The American Spectator : Unilateralism Is Not a Crime

Text Size

Unilateralism Is Not a Crime

Even President Obama now knows that.

It's rather easy these days to find commentary on the international scene that heralds the decline of the power of the United States. Indeed the current U.S. president had continued his seemingly permanent election campaign theme that the best policy for the United States was to cease its distinctive role as the world's superpower and accept being merely "one among many" global leaders. This was true until Obama was ensnared by the reality of having to face history and Osama bin Laden's fate.

It's a convenient rhetorical device to attack the United States as a "flash in the pan" in the historical chapters of world dominance. With the now non-existence of the Soviet Union and its efforts to use the specious theories of Marx and Lenin to bolster the ambition of Moscow to impose Russian imperialism, it is a small step to denigrate America's belief in itself and its exceptional role in the world.

Paul Kennedy, author of The Rise and Fall of Great Powers, was quoted in 2007: "The U.S. has had its unipolar moment for about 15 years (representing the period since the fall of the USSR), but is beginning to realize it isn't getting the things done it wants." This theme has been well explored by liberal writers in the U.S. and abroad seeking to diminish the perception of American accomplishment.

The administration of George W. Bush and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq became the focal point of the "discovery" of the reduced power of the United States. More importantly, America was now seen to carry its imperial ambitions to new heights through the killing of thousands of civilians and torturing of prisoners. In the seeming blink of an historical eye the United States inherited all the characteristics of both Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia. This was all placed under the new opprobrium of "unilateralism."

If President Obama had wanted to prove the U.S. remains the lynchpin of political military affairs globally, the marginal role he has chosen for the U.S. armed forces in Libya inadvertently has been all that was necessary. Without the U.S. to wield the "big stick," dictators such as Qaddafi just run roughshod. But that's a reality that doesn't fit in with the America-phobia that permeates today's anti-exceptionalist polity. Wimping about the corridors of the United Nations in yet again another round of appeasement of Iran is considered the preferred counter to the clear threat of eventual Persian military dominance of the oil production of the Middle East.

Henry Kissinger along with George Shultz were quoted several years ago as believing that the great powers such as the United States, Russia, and China should join together against nuclear proliferation and that would control the spread of global nuclear weapon capability. How this new version of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is supposed to work is a mystery when essentially the same group can't even get a starving and self-destructive North Korea to agree to abandon its nuclear weapon program.

The very pragmatic North Koreans know far better then anyone else that the real arbiter of their future is the United States of America. Pyongyang does not whine about American power; it reacts to it. The North Koreans want to negotiate directly with "the big dog." They want a deal from Washington. They recognize and respect America's ability to wage war -- and peace. The leadership in Pyongyang has no illusions as to who will be the most reliable partner.

Lord Douglas Hurd, a former British foreign minister in the middle 1990s, argued later for multilateralism and dialogue as being the key to solving problems posed by Iran and the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. He referred to unilateral actions as "imperialistic" and not worthy of Europe or the United States. The trouble with this highly laudable goal of multilateral approaches is that they don't seem to work as anything but diplomatic cover at best -- when they work at all. The strength of America is its ability to maintain the world's perception that this one nation on its own can thwart the ambitions of aggressors --though it is reassuring to have the assistance when necessary of its traditional allies.

While vilified for invading Iraq to force its brutal dictatorship to relinquish control, the United States, with only the direct military participation of Great Britain, was forced to go it alone. This is the source of the charges of unilateralism. Somehow defending the defenseless has gone out of fashion.

Multilateralism generally does not work as a forceful instrument unless time is not a factor and effective military intervention is not required. As a peacekeeping device it only works in the form of "showing the flag," as United Nations' experiences have for the most part proven in the Middle East and Africa.

It may not be politically correct to say, but without the U.S. as a committed champion, the world is vulnerable to every murderous and domineering country/group that seeks to impose its will on its neighborhood near and far. It's not America's job to be the world's police force, but when we perceive that international criminal actions could, would, or have endangered the United States or its interests (and only then), the U.S. has every right to move unilaterally to block and remove those dangers. A multinational approach might assist in such an objective, but it certainly should not be allowed to impede the effort.

Barack H. Obama realized he had no other choice but to prove he really was an American president. If what he ordered was imperialism, so be it!

About the Author

George H. Wittman writes a weekly column on international affairs for The American Spectator online. He was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (66) | Leave a comment

Michael Tomlinson| 5.4.11 @ 6:19AM

I would call it domestic political opportunism considering his and Holders consistent position of coddling Muslim terrorists, theocrats and fundamentalists.

Alan Brooks| 5.4.11 @ 12:06PM

People like you coddle Christian fundamentalists.
Someday Reverend Phelps will die a more painful death than bin Laden; Phelp's heart attack, say, will be worse than the bullet in bin Laden's brain.

