and Hezbollah is now in control, and the Palestians held elections and Hamas is now in control. As said, it doesn't matter who the prez is or what the circumstances are as long as Islam is practiced in those countries.
William R| 2.25.11 @ 9:55AM
That freedom in the Arab world. 80 percent of Egyptians think you should be put to death if you leave Islam. This Democracy stuff is going to work out real fine. How's that Hamas working out in Gaza. Remember they were elected.
NeoCons. Pathetic.
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.25.11 @ 11:34AM
William R,
You express a lot of good thought.
So,
Why in hell do you keep throwing out what you obviously consider a curse-word..."neo-cons"?
Dipshit, were we neo-cons when we declared war in 1941?
Oh... I forgot. The Japanese did a surprise attack on our military at Pearl Harbour!!!!!!!!!!!!
Uh 9-11?
You may not be able to understand this, but a lot of our lurkers can:
"No state sponsorship of terrorism will be acceptable!" (Dubyah's words)
That's why we went after the Taliban and Al Queida.
Nit pick all you want to. We needed to take Saddam off the board.
That's why we need to take Iranotheocracy off the board.
They are a clear and present danger as well.
While dipshit feces throwers like you join up with our communist, (pardon the shorthand), administration in denial, we freedom die-ers have to pick up your slack.
Grow some balls. Thank you.
canuckistani| 2.25.11 @ 2:43PM
You might forget we were firmly on the fence as France , England and Poland were decimated.
Roosevelt had to do an Iran-Contra deal to get weapons moving across the Atlantic, and our oil embargoes of Japan were likely the lynchpin of the attacks in the first place.
If Britain had fallen, the US was quite willing and able to make a deal with Hitler. Look it up.
Roosevelt had to drag us into war, just like he had to drag us into the New Deal and other disruptions to our entrenched apple carts.
Neocon is an apt description of useful idiots the corporatist thugs needed to conjure up a pretext for Iraq and almost Iran, just like the enthusiasm for the A-bomb by Jewish scientists was harnessed and almost vanished after the bullet entered Hitler's brain.
I like the US with balls or cojones, but I also prefer one with a brain guiding them.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.11 @ 6:05PM
Sorry, Canukistani, but Hitler declared war on the US all by his lonesome after Pearl Harbor, precipitating our declaration. Look it up.
Iran does need to be bashed down, super hard, or have its government replaced by a pro-US one. I like the Shah, and was trained by one of his top Government officials in my profession.
Alan Brooks| 2.27.11 @ 9:54PM
"I like the Shah"
SAVAK were as bad as those they were brutalizing-- the Shah got what he deserved. The Shahs, Mossadegh, the Ayatollahs, Ahmadinejad?
No-win choices, all of them.
Brian Mc| 2.25.11 @ 10:09AM
Any culture that cheers favorable results achieved by a child with bombs strapped to his chest will never give the world a favorable government that can co-exist.
Dixie Pixie| 2.25.11 @ 11:10AM
There is several problems with the theory that Bush 43 was the mastermind and originator of the current wave of "Democratic Movements" sweeping the Middle East.
1...The Republican Parties Foreign Policy has always promoted social stability through authoritarianism and Bush 43 did not deviate from that policy.
For an example consider the recent Afghan election cycles.
It is obvious that Bush 43 picked a "Strongman" and wrapped the illusion of "Democracy" around him.
Bush 41 and Bush 43 were the biggest supporters of authoritarianism with Mubarak's Egypt as the best example.
2... What wave of democratization is sweeping the Middle East.
All we have is the testimonials of the Main Stream Media who's truthfulness is well established.
The reporters report what the editors told them to report even in the face of no evidence for the media line.
The current media line is "Democracy" and this is their attempt to right the first draft of history to their liking.
3... The Bush 41 Administration could have easily turned Kuwait into a Democracy yet turned the country back into a family run business.
Just like the Bush Family would run America if they could.
Jeb Bush 45 President 2012.
How Democratic is that.
