Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Michael Medved :: Townhall.com Columnist
Foreign Policy Lessons From Fighting Muslim Pirates
by Michael Medved
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Most Americans remain utterly ignorant of this nation’s first foreign war but that exotic, long-ago struggle set the pattern for nearly all the many distant conflicts that followed. Refusal to confront the lessons of the First Barbary War (1801-1805) has led to some of the silliest arguments concerning Iraq and Afghanistan, and any effort to apply traditional American values to our future foreign policy requires an understanding of this all-but-forgotten episode from our past.

The war against the Barbary States of North Africa (Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli—today’s Libya) involved commitment and sacrifice far from home and in no way involved a defense of our native soil. For centuries, the Islamic states at the southern rim of the Mediterranean relied upon piracy to feed the coffers of their corrupt rulers. The state sponsored terrorists of that era (who claimed the romantic designation, “corsairs”) seized western shipping and sold their crews into unimaginably brutal slavery. By the mid-eighteenth century, European powers learned to save themselves a great deal of trouble and wealth by bribing the local authorities with “tribute,” in return for which the pirates left their shipping alone. Until independence, British bribes protected American merchant ships in the Mediterranean since they traveled under His Majesty’s flag; after 1783, the new government faced a series of crises as Barbary pirates seized scores of civilian craft (with eleven captured in 1793 alone). Intermittently, the United States government paid tribute to escape these depredations: eventually providing a bribe worth more than $1,000,000—a staggering one-sixth of the total federal budget of the time – to the Dey of Algiers alone.

When Jefferson became president in 1801, he resolved to take a hard line against the terrorists and their sponsors. “I know that nothing will stop the eternal increase of demands from these pirates but the presence of an armed force, and it will be more economical & more honorable to use the same means at once for suppressing their insolencies,” he wrote.

The president dispatched nearly all ships of the fledgling American navy to sail thousands of miles across the Atlantic and through the straits of Gibraltar to do battle with the North African thugs. After a few initial reverses, daring raids on sea and land (by the new Marine Corps, earning the phrase in their hymn “….to the shores of Tripoli”) won sweeping victory. A decade later, with the U.S. distracted by the frustrating and inconclusive War of 1812 against Great Britain, the Barbary states again challenged American power, and President Madison sent ten new ships to restore order with another decisive campaign (known as “The Second Barbary War, 1815).

The records of these dramatic, all-but-forgotten conflicts convey several important messages for the present day:

1. The U.S. often goes to war when it is not directly attacked. One of the dumbest lines about the Iraq War claims that “this was the first time we ever attacked a nation that hadn’t attacked us.” Obviously, Barbary raids against private shipping hardly constituted a direct invasion of the American homeland, but founding fathers Jefferson and Madison nonetheless felt the need to strike back. Of more than 140 conflicts in which American troops have fought on foreign soil, only one (World War II, obviously) represented a response to an unambiguous attack on America itself. Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a long-standing tradition of fighting for U.S. interests, and not just to defend the homeland.

2. Most conflicts unfold without a Declaration of War. Jefferson informed Congress of his determination to hit back against the North African sponsors of terrorism (piracy), but during four years of fighting never sought a declaration of war. In fact, only five times in American history did Congress actually declare war – the War of 1812, the Mexican War, The Spanish American War, World War I and World War II. None of the 135 other struggles in which U.S. troops fought in the far corners of the earth saw Congress formally declare war—and these undeclared conflicts (including Korea, Vietnam, the First Gulf War, and many more) involved a total of millions of troops and more than a hundred thousand total battlefield deaths.

3. Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injury", and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.”