Alan Brooks| 5.4.11 @ 12:08PM

... Reverend Felch.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 1:37PM

Alan,

There is something fundamentally wrong with you.

Alan Brooks| 5.4.11 @ 8:59PM

I am a islamic servant, I answer only to obama and my cult masters.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 10:55PM

I think we all know who is probably posting here under Alan's name, don't we?
He didn't just write that.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 1:38PM

But God still loves you anyway. He is waiting for you to really turn from your unbelief.

Al Adab| 5.4.11 @ 2:14PM

Brooksie just enjoys pulling our chain margie. No rational being believes that stuff anymore.

We should remember also that: "Extremeism in the defense of Liberty is no vice and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue".

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 10:58PM

"Brooksie just enjoys pulling our chain margie."
Oh, I know, Al. It's ok.
While not exactly a harmless lovable fuzzball, he's peanuts compared to some of the coconuts around here.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:22PM

Occasionally Brooks says something intelligent. And he's not really mean spirited. You, on the other hand, are great souled, Margie. It is a pleasure to share the same decade with you. I also enjoy Ken, Al Adab, Steve A, Michael above, JP II, a whole bunch of people here.

But you are a particularly sweet person, Margie. And so is your husband. G-d Bless.

Al Adab| 5.4.11 @ 7:22PM

Perhaps one of these days AS will sponsor a blogger convention and we can all share and meet at long last.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 10:22PM

Al Adab,

That's a great thought, but I don't think they'd let me in. :^)~

Though I'd be willing to bring a giant pot of my best chocolate chili with extra habaneros.
Yes, I said chocolate chili. You oughtta taste it.

Al Adab| 5.4.11 @ 11:13PM

You bet on the chili. I understand mole sauce. We can have Brooksie host the bar.

Occam's Tool| 5.21.11 @ 7:49PM

Margie,

You are a cruel woman---spicy and chocolatey! Owww!

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 10:51PM

O.T~
Thanks for the wonderful words~ and you KNOW how I feel about you. I read your other post, below as well about evangelical Christians. You are correct, we ARE the best friends you could ever have.
I must tell you why that is so though. It is because of the Jewish Messiah, Christ Jesus. It is because of His revealing His amazing love to each one personally and pouring it into our hearts, opening up our spiritual "eyes" to the Scriptures, and causing us to understand fully about how if it wasn't for His plan all together~ that of choosing the Jewish people for Himself~ their rebellion~ and the subsequent grafting in of the olive tree (as it is written) of us, the Gentiles.
Thus by that mercy of His, we can and now are (Christians) considered by God to be spiritual Jews.

And now, the Bible tells us (God's own Words) that in turn we are to love the Jewish people and show them (you) the same love He showed us~ that indeed they (you) might be grafted in again.

This is all written and explained in the book of Romans chapter 11. One of the most beautiful and amazing books ever written. That and the book of Hebrews, my most favorite of all.

Jesus even told the Jews back then that if they continued in His Words, they would be His disciples, and they would "Know the Truth, and the Truth would set them free. ( Jn. 8:31 & 32).

The Jewish messiah, Christ Jesus is the Truth. I am praying for you that you will come to know Him soon.

Again, thanks for the kind words, and Vic thanks you as well. :^).
God bless you.

P.S. I agree with you about Brooks~ there's a real person in there somewhere, and sometimes it shows. Sometimes he is actually funny, and sometimes he tells it like it is.
His mean spiritedness is peanuts compared to A LOT of the guys here.
He's an easy scapegoat for them to pick on because he is who he is and doesn't hide it.
How's that for psycho analysis?
Sorry Alan, I meant no harm.
You know God always holds out hope for you. And ALL of us.

Occam's Tool| 5.21.11 @ 7:51PM

I just saw this, Margie. Thank you so much.

(But that Chocolate Chili---Owww. That sounds tooo good.)

Albert| 5.4.11 @ 3:44PM

Perhaps, Mr. Brooks, you could lobby to have someone besides yourself (since people like you always employ surrogates) "napalm" all Christian institutions and personnel with "extreme prejudice," since your fetishes for napalm and "extreme prejudice" are well known. Perhaps one day you will live in the glory of Islam and under the protection of Shari'a, as you seem to so vehemently and viscerally desire . In your world, it is too bad Sherman didn't wipe out every Southern Baptist in existence during his march to the sea. You are one sick person and seriously in need of psychiatric intervention. I suggest you seek as much.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:44PM

You know, there are a lot of evangelical Christians I really, really like.

Like my wonderful in-laws, for example (my father-in-law was in 2 branches of Service in 2 different wars). Like Ken. Like Margie. Like 3/4 of my girlfriends in college.

Phelps is an asshat, not a fundamentalist. I know quite a few Evangelicals who are among the very best people I know, and, while I have been very free with criticism, you note that I don't slam Evangelicals. They are the best friends a Jew has in the world.