JimP| 2.25.11 @ 11:17AM
The freedom wave has started in the U.S. too. From the tax and bailout protests, to the Tea Party and last Novembers elections, American freedom 'fighters' have taken up the gauntlet. The tyrants are trying to cling to power in ways that only fuel their own demise (as in WI). Down with the Dems and big spending Repubs, up with liberty. The Dems and RINOs are nearing the ash heap and good riddance.
Bob T. | 2.25.11 @ 2:02PM
Excellent!
Mark Jeffery Koch| 2.25.11 @ 11:31AM
When is our President going to declare a no fly zone and tell Ghadafi that we are going to shoot down any helicopter or plane firing on civilians and that if he does not order his military to stand down we will stand him down? Obama, America is supposed to be a beacon of hope in a world of darkness, not a flashlight with its batteries fading away.
Mimi| 2.25.11 @ 11:53AM
Mark...maybe it's time for a " drone" visit....???CIA??.. ENOUGH people are dying in the streets!! Even AHMEDINIJAD might get nervous and start to play BALL!
PEACE THRU STRENGTH!!
canuckistani| 2.25.11 @ 2:51PM
You may have to remind me again where on the planet these drone strikes have yielded positive results?
Not the soundbite videogame victories, but lasting step-changes. Not Pak, Not Afghan and definitely not in Libya - as you propose.
The work around A-jad is far more complex than any of us here can imagine - and certainly more complex than the basic neocon bogeyman whisper campaigns can articulate.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.11 @ 6:07PM
Sorry, I thought the neo-cons were pro-Israel and a strong US defence.
Drone strikes will do quite well if the explosive on the drones can bust bunkers.
Leonardo| 2.27.11 @ 10:38AM
If the neo-cons are pro Israel and a strong military defense, then what is Emmett Tyrrell? In his interview on c-span recently, he spoke about how in the conservative movement which he seemed to indicate that he was part of the original or first members, that later on the "neo-cons" came into it.
So I am wondering what this makes him? Is he not pro-Israel and for a strong military defense? If not then is he a Clint type or a Red Philips type? And what is that called?
Purple Lips| 2.25.11 @ 11:38AM
Ah yes the March of Freedom. That is the freedon for Baathists and Shias to cut eachother's throats. The freedom for the Taliban to grow a higher yielding poopy plant; the freedom for Egyptian men to cut down Copts and mutilate women; the freedom for Palestinians to blow up Jewish Pizzarias; and of course the freedom for Lybians to revert back to the State of Nature.
One can't say it hasn't been interesting. Reminds me of those 2 fatal shots that Serbian "freedom fighter" took in July 1914. Now that was a shot heard around the world! Just ask the Austrians. They went from an empire run by field marshalls in funny costumes to a tiny nation of chocolate lovers and hoteliers in only 4 years.
canuckistani| 2.25.11 @ 2:53PM
....and no coastline for Captain Von Trapp to sail his vessel.
David| 2.25.11 @ 11:48AM
I just read the Moqtada a Sadr (remember him - the big trouble maker in Iraq) has returned to Najaf, Iraq, from Iran. I said way back when that the Americans should have blown up him and his men when they were holed-up in that mosque early on in the war. I knew he would always be a pain in the a___!!! What a message it would have sent to all of our enemies if BUSH had given the order to take him out and say screw the mosque.
Pelligrino| 2.27.11 @ 12:25AM
David, correct. That would have been results-oriented real leadership.
We lost then and continue to lose much clout with the real Iraqis who do want new, peaceable lives in the post-Saddam years.
I have no idea why we fight/behave like we are wearing pink tu-tus. We started out so well in April/May 2003....
I believe that Iraq still have the potential to be a success story. But our softie, mamby-pamby behavior has delayed it for another 2 decades.
Mistral| 2.25.11 @ 12:20PM
I had toi chuckle to myself when I read the KIng of Saudi has returned home offering increased benefits to his subjects. He hasn't understood has he? People want freedom, not necessarily more welfare benefits - too many of these create learned helplessness which then undermines one's freedom. Back to square one!