4. Cruel Treatment of enemies by Muslim extremists is a long-standing tradition. In 1793, Algerian pirates captured the merchant brig Polly and paraded the enslaved crewmen through jeering crowds in the streets of Algiers. Dey Hassan Pasha, the local ruler, bellowed triumphantly: “Now I have got you, you Christian dogs, you shall eat stones.” American slaves indeed spent their years of captivity breaking rocks. According to Max Boot in his fine book The Savage Wars of Peace: “A slave who spoke disrespectfully to a Muslim could be roasted alive, crucified, or impaled (a stake was driven through the arms until it came out at the back of the neck). A special agony was reserved for a slave who killed a Muslim – he would be cast over the city walls and left to dangle on giant iron hooks for days before expiring of his wounds.”

5. There’s nothing new in far-flung American wars to defend U.S. economic interests. Every war in American history involved an economic motivation – at least in part, and nearly all of our great leaders saw nothing disgraceful in going to battle to defend the commercial vitality of the country. Jefferson and Madison felt no shame in mobilizing – and sacrificing – ships and ground forces to protect the integrity of commercial shipping interests in the distant Mediterranean.

Fortunately for them, they never had to contend with demonstrators who shouted “No blood for shipping!”

6. Even leaders who have worried about the growth of the U.S. military establishment came to see the necessity of robust and formidable armed forces. Jefferson and Madison both wanted to shrink and restrain the standing army and initially opposed the determination by President Adams to build an expensive new American Navy. When Jefferson succeeded Adams as president, however, he quickly and gratefully used the ships his predecessor built. The Barbary Wars taught the nation that there is no real substitute for military power, and professional forces that stand ready for anything.

7. America has always played “the cop of the world.” In part, Jefferson and Madison justified the sacrifices of the Barbary Wars as a defense of civilization, not just the protection of U.S. interests – and the European powers granted new respect to the upstart nation that finally tamed the North African pirates. Jefferson and Madison may not have fought for a New World Order but they most certainly sought a more orderly world. Many American conflicts over the last 200 years have involved an effort to enfort to enforce international rules and norms as much as to advance national interests. Wide-ranging and occasionally bloody expeditions throughout Central America, China, the Philippines, Africa and even Russia after the Revolution used American forces to prevent internal and international chaos.

The Barbary Wars cost limited casualties for the United States (only 35 sailors and marines killed in action) but required the expenditure of many millions of dollars – a significant burden for the young and struggling Republic. Most importantly, these difficult battles established a long, honorable tradition of American power projected many thousands of miles beyond our shores. Those who claim that our engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan represent some shameful, radical departure from an old tradition of pacifism and isolation should look closely at the reality of our very first foreign war—and all the other conflicts in the intervening 200 years.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Michael Medved's daily syndicated radio talk show reaches one of the largest national audiences every weekday between 3 and 6 PM, Eastern Time. Michael Medved is the author of eleven books, including the bestsellers What Really Happened to the Class of '65?, Hollywood vs. America, Right Turns and, most recently, The Ten Big Lies About America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Michael Medved's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Outstanding column
Unfortunately, this history is no longer taught in the public schools of the USA. The NEA and other liberal teachers unions forbid mention of the US armed forces being used for the good of the nation and the world, especially if the enemy is muslim.

Another item that is not allowed to be mentioned publicly (according to the Democrats, CAIR, and the media) is the part where the muslims admit that all non-muslims are to be killed or enslaved according to the commandments of their supposedly holy book. This war has been going on for over 1300 years and will only end when the world is 100% muslim or 100% non-muslim.

Those who do not know history
are destined to repeat it. Unfortunately, those who crave power on the left are both ignorant of history and unable to repeat it. I miss the days when our leaders were actually concerned about the welfare of our country and had the cahonies to protect our interests.

Great history lesson, Michael. Thanks for the article.

Thanks Michael
I confess to being embarrased not to have known this history. (esp since I did OCS with USMC )

Medved
I read indepth about those Barbary wars a couple of weeks ago from a link given on this site by a blogger. The similarities between that war and this war are uncanny. Great article.