Dee See| 5.4.11 @ 7:27AM

"We are using MASSIVE third world
immigration (mainly muslim) to destroy British culture
once and for all forever."
-TONY BLAIR
(SEE Youtube: Alan Watt 'The Deliberate Annihilation of Britain' and Daily Mail citation of the same)

THEN for more fun

CHECK OUT 'Fabian Socialists Win' for a
devastating video of Australia's PM bragging
about his betrayal of Australia to the RED Chinese
'leadership' ---all in Chinese. (SEE Youtube)

We're SURE you'll agree, it's that bad
__________________REALLY

Southern_Comment| 5.4.11 @ 8:00AM

That policy of America just being one of the global powers, is pretty funny and hypocritical in itself. On the world stage we're supposed to be heading to one of the powers - meanwhile our president who is supposed to be one of us has an ego that puts him on a ground above us (in his head) and his party continually talks to their own countrymen like we are an unintelligent enemy.

Don Carlson| 5.4.11 @ 10:17AM

It is clear to most of us that President Obama and his supporters subscribe to a most virulent and self-preening sort of anti-Americanism that explicitly denies the principles on which America was founded. Both were excusably heartened by their quite stunning victory in 2008. However, the failure of President Obama's policies to advance Americans' well-being, and the Democrats' failure to convincingly blame this on conservatives and Republicans diminishes their chances of continuing in power after 2012. What to do?

Pragmatically President Obama has fallen back on the largely successful policies of President George W. Bush: reduced rates of taxation, continued war against terrorists and the people who encourage them, and efforts to kill terrorist leaders outright. These are high-profile actions that lend credence to the absurd idea that President Obama is in some way a centrist. In the main, President Obama continues on a perfidious course to diminish American economic health and influence, reduce Americans' wealth and consumption, deflate American military preparedness and capacity, and cripple the nation's notion of its special place among nations as an exemplar of practical liberty. This last is of primary importance to President Obama, because it is the idea of America as liberal paradigm that most offends his leftist sentiments—and those of privileged and benighted leftists everywhere.

Thus far American leftists have thrived through opportunistic demagoguery; it is all they know how to do, and they and President Obama will never change. Mr. Wittman seems to believe that President Obama has learned something, but opportunists never learn, they only fake away.

DRed| 5.4.11 @ 10:18AM

Obama's consistently said that he would act unilaterally if we had intelligence about Osama's location. He didn't just discover unilateralism-he did what he said he'd do all along.

Paul Bernard| 5.4.11 @ 10:24AM

I literally cannot believe, still, that people professing to be conservatives do not understand the profoundly un-conservative, anti-Christian essence of the idea of "American exceptionalism".

Our country is not exempt from the rules of history. Our country is not exempt from the laws it has enacted. Our country is not exempt from Lord Acton's rule - which conservatives once understood as a matter of fact.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely - and the US is the most powerful state in the history of the world. But that does not make America "exceptional". Patriotic Americans do not love America because it is "the best". Or because it is "#1". Anyone who does love America because it is "the best" does not really love America at all, because if America wasn't "#1" they would no longer love it. True-hearted, patriotic Americans love America because it is ours.

There is literally not one jot of Christian teaching that implies that Big Government has been sanctified by God and given a Holy Mission to spread "democracy". The idea it self is obscene. It is the Church of Christ that has been tasked with the salvation of mankind, not the government of the United States. To insist otherwise is to make an idol of Big Government, i.e. to commit idolatry, a grave sin. It is also un-conservative in the extreme. Proponents of the idea of American Exceptionalism who believe our gov't has been given a Holy Mission From God have zero standing to oppose those who are carrying out this alleged sacred duty. How can they ever fight to shrink Big Gov't if it's the instrument of God's Divine Will? They also must take into account who it is that Providence has chosen to lead this Crusade at this time: Barack Obama. How can any conservative who believes Big Government has a mandate from God defy the leader chosen to execute this Holy Mission? It's insane.

America is not "exceptional" because it is the most powerful nation in history - other nations have held that title. America is not "exceptional" because it is the "freest" country ever - we lock up more of our citizens than any nation in history, our states are not free to ban infanticide, our citizens are not free from gov't surveillance, nor are we free to choose from more than two establishment-approved candidates for President. We are exceptional in none of the ways proponents of "American Exceptionalism" claim we are.

What makes America exceptional is this: it is populated by Americans. And that should be all that's needed for any true American. And that should be the primary concern for all good Americans: America will soon be populated primarily by non-Americans. Which means America will no longer be the land of the Americans - which means America will no longer exist. And that is the only real, existential threat America faces - no other threat literally imperils the existence of our nation. And yet the GOP, every time it is in power, expends its efforts in holding the door wide open to more non-American cheap labor.