Fred| 2.25.11 @ 1:25PM
I wish I could agree with you Mistral. I really do. But as I've pointed out before, the Arabs have a primitive, violent honor/shame culture; a primitive, violent, fanatical religion that maintains that substituting the will of the people for the will of Allah as expressed in Shari'a is blasphemy; and a centuries (in some places millenia) long tradition of brutal, oppressive, corrupt, nepotistic politics. Where the hell is democracy supposed to come from? The tiny sliver of Western educated Arab liberals? They'll be the first ones lined up against the wall and shot when (not if) the Islamists take over. Bush should have taken out Saddam, installed a Saddam lite, and got the hell out of Iraq. Instead, he unleashed forces that will threaten us for decades.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.11 @ 6:10PM
The best comment on this thread; right up there with Ken's. Good job, Fred. Some one should put your words to a hit record...perhaps "Right, said Fred?";)
Correct, too, on the futility of "nation building" among savages.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.11 @ 6:12PM
The trick with these nations that oppose us is to knock them back to sand----fused into glass or not--- with "minimal boots on the ground," and maximal destruction, until they abjectedly surrender. The Israelis used to practice asymmetrical response, and did quite well. We need to do the same thing.
Red Phillips | 2.26.11 @ 12:20AM
Thanks for making your disturbing blood lust so explicit.
Leonardo| 2.27.11 @ 10:42AM
Blood lust? You say he has blood lust for wanting to take out the enemies of America? I find that quite disturbing and it makes me question your sanity and who's side you are on.
Is this what the new conservative is supposed to be like or something? Very, very disturbing.
Red Phillips | 2.27.11 @ 11:07PM
Fused glass is a reference to nukes. Advocating indiscriminately nuking people is morally reprehensible. OT has previously suggested nuking the Aswan Dam. Nuking non-strategic sites for the purpose of terrorizing people is a war crime and worse, a moral abomination. It is a flagrant violation of Christian Just War principles. And yes I do think conservatism should be guided by Christian (and civilized) thinking about war and not pagan and barbaric ideas about total war.
Kingofthenet| 2.25.11 @ 1:56PM
43 is Gone isn't that what you keep telling us Progressives...Let it go, Obama did this with his 'Mid East' Speech ;)
Bob T. | 2.25.11 @ 3:21PM
"These are the best of times and the worst of times" and always will be if fear. . .still, lately for the first time since I returned as a nineteen-year-old marine from VN in 1969, I have begun to feel a sense of optimism I last felt for a too short time during the Regan years. Not because we have a bold new leader who can lead us out of the wilderness, far from it, but because I see what I can only describe as an Awakening. An Awakening among everyday people who respect the lives and sacrifices of those past who have earned our Liberty and Freedom. And for what reward? They fought for it because they believed in it. And they believed in the person next to them even if they didn't always agree. This New American Movement is NOT one of screamers and ranters who generally just piss all over the cherished values that made our Country prosperous and virtuous while still certainly not perfect, it is a Movement of everyday people who reject the failed social and political policies of helplessness and dependence while still valuing charity towards others. Where people can grow and achieve unhindered by the chains of totalitarianism and political correctness. Sure we have a long way to go but we always have. There are many yet to see thru the haze and many perhaps never will. But I see more now than I have in the past. It is a start. We cannot predict the future and if we could we would go insane. That is not for this realm. But have Courage. Try to do what is right. And never give up!
Bob T. | 2.25.11 @ 3:46PM
Correction: "These are the best of times and the worst of times" and always will be >if< (I) fear. . . sorry, Doh!
justplainbill| 2.25.11 @ 5:17PM
George W. Bush has a pro choice mother and a pro choice wife. That is all you need to know about George W. Bush.
Francis| 3.1.11 @ 12:26PM
This type of judging is wrong. George Bush is pro life and a Christian. My own family are not Christian and Liberal, yet I am a believer. The fact that his own Mother and wife are pro choice and to judge him accordingly is ridiculous. It means nothing.
Bill in Texas| 2.25.11 @ 5:24PM
Just as the 20th century was the bloodiest in history. it took 2 world wars (almost 3 with the cold war) to pacify Europe, the middle east will most likely take some serious bloodletting to pacify or destroy their desires what with sharia and communism merging onto our most serious challenge to freedom ever. Lets pray Red China doesn't try to take Taiwan while the middle east burns.....history is on the march
Tina B| 2.25.11 @ 5:34PM
That was a pretty astute comment, justplain.