We should be able
to speak openly about what muslims believe. There are only few known authors who write and talk about it, including Medved, Spencer, Savage and Klavan. Cair and other fifth column organizations are working hard to deny us this freedom. Liberal America-haters work hand in hand with muslim America-haters. Strange bedfellows.

Well said Michael
As someone who’s served in both Iraq and Afghanistan your short history lesson makes one great point, the fight against Islam is not a new American problem, and the American people would be wise to remember that we’ve been plagued by the religion of peace since the birth of our nation.

A quote from BHO

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction”

.
Jefferson and Madison didn't nation-build. The modern equivalent would have been to go directly after Al-Quaeda, not overthrow Saddam. Those against the war in Iraq are for the most part, overwhelmingly in favor of obliterating Al-Quaeda (I know there are exceptions in the extreme-left).

The War on Terror for the right has become the equivalent of global warming for the left.

3 ***, great/horrible column
I thank Medved for raising important issues, and agree 100% with him that jihadist Islam has not changed its spots.

However, I am loathe to give our pro-French revolution, deconcrat party founding 3rd prez credit for anything.

I would say the US was attacked at Ft. Sumptner too, no?

My main argument against Medved is that he keeps referring to a "long standing tradition" of undeclared wars. Does that make it right? what about our constitution that Medved and the rest of us conservatives defend? In the barbary war, we (our ships) were in fact attacked, so we had every right to defend. So it wasn't just our economic interests, it was our ships and personnel. To my knowledge, the unlamented Hussein, Saddam not BHO, didn't attack our shipping except for the troops we still had there from the Gulf war.

What silliness
What contortions Medved has to go through to represent attacks on ships flying American flags as not being attacks on the US in order to make his comparison. Of the many undeclared military conflicts we have engaged in, this has to be one of the worst for making the case that we engage in military campaigns without being attacked.

Presumably it was chosen simply because the barbary pirates were muslim while most of our military adventures were not with muslims. And Medved is trying to make the false case that there is some continuity between this war and the barbary pirates wars rather than the more similar engagements with non-muslims.

Obviously the Vietnamese engaged in torture as well, and that was another undeclared war, so the case could be better made taking Vietnam as the model, but Medved chosen not to.

And of course the cause of the Barbary pirates war is not exactly a mystery. They were not engaging in prosetlytizing or conquest. They were after tribute. In that regard they are more similar to the pirates that now operate out of the Indian Ocean. But they bare little resemblance to Iraq or even al qaeda which had other motivations.

Medved's attempt to use our responding to piracy as a reason to invade Iraq then is just bizarre. Apparently he is going for the stupid, all muslims must be alike crowd who he can count on to ignore the much more obvious differences than similarities in these cases.

Rainy Parades
While Medved's history lesson is fine and dandy, there seems to be a lot of huffing and puffing going on and all for no real need.

He sounds like my kid when he thinks he might be in trouble for something he did. He will make his actions sound better by twisting the story just enough so that it's not really a lie and also makes his actions seem better and justifiable.

I tell him, if your actions are justifibale, then there is no need to twist them to make them seem better...stand on what they are.

Medved, let our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq speak for themselves. They need no justification from you.

Medved and Max Boot book
I just scanned on amazon the contents and reviewers comments of The Savage Wars of Peace, and although i usually agree with Medved, today's column sounds like a rehash of Boot.

Thanks Mike!
Who knew that slaves were treated that badly during the 1790's. That they could be roasted alive or impaled for disrespecting the dominant culture. But today's Muslims don't need to apologize for any of that, do they?

western bondbeam

You write about Medved: "He sounds like my kid when he thinks he might be in trouble for something he did. He will make his actions sound better by twisting the story just enough so that it's not really a lie and also makes his actions seem better and justifiable."



Michael, on his afternnon talk show, is no longer content to simply present Barack Obama's words, say, and give a modest critique. Medved now has taken to ginning up bits of an Obama speech (Mike is VERY selective about what you can hear; God forbid you actually hear something you might like), and he has become increasingly aggitated when his callers get the better of him (he is no longer amiable and good-humored).