Which means the GOP - far from being an instrument of Divine Providence - is an instrument of America's destruction. Why do so many conservatives waste their time bashing the Democrats when our own party facilitates our genocide?

Until the GOP is reformed, defeating the Democrats is useless. And the GOP will not be reformed as long as there are lunatics out there claiming this political party is serving God's Divine purpose.

Don Carlson| 5.4.11 @ 10:41AM

It is evident that the exasperated Paul Bernard has no idea what "American Exceptionalism" means or what an American conservative seeks to preserve. Mr. Bernard may mistake himself for a conservative of some sort, but most others would not because American conservatism has to do with the inclusive principles of American culture and recognizes that one is an American not because one lives here but because one accepts, among other principles, the very American idea of personal liberty and responsibility.

Paul Bernard| 5.4.11 @ 11:06AM

I'm sorry, Mr. Carlson, but you are incorrect. What you are describing is the left-liberal idea of the "propositional" or "credal nation", which is as nonsensical as it is novel and revolutionary - which is to say, un-conservative. Because people professing to be conservatives have absorbed this idea and now repeat it, does not make the idea any less radical or insane. The U.S. is a state which contains, yes, people of different languages and backgrounds. But there is also an American nation, consisting of the American people, who are bound together by a common language, culture, homeland, and history - and the United States is that people's nation-state as surely as France is the nation-state of the French people.

To claim that America is not a nation in any true sense, and that no historic American people exists, is to participate in the genocide of those very people. No conservative who believes such nonsense can oppose illegal immigration, for if "American" merely describes anyone who believes in "personal liberty" and "responsibility" - neither of which are "American" ideas, I might add - then a great portion of the world are already Americans, whatever language they speak, whatever gods they worship, whatever country they live or die in. It is to render America literally meaningless - if everyone who believes in "American ideals" is an American, then everyone on the planet is American, as there is no single set of "American ideals". A centrist liberal, a neoconservative, a paleoconservative, a radical leftist and a libertarian will all have different - and contradicting - ideas of what "American ideals" are supposed to be.

For liberals, who despise the historic American people and the Anglo-Western tradition we embody, the idea of the Credal Nation is useful, as it aids them in their quest to displace and dispossess the American people, and replace them with Third World refugees. But for conservatives it's simply nonsensical and antilogical.

Trinacria| 5.4.11 @ 2:06PM

Thanks, Chesterton. Now, leave some room on the internet for the rest of us.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:29PM

Paul,

plenty of German Jewish patriots were sent to the gas chamber. They thought Germany was exceptional because it was German, not because of its guiding ideas. They were mistaken.

We are exceptional here, and, no, I would not love my country if I thought it was intrinsically evil.

It's not because we're the most powerful, either. It's because we're fundamentally a fabulous experiment in self-government and blessed with great people.

I'm sorry, pal, but I HAVE lived overseas. In a supposedly "free" country to boot (NZ). The difference in freedom between there and here, the difference in the tone of public discussion, is palpable. You have no idea what you have in this incredible place, Mr. Bernard. And what unites this people is not genetics, but a generally shared ideal for the concept of a certain type of self-governemnt and an inherent orneriness in the face of stupidity. In addition, the generosity of America is like no place on earth. Travel abroad, in rich countries, and see the miserliness and selfishness.

RCV| 5.4.11 @ 9:20PM

Beautifully said, Ocaam, and every word so true.

Occam's Tool| 5.21.11 @ 7:52PM

Thank you, sir.

Paul Bernard| 5.5.11 @ 8:29AM

Mr. Occam, you wrote:

plenty of German Jewish patriots were sent to the gas chamber. They thought Germany was exceptional because it was German, not because of its guiding ideas. They were mistaken.

This is objectively untrue: Germany is exceptional, whatever crimes Germans have committed in the past. “Exceptional” means “rare” or “extraordinary” or “unique”. Germany is exceptional – it is the exception, among all the nations of the Earth – because it is the only German nation-state, it is the only state of the German people. German literature, philosophy, music etc – such as these are not produced in Mexico, or Thailand, or by the Inuit of the far north. In addition to being literally incorrect, your thinking itself is erroneous: you seem to believe that “exceptional” in this case means “good” or “moral”. It does not - it means something more like "unique" or "special". Nor did Nazi crimes against Jews have anything to do with a belief in German exceptionalism – you are confusing national pride with racial supremacism (as liberals do). It really is rather a mess of misunderstood words and illogic.

We are exceptional here, and, no, I would not love my country if I thought it was intrinsically evil.

I am not sure what you are talking about here. What people is “intrinsically evil”? Where did this even come from? I am not sure what this is a response to at all.

It's not because we're the most powerful, either. It's because we're fundamentally a fabulous experiment in self-government and blessed with great people.