It really does say a lot.
Alan Brooks| 2.26.11 @ 8:27PM
Bill might be right about Taiwan, though. The endgame, as they say, is in the waters around Taiwan.
Pelligrino| 2.27.11 @ 1:07AM
While some might think JustPlainBill's and Tina B's comments about G.W. Bush's mom and wife off base, no, they are not.
Where one stands on that as a concrete life precept informs as to the whole of the individual.
This tells us what a person really thinks about Life. (whether here or abroad in a land that does not know liberty)
We have a chance in these remaining 20 months prior to election day November 2012 to once more choose. Please let us choose wisely.
We need someone at the helm with a moral compass that stems from unshakable, unwaverable Christian/Bibical faith.
PCP Smoker| 2.25.11 @ 7:32PM
Take a cold shower. You have no idea (idear, in NY) whether those savages are pro-democracy or not. They are likely radical islamists wanting more representation from Wahabists.
Alan Brooks| 2.26.11 @ 8:28PM
Let's have it clear: they want democracy for men, not women.
Alan Brooks| 2.26.11 @ 8:33PM
PS (I'll doublepost so there is no mistaking):
When America was founded we set up democracy for whites, not blacks;
the Soviets gave rights to workers and the Communist Party (the ones who weren't purged) but not everyone else;
the Nazis improved life for everyone save for minorities.
Dee See| 2.25.11 @ 11:31PM
----As the Globalist 'shadow government'
has betrayed and plundered us in the name of
enabling, consolidating and 'bringing up'
the awesomely genocidal RED Chinese regime
(their creation ON RECORD) ---and as it is
now UNDENIABLE that 'Free Trade' , Globalism
and EUGENICS (incremental genocide) are
inextricably intertwined (any sober good look
at what 2 centuries of 'Free Trade' has done to
England will silence all debate on that score)
---TIME to get that HUAC meets NUREMBERG
tribunal together.
Retroactive IMPEACHMENT for our last
4 administrations.
Nullification of ALLLL their secret,
illegal, soveriegnty destroying treaties and
agreements.
INSTANT default on the FIAT debt, esp. in
regards to the American taxpayer funded
'economic miracle' of RED China and its
creditors.
OPEN, audit, prosecute and END the FED.
Special investigative attention to its legacy
of instigating American involvement in wars,
possible assasinations of sitting American
Presidents, EUGENICS, collusion with foreign and supra-national powers, and a string of engineered depressions.
ANY QUESTIONS?
Red Phillips | 2.26.11 @ 12:35AM
Since Dr. Kengor is a professor of political science then surely he understands that envisioning the US as the spreader of global democracy IS NOT CONSERVATIVE. It is revolutionary Jacobinism.
If people want to peddle this hubristic nonsense fine, but please drop the pretense that it is in any way conservative. To do so betrays an embarrassing lack of understanding of basic political philosophy and the meaning of terms.
Capt G| 2.26.11 @ 5:42PM
"Spreading democracy" and nation-building are not the same thing. The former is conservative while the latter is not. That being said, it is impossible to separate those purple stained Iraqi fingers from subsequent events in the Middle East. It may be wrong to say that the people of the Middle East want democracy but that is not to say they do not want freedom. Kengor's comparison between Reagan and Bush is apt, especially in light of the current administration's unknown principles. Conservatism is always on the side of freedom and the quaint notion that a people may choose to govern themselves as they best see fit.
Leonardo| 2.27.11 @ 10:49AM
Very well said, you have put the finishing touch on this man's disturbing view of reality. I do not think that from reading the comments here that Mr, Phillips' view of world affairs or those of his views on American interests reflect those of conservatism. He seems, and those similar to him to view things as the old hippies from the 1960's. You know, the old flower children who constantly protested the war. I thought those flower children grew up and became adults and started living in the real world but it looks like they ended up in the White House instead, and many of them are to be found here too.
Red Phillips | 2.27.11 @ 11:10PM
Leonardo, I'll put my knowledge of the philosophy that underlies conservatism up against yours any day of the week. Try me big talker.