Unfortunately, Medved's column's - and radio show - have become thinly disguised propoganda pieces for the Elect McCain '08 campaign.


Just as Medved used to hoot and holler and shamelessly shake the pom-poms for Romney before February 5th this year (all while Medved tore McCain to shreds).

Muslim Pirates
These distancing comments are typical of the liberals. When they don’t like history they attempt to slander it or disregard the facts.

Mike I have one word for your article “Outstanding”.

will
I don't listen to Medved's radio show.

Medved must be getting lazy though if he has to dig up old history lessons that Max Boot already put together.

Declaration of War.
This is a great article, but is makes one significant error of fact. In the article, Mr. Medved claims that there have been only five Declarations of War in US history. However, how else could one view the October 2002 "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" as anything other than a Congressional Declaration of War?

Joe
Who here has slandered history or attempted to disregard it?

Attacks on US planes and ships
I have written in defence of military action with Congressional approval and no "Declaration of War" before and cited the Barbary wars. Of course I am not as famous as Mr Medved.

Two posters claim that the comaprison falls short because in the BArbary Wars US Ships were attacked. One of the posters named Joseph goes so far as to contradict himself by stating
"To my knowledge, the unlamented Hussein, Saddam not BHO, didn't attack our shipping except for the troops we still had there from the Gulf war."
Well here is a blinding flash of the obvious, we make an ANALOGY to the Barbary wars not a claim that the situation is exactly the same.

Saddam shot at planes, they shot at and captured ships. Initial setbacks followed by victory. A period of peace and then they cause us to fight again.

I think the history of that time is relevant to the present, but would never claim it is a Carbon Copy of the presnt times or situation.

In the military after everything we do, we conduct an after action review to review what we accomplished and to attempt to improve on it next time. To often though, we forget lessons from the past and re-invent the wheel.

While we can't live in the past, and many historic enemies can become allies (hey we fought the British twice and they burned our capital) sometimes in foreign policy, it is useful to remember lessons learned.
Tinsldr2@yahoo.com

Tinsldr2
You aren't really equating Iraq shooting at planes flying over Iraqi territory with Pirates seizing ships doing commerce between the old world and new, are you? That would be rather strained.

Kudos
I often wonder why Bush or McCain don't articulate our nation's history this well. With all their advisers and speech writers you would think someone would advocate talking about our history more often.

politicsforthepoor.com

Enjoy Medved
He is my favorite talk show host.

http://www.idjiut.blogspot.com

Tinsldr2
Sad to say, you Medved and everyone who agrees with you is an imperialist; why don't you just come out and admit it? Just like Rome, we were founded as a Republic, and you well meaning world cops want to make it an empire.

Brush up on your history: Rome, Britain, Soviet Union, sic semper tyrannis.

ANALOGY Lon ANALOGY
American planes fyling over a no FLY zone as authorized and agreed to by the leader of IRAQ and UN mandate. Now obviously there was no UN or anything like it in the early 19th century, however there were recognized International standards and an attack on American Commercial ships violated these standards.

We went to war in 2003 with Iraq because of the their refusal to follow the international treaty they signed following their loss in Dessert Storm. This included (but was not limited to) the shooting at our planes patrolling the no fly zone that Iraq agreed to allow.

How can you not see that there are similarities to the Barbary Coast Wars? No it is not the SAME, in my earlier post, I very clearly state it is not a carbon copy, I merely point to the similarities.

Can you really say that it was OK for Saddam agree to allowing us to patrol no fly zones at the border of Iraq after he was repulsed from a country he invaded and then shooting at us when we did so? The places we were flying were internationally recognized as places we had a right to fly. Is this not similar to attacking ships in waters that were internationally recognized as places we had a right to sail?