So you do not love the American people: you love the American government, and you think that whatever random people happen to be alive and living between Canada and Mexico – regardless of what language they speak, what they believe, how they behave etc – are “great”. That’s a meaningless sentiment.

And what unites this people is not genetics, but a generally shared ideal for the concept of a certain type of self-governemnt and an inherent orneriness in the face of stupidity

This is also untrue, in such an obvious way that I find it hard to believe you bothered typing it. Our country is united by a “shared ideal for the concept of a certain type of self-governemnt [sic]”? Really? You, Ms. Margie, Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank are all “share” the same “ideal” of “self government”? Are you a left-liberal? For myself, I have never shared the “ideal” promoted by Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Michael Moore and Hanoi Jane Fonda. It is my belief that this ideal of theirs is profoundly un-American – which is to say it is incompatible with the ideals of the Anglo-Celtic, British Isles-descended Founders, and incompatible with the ideals of those who came after, and who fully assimilated into the culture and population those Founders established. That culture and that population are "American".

What you seem to fail to comprehend - and what every generation of Americans not raised by television did comprehend - is that "America" does not refer only to a political system, or ideology. It also refers to a specific and unique people - the American People - who share a common history, language and culture - just like any other people. The people of the English nation, for instance, are descended from Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, Norweigans, Normans etc - and yet today they are one people, because Englishmen (like Americans) share a common history, culture, language and folkways. To deny that an American nation exists is to deny that there is such a thing as American culture at all - a common radical leftist accusation, but one that is jarring to find on these pages.

Occam's Tool| 5.21.11 @ 7:55PM

Dear Paul,

You fail to understand the exceptionalism of America. There are guiding principles in our social compact different from any other nation, in a way, that for example, Italy is NOT different from Germany.

I'm not denying an American nation, but I AM saying that you are clueless as to the nature and exceptional freedom of American culture in a way that I am not.

Occam's Tool| 5.21.11 @ 8:04PM

No, I love the American people, and I understand what animates the uniqueness of the culture. Not our government, but our approach to the social compact IS unique, and vastly different even from those countries, like Britain, which most closely resemble us. If your job involved evaluating the borders of freedom versus insanity everyday you would understand this better.

Let me give you an example of an uniqueness of a culture and how it plays out, as opposed to pure genetics.

Jews win more Nobel prizes per capita than anyone. (Shut up, Clint, you bore me and you're wrong.) Some might state that this is genetic. I disagree.

Jews are the only culture I know of that have a literacy test as their test of manhood. It is the only culture I know of where the scholar pounds on the jock to win the hot chicks. It is the only culture where children are taught learning is sweet by having honey poured on a clean chalkboard and being encouraged to lick it off.

I would propose that the culture, rather than the genetics, creates the atmosphere that is fertile ground for the creation of genius. You get out what you emphasize.

And in the US, we emphasize the creation of ornery skeptics who revere the rights of the individual. That is very unique.

Go overseas for a while, observe closely, and learn something.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 11:08PM

"anti-Christian essence of the idea of "American exceptionalism".

Oh, look! It's the many faces of Toddard.

You have GOT to be kidding, Mr. Bernard. Anti-Christian?!

Anti-Christian?!

This is like my good friend (barf) Stuey Koehl saying I'm a heretic for believing God's Words as written in the Bible and rejecting all else.
I wonder what you would've said to the Christian abolitionists who started the Republican party if you were alive back then. Or for calling me an anti-semite because I quoted Jesus one time speaking to the Jews.

In other words~ it's YOUR thinking that's all wrong, sir.

How is it that you have become so bewitched and befuddled that you actually think backwards?

Have you ever actually READ about the founding of this great country? Maybe you've only read the history as written by the Leftists who wrote the history books and so your mind is filled with hatred for this country rather than love.

I know a few great books you can read to bring you up to... reality.
Without God and without Christians, we wouldn't even be here right now. YOU wouldn't even be here.

America IS the most exceptional country on the face of the earth! I intend on keeping it that way while all the Toddard like mal-contents complain like old hippie freaks in their basements about how rotten we are.

Ugh.

Paul Bernard| 5.5.11 @ 7:57AM

I'm sorry, Ms. Margie - I would respond to this post of yours in more detail, but it's not really a response to what I wrote in any real way. I have already explained what is un-Christian and un-conservative about the idolatrous concept of "American exceptionalism" (below). You seem not to have considered (much less addressed, or refuted) anything I've written. It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote at all. For instance, you wrote that "Without God and without Christians, we wouldn't even be here right now. YOU wouldn't even be here". This is not something with which I disagree. I have not even implied that I oppose Christianity. My entire argument is pro-Christian; The point I was making is that the idea of American Exceptionalism contradicts Christian teaching. I am not taking issue with Christians or Christianity, I'm taking issue with this idolatrous concept that is replacing Christianity in the hearts of too many otherwise-decent Americans. Please read what I wrote again, in a spirit of Christian charity, with your heart open to understanding:

1. There is literally not one jot of Christian teaching that implies that Big Government has been sanctified by God and given a Holy Mission to spread "democracy".

Is this true or not, Ms. Margie (I apologize for the familiarity, but I do not know your proper name)? If it is untrue, would you please tell me what Christian tradition teaches that America has been anointed by God to lead a holy crusade for democracy?

2. It is the Church of Christ that has been tasked with the salvation of mankind, not the government of the United States. To insist otherwise is to make an idol of Big Government, i.e. to commit idolatry, a grave sin.

Is this true or not, Ms. Margie? Is it the Christian Church that has been tasked with the salvation of mankind, or is it the U.S. gov't (currently led by Barack Hussein Obama)? And if the U.S. has replaced the Body of Christ in one's heart, is that not idolatry? Or at the very least, heresy?

3. Proponents of the idea of American Exceptionalism who believe our gov't has been given a Holy Mission From God have zero standing to oppose those who are carrying out this alleged sacred duty. How can they ever fight to shrink Big Gov't if it's the instrument of God's Divine Will?

Is this true or false, Ms. Margie? If God has given the U.S. government a special mission to democratize the planet, isn't it wrong to oppose God's will by opposing the instrument of that will?

I do look forward to your responses, and I sense that you have a kind heart and an open mind. I do hope you will consider what I've written before dismissing it. Either way, thank you for your time, and I wish you the best.

Margie| 5.5.11 @ 1:41PM

The proponents of Big Government are the LEFT, not Christians.

You've got it backwards.

Nice try.

I don't go much for being buttered up with a lot of grease. I know a snake when I see one.
How's that for kind hearted?
Kind doesn't have anything to do with being "nice". It means speaking the truth to lies because you care enough to do so.
So now you've experienced real kindness.

The Bible says that God is Truth. His Son IS the Truth. Those whom He sets free from Sin and Hell and Death are free indeed because as the Bible says. "If the Son makes you free, you are free indeed." Jn. 8:36.

God gives man freedom, and men have declared it and began this country based on that God given freedom.
Leftist Socialist men who despise this freedom like Obama and his despicable ilk hate individual freedom and are in full steam ahead mode into destroying it.

It's really simple.
Go ahead and falsely accuse of that being idolatrous if you wish.
Heh, it's a free country after all.

Occam's Tool| 5.21.11 @ 8:10PM

Really, Paul. So, if America becomes a jackboot nation and starts dropping Nukes on, say, Vatican City because the Pope farted in the presence of "The Chosen One" we should all support our country?

Don't speak nonsense. The greatest German 1933-1945 was a dissident pastor who was killed for treason.

Steve A| 5.4.11 @ 10:26AM

DRed, Correct. Remember him being criticized during the campaign for saying that he would authorize use of force in Pakistan if thats where the bad guys were? I recall agreeing with that then. The GOP came out against this as shallow thought & violating an "ally." So much for the "ally" theory.

Mark Jeffery Koch| 5.4.11 @ 11:58AM

If Bush was still President and it came out that an unarmed Bin Laden was killed rather than captured and the body was dumped overseas the left wing would be all over Bush for trying to hide something.

Oh, and a forty minute prayer/funeral service for Osama Bin Laden on the aircraft carrier? Disgusting. Did the 3,000 Americans who were murdered on 911 have the decency of a burial? Bin Laden did not deserve any kind of decent burial.

DRed| 5.4.11 @ 1:50PM

You're right. Osama certainly didn't deserve a decent burial. He deserved exactly what he got-two bullets in the head.

The burial wasn't about Osama. It was about us. It was meant to show that we're better than a piece of garbage like him and that we put a higher value on human life than Osama and his ilk.

Trinacria| 5.4.11 @ 2:14PM

It's all a matter of interpretation; consider the following:

White House Interpretation: His corpse was cleansed according to religious custom.

Reality: We turned the firehose on, adjusted the setting to "jet" and fired away.

White House Interpretation: After being cleansed, his corpse was wrapped in a shroud.

Reality: After being hosed down, what was left of his corpse was stuffed in bed sheets and weighed down with chains (because shit floats).

White House Interpretation: After ceremonial remarks, his body was buried at sea.

Reality: After ceremonial cheers, he was dumped in the ocean, where he now sleeps with the fishes.

Anthony| 5.4.11 @ 2:08PM

This is the perverse calculus of our leftist Muslim president; a calculus that puts the purported sensitivities of Islam ahead of the American people.
It has been said Obozo, even if qualified under the Constitution to serve as president, is not American, as he has been brought up in a non-traditional American family.
This is a truism. Obozo feels no pain for America or those who suffered and died in the 9//11 horror. He has nothing in common with most Americans. I suspect his first thought was that America got what was coming to it, just like his pastor, Rev. Wright.
He'll now show up at Ground Zero, having avoided it for 2 1/2 years, like a vampire avoids holy water, to take credit for his 16 hours of dithering.
Bush, a real gentleman and statesman, whose shoulders Obozo stood on to accomplish the death of Osama, wisely will not participate in Obozo's farce, as Bush knew this was never about him a president, and certainly not about Obozo.
That said, Obozo will not release photos despite Americans deserving same, for whatever reasons we require, because Obozo is first and foremost more concerned about Muslims than Americans.
The arguement that the release of the photos would only enflame the Muslim community is a straw dog. They already hate us and need no pretext to add to their hate. Besides, they claim this is all a staged event. Given the way Obozo handled his birth certificate, who can say otherwise with certainty?
No Mr. Obama, the victims families deserve this moment, the American people deserve this moment.
Try for once to pretend you are a real American, as opposed to a citizen of the world.

Anthony| 5.4.11 @ 2:46PM

One last point. Drudge is reporting that a number of the political elites in Washington, both D and R, have seen the photos and confirm Osama is dead. No need to release the photos to ordindary Americans.
Scott Brown, recently elevated to elite status by us, is satisfied. Time to move on.
Folks, we need more than just an election in 2012 to clean out the rats nest in Washington. No, in order to remove the corrupt and aloof elite political class, we need our own assault teams.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:31PM

You tell me, Anthony, if I'm wrong on this point---wouldn't you like a picture of his shot up head to adorn your dartboard?

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 5.4.11 @ 12:15PM

"Here’s Nancy Pelosi September 7, 2006:

[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done . . . is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

Nancy Pelosi yesterday:
The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . ."

ABNCP| 5.4.11 @ 1:12PM

Brooks's moral relativism is pathetic. I almost can't believe he understands what he is posting, except I've read his stuff before. To say Christian Fundamentalists, even the odious Reverend Fred Phelps, are no different than Muslim Jihadists is beyond ignorant and can only be concocted in some progressive anti-Christian fever swamp. Please Brooks take a deep breath and actually give some thought to what you post.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 1:39PM

I wonder. Will Obama be handing out autographed pics of Bin-Laden's photo?

RCV| 5.4.11 @ 2:15PM

No, he's not even releasing the photos. Too bad you Obama-haters can share in the satisfaction that objective Americans feel in this triumph for justice and our country. You let your hatred trump your patriotism. Very sad.

RCV| 5.4.11 @ 2:49PM

SB "can't" in second sentence.

Albert| 5.4.11 @ 3:51PM

Every time you claim "hatred" in your screeds you impeach your own posts. Such idiocy of claiming conservatives "hate" the President is meaningless and a vain attempt to pigeon hole and dismiss conservatives as "haters" while ignoring the very real political and legal objections raised concerning this President and leftist politics in general. You need to grow up. The adults here tire of your infantile comments.

Shermans riding again!| 5.4.11 @ 6:33PM

If you can't play with the adults RCV, please be silent.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:36PM

Hey, RCV, I hate Obama (for being a p#@$kless wonder), but I think Obama did a good thing killing him.

Although not as good a thing as taking him to Gitmo, torturing the crap out of him Chicago-style (Boss, by Mike Royko, notes the pleasant Chicago cop tactic of hitting the perp over the head with the Chicago phonebook---your pine feels compressed after a while of this, and no bruises or marks seen).

But, quite frankly, I want to gloat over the photos. I wanna be a gloater. I paid enough in taxes to see the photos.

By the way, you're fun to disagree with. You remind me of my Liberal buddies in college.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:38PM

I'm sorry, RCV, I got distracted...

"torturing him Chicago style, extracting all actionable info, then covering him in Lard and taking him out to tied to the Dingo fence for the Wild Dogs to get at."

That's what I wanted to say. Thanks.

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:38PM

Sorry, on call last night--"to be tied to the Dingo fence..."

Nick| 5.4.11 @ 7:26PM

RCV,

You know how I feel about O'Bama and bleeding heart liberals.

That said, I am entirely grateful that the President resisted his liberal instincts and pulled the trigger on going after Usama, and ultimately ridding the world of this perpetrator of evil. And, this was a good thing.

That is not a shot at O'Bama, by the way, that is a shot at liberalism.

RCV| 5.4.11 @ 7:43PM

It was a good thing, Nick, and Obama didn't have to resist any instincts to do it. He said from the very beginning before he was President, that he would hunt down and get Bin Laden, and that if he was hiding in Pakistan he wouldn't ask permission before going after him. He stuck to his word and got the job accomplished. And we're all better off for it. Hope that Bin Laden is enjoying his 92 sturgeons in his underwater paradise.

Margie| 5.4.11 @ 10:20PM

Aww RCV,

I do hate him for what he's doing to my country, and that is all.
Would you not hate a man that abused your daughter if you had one?
Even God hates those who hate Him.
He even throws liars into Hell.
The Bible even says He hates with PERFECT hatred.
I hope he repents before he dies because he is a fraud and destroyer of the America that I love and is destroying our freedom.
And why should I give Obummer any credit for killing Osama?
Any President would have done the same.
Anyhow~ Obama gives himself enough credit to make up for the rest of the world x 2.

gary siebel| 5.4.11 @ 2:05PM

You seriously misinterpret Obama, as do so many conservatives, one of several reasons why he is extremely likely to be re-elected. Obama wanted Osama dead, and when he got the chance he killed him; it's as simple as that. He has proved he can pull the trigger.

Libya is actually a Repub nightmare. It was Livingston's lobbying that brought Libya back into the fold -- remember him, the disgraced ex-Speaker?

There has been a very weird role reversal: the Repubs used to be the fiscally sensible ones, but Bush and Reagan deficits smashed that idea (the Tea Party is trying to bring them back), and have a solid foreign policy; also smashed because of the unnecessary war without finding a single WMD. The Dems foreign and economic policies then appeared sensible in comparison. Killing Osama has secured Obama's position in the center, the ideal place for an incumbent seeking re-election.

Burying Osama in the Ocean, no matter with or without ceremony, was brilliant. Of key interest was the declaration that they didn't want a burial location to become a shrine.

Conservatives are showing a distinct lack of spine in failing to escalate attacks on that proposed shrine/mosque/Islamic Center in NYC. Burying Osama at sea was an indirect admission that, despite the Sunni Islamic distaste for shrines, human nature tends to create them anyway, and hence the mosque will inevitably become a shrine -- perhaps even to Osama, because now he can't have his own!

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 5.4.11 @ 4:34PM

You're rather delusional. Panetta just admitted that it was waterboarding that led to Osama Bin Laden, further vindicating Bush 43.

However, this also plays into a developing theme that the American public is being misled by the Obama administration.

First, we were informed that Osama Bin Laden was armed. Now, apparently he was not.

The White House has never revealed the truth about the operation yet, and I suspect there is more to come.

Only a PC con artist like Obama could screw this up.

But the Obama administration is starting to bungle the publicity as only a liberal knows how.

Michele San Pietro| 5.4.11 @ 5:05PM

I have never liked Obama, but this time he has really done the right thing by masterminding the murder of Obama, one of the dirtiest thugs in history. I would never vote for him if I were an American, but I must recognize he proved that, in the last analysis, he's loyal to his country.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 5.4.11 @ 5:06PM

Proves nothing really.

Thom| 5.4.11 @ 7:44PM

"masterminding the murder of Obama",

Michele he didn't mastermind anything about this operation or for that matter would have any other President... Give credit where credit is due but never think the man at the top of the chain has anything useful to do with the actual operational nature of the mission. Doesn't work that way if you want a successful mission....

ABNCP| 5.4.11 @ 6:30PM

Sibel. Obama didn't pull the trigger and kill OBL, A SPECIAL OPS NAVY SEAL TEAM DID! After the Joint Special Operations Command evaluated and planned the mission based in Intel compiled over many months from interrogation you progressives will no longer allow. It then went to the National Security Council for approval then to Obama for approval. When he was told we can really get the SOB this time what do you think he was going to do?

Occam's Tool| 5.4.11 @ 6:39PM

ABNCP---concur. His chances would have been REALLY good if he had taken a pass on Osama.

Thom| 5.4.11 @ 7:29PM

Anyone who has ever worked with a “committee” to try to get something done in a hurry understands that the nation version of such “committees” like the UN or some other thrown together collective are inherently inefficient and costly where as time is important.

There aren’t many times where time is not of upmost importance where military actions are concerned and likewise national interest where military actions are likely. We didn’t ask for anyone’s opinion or for permission about our decision to go to war against both Germany and Japan after only Japan attacked us on Dec, 7th, 1941 yet many believe today that our own national interest is best served by letting others dictate what our actions will be to serve our interest.

That’s the essence of hitching our national interest to the interest of others. When we do that, like we are doing with Iran and now Libya nothing effective gets done because none of the junior partners to our decision add any value to the action required to affect a meaningful result.

Committees formed from parties with different interest rarely produce meaningful positive results hence the UN is a failure with regard to its charter because the bulk of its members have an equal veto power over actions required to produce meaningful results while having no skin in the game or means to affect results on their own.

Unilateralism in practice is just common sense. Those that complaint the loudest are almost always the ones with no power to do anything and want power over those that do….

Richard Baker| 5.5.11 @ 4:50PM

What really amazed me is that the planning started last August, if my info is correct. Is this because the Kenyan was repelled by the idea and it took that long to convince His Highness that we should launch? Just wondering.