Red Phillips | 2.27.11 @ 11:18PM
Capt G., spreading democracy is not conservative because democracy is not conservative. Are you really that clueless?
But the notion that the US has some special mission to spread democracy betrays an underlying universalism and a hubristic misunderstanding of the limits of government and the limits of fallen man. Neither is conservative. Conservatism is parochial, not universalist. Conservatism is not Utopian believing in the perfectibility (of sorts) of man. Conservatism is guided by the Christian understanding of fallen man and is humble with regards to what we can spread to other countries, particularly at gun point.
Capt G| 2.28.11 @ 2:20AM
Being under no illusions as to the perfectibility of man, I am yet reminded of Kirk's closing words in The Conservative Mind. "Democracy in some form will endure. Whether it is to be a democracy of degradation, or a democracy of elevation, lies with the conservatives."
It is not coincidence that the elevation of the individual and his freedom most often results in an attempt at self-governance via some form of democracy.
And the propagation of the American idea, that all men are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights, is not only a conservative goal, it is the heart itself of conservatism.
Mike | 2.26.11 @ 12:36AM
Not to throw cold water on this love fest for Reagan and Bush, but they did make their accommodations with Mubarak, the Saudi royal family, ...well, you get the picture.
Capt G| 2.26.11 @ 5:44PM
...as did Reagan with the Soviet Union. How'd that work out for ya?
Bob Grant| 2.26.11 @ 7:45PM
I don't know how old you are but when speaking of Reagan you have to put his actions in the context of an aggressive Soviet Union. The middle east was just like every other part of the world where countries were distinguished by pro-western or pro-eastern allegiances.
Geo politics were a completely different game in the 60's, 70's, and 80's as opposed to the 90's and '00's.
stmichrick| 2.26.11 @ 8:36PM
Mike, why do you think Reagan and Bush made 'their accomodations?'
Oh, I know; for their rich oil buddies, right?
I think they tried to deal with entities that had something to offer United States' interests. And Monday morning quarterbacking aside, how would you have offset the influence of the worst actors in the region?
Oh, I know; cut Israel loose, right? Brilliant.
History is easy to re-write.
Richard Baker| 2.26.11 @ 6:03PM
The world outside our borders is Hobbesian and assuming the opposite is the mental haven of knaves and fools. The US should keep in mind that the survival and forward progress of our nation is paramount to us. To those who disagree, I respectfully suggest that you GET OUT and go find the haven for which you search and leave the rest of us bereft of your presence.
Rick| 2.26.11 @ 10:15PM
I don't think what is happening in the Middle East has anything to do with Bush's illegal ousting of the Iraqi Head of State; rather, I think the Arab public has been inspired by President Obama's personal story and the leadingship he displayed in saving the world from another Great Deprerssion. Your a rasistr if you say otherwise!
Osamas Pajamas| 2.27.11 @ 12:10AM
What this country needs is a truly LIBERAL president and congress and judiciary! And I forgive the reader for suspecting that this must be some kind of bad joke!
But the Democrats believe in "statism" --- not "liberalism."
They benefit from the imprecise American political terminology ---- we say "the government" here in the USA ---- rather than "the state." And that's a dangerous problem. Famous brands of statism in recent centuries have been Nazism, socialism, fascism, communism, and welfare statism ---- this last is sort of a mix of fascism and socialism.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a political philosophy of small, cheap government ---- it is a constabulary ---- and the job of a liberal government is to enforce human rights within its own jurisdiction. I speak of the unalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ---- The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words. The words "liberal" and "liberalism" were hijacked by the Democrats and socialists and fascists long ago ---- and it was the mistake of conservatives and libertarians to let them get away with it.
It is long past time that liberalism be reclaimed, defined, and explained by its rightful owners ---- by the champions of freedom, i.e.: not by Democrats.
Well, how about "progressivism?" Whuzzat?! “Cancer” is “progressive,” too. Isn't “progressivism” just another statist cancer? It chews you up, piece by piece, in the name of Da Peepul? Eat Da Rich? Moral cannibalism, anyone?