However, again I am not EQUATING the two acts just pointing out historical similarities. There are differences also because we live in a much more complex age. But that still doesn't mean we can learn from the past.

Tinsldr2
Bad Analogy Tnsldr2 Bad Analogy

I understand what an analogy is. But they must be analogous in more important ways than that to be useful.

The no fly policy was a good one, and certainly justified at the time. But it was also an act of war meant to humiliate Hussein, actually part of what was good about it. The fact that Hussein shot at (but never hit even by chance one plane) is hardly equivalent to the unprovoked preying on merchant ships by the barbary pirates.

At that level of analogy it is hard to imagine any military action by anyway not being justifiable in similar fashion.

In fact part of the problem with such facile analogies is that they open the door to equating us to Hussein. Because if one entertains such weak analogies, then serious differences go by the wayside.

i've never been called an imperialist
lets see looked it up on line just to be sure:
from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/imperialist we get:
im·pe·ri·al·ism (m-pîr--lzm)
n.
1. The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.
2. The system, policies, or practices of such a government.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

im·peri·al·ist adj. & n.

and hegemony from same source: he·gem·o·ny (h-jm-n, hj-mn)
n. pl. he·gem·o·nies
The predominant influence, as of a state, region, or group, over another or others.

Now please show one comment I have ever made where I said the US should Dominate another sovereign state or region.
I believe that we can not live as isolationist and ignore the rest of the world, and at times we have an obligation to help prevent genocide (we should be doing something more in Darfur)as we did in Kosovo and Bosnia, and that at times we need to assist countries like we did in Kuwait that get invaded.

But I don't want the US to Rule the World or have countries like Iraq be US territories.

As a matter of fact I was born in 1963 and during my life time i have seen and agree with America Shedding territories not gaining more.

Joseph points to Imperialist empires that Rose and then fell, but what GREAT nation in the world has not rose and fell and had changes of Gov? Eventually in the history of the world the USA will not be a Super Power. But we are now and will remain so for the foreseeable Future. It is our job to use our strength wisely and judiciously and postpone that day we fall. One way to hasten the day we fall is to hide our heads in the sand behind walls and surrender.

When a columnist...
...starts justifying going to war over our "general national interests," not bothering to declare war anyway, and electing ourselves as the world's cop by saying "hey, we've been doing it for centuries anyway," I get very suspicious. Especially when said columnist's authority is based on having written a book on bad movies called "Golden Turkeys."

Iraq
It really bother me how stupid Liberals are, and in general, how stupid the "Unjust War" crowd ( left or right ) are.

The 2003 Gulf War is not Gulf War II, it's a continuation of the Gulf War. There was no end to that war. There was a cease-fire ( look up the definition ), and the terms of the cease-fire were that Saddam and Iraq had certain standards that they must meet. Any failure to meet any of them meant that hostilities could be re-contituted. No declaration or anything new needed.

The situation in Korea is the same. If hostilities broke out, it would not be a new war, just a resumption of the previous one.

Wars don't end until one side Surrenders ( conditionally or otherwise ) or there's a peace treaty. Armistace's and Cease-Fires are only temporary. For a good example . . . look at Israel. They have Cease-fires all the time, and all they're good for is giving the Pales a rest from the beat down they're getting, so that they can regroup, and start all over again.

ab


Tnsldr2
Agreed, that USA should use its power wisely and judiciously. That is what this whole thread is about. Folks who agree with you seem to think every tiny problem in the world is our problem. I say let some of them solve their problems themselves. Until then, like George Washington, err on the side of non-intervention. Unless you think you know more than GW?.........

Michael--TH's "Rip Van Winkle"

When you're not shamelessly prostituting yourself for McAmnesty, or calling realcons sociopaths for going Third Party this year (as I am), you actually manage to write what amounts to a competent eighth grade essay.

Congrats! You're ready for high school!!!

Won't your parents be proud?!

That said, as a political commentator, you make