Friends of freedom! Friends of peace-through-strength! And friends of prosperity! Declare yourselves to be "liberals," then ---- and kick over the bloody coffee tables --- and overthrow and trounce the Democrats in 2012!
Postscript: What's good for America is good for the world.
Jameson Campaigne| 2.27.11 @ 12:39AM
While I yield to few in my admiration for the work of Paul Kengor on Ronald Reagan, I would urge restraint to anyone drinking this Kool-Aid with respect to freedom and democracy in the Middle East.
This essay is as delusional as the writings of the Council on Foreign Relations “expert” Max Boot, who once said at a Philadelphia Society meeting we fought World War II “to bring democracy to Asia”.
The simple facts of the matter – if one learns the lessons of The Character of Nations by Angelo Codevilla, or the works of Jeanne Kirkpatrick like Making War to Keep Peace, or any demographic study of the populations of the Middle East – are that most of these countries are tribal in nature; in most of them the median IQ is in the 60s-80s range, creating easy prey for demagogues; few of them have any rational, liberal mediating institutions or traditions which restrain violent passions.
And then there is Wahhabist-style Islam, which, according to Winston Churchill (The River War, 1899):
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity … Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities … but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science – the science against which it had vainly struggled – the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.
Elections, should the turmoil in the Middle East lead to them, will result in “one man, one vote, one time” as the old saying about African elections in the 1960s predicted. Oligarchy, or perhaps benign autocracy, is the best form of government we can hope for from the countries of this region, for the rest of this century (during which the best and brightest of these countries can be educated in western universities).
Unlike the nations comprised of the old Soviet bloc, imbued with parts of the residue of western civilization as the basis for rebuilding after Soviet domination, the cultural and human material required for self-government is simply “not there” in the Middle East, despite the too-few brilliant or capable cadres which do exist there.
The neoconservatives captured Bush’s foreign policy early on, and encouraged/imposed this foolish Middle East salient on his administration. They ignore the fact Reagan used the rhetoric of freedom and democracy against the Soviet bloc as a weapon to weaken and then eventually destroy the Soviet Union – all in defense of an overriding American self-defense interest, not necessarily to create democracies in eastern Europe or Russia or anywhere else – primarily to break up a power which was threatening us and our allies.
The problem with the neocons is they are all theory – they discount history and culture when promoting their plans for remaking the world.
This nonsense needs to stop, before it creates a world utterly hostile to the United States, a world in which other great powers (probably China) step in to pick up the pieces of the wreckage we are creating.
Sorry, Paul!
Jameson Campaigne, Ottawa, Illinois
http://spectator.org/archives/.....rch-of-fre
Pelligrino| 2.27.11 @ 12:50AM
The article's author quotes President G.W. Bush as saying, "We believe that liberty is the design of nature; we believe that liberty is the direction of history…. And we believe that freedom -- the freedom we prize -- is not for us alone, it is the right and the capacity of all mankind."
I expect most all reading this post enjoy a good deal of freedoms and liberties in their lives (certainly compared to what 2/3 of the world's population knows).
Did you earn this? If so, how?
I did't earn it; I didn't achieve it.
I've been gifted freedoms & liberties.
These blessings have been given to me by 1) God Almighty, and 2) forefathers/ancestors.
It's indeed part of my job while on this earth to help attain freedoms, liberties (a better life) for those who don't know them.
This is what good people do for one another.
In little tasks, big tasks, doesn't matter.
It is a conscious effort; it must be action.
It is always on the "it's my duty" list.
Leonardo| 2.27.11 @ 10:56AM
Let me just add a number three to your list of where our blessings of freedom came from, or how they have been obtained and kept.
3) Our brave fighting men in the United States Armed Forces.
Lest we forget.
Justin Gross| 3.2.11 @ 12:03AM
And now is the turn of Gadaffi to step down as the president of Libya. This wave of freedom is spreading in the world like wild fire. If this continues, then the day is not far off when this world will be free from autocratic regime.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Best.....id=5871930
Reebok | 8.11.11 @ 2:46AM
is good
العاب | 4.11.12 @ 5:19PM
Ignorance of islam is not going to protect you from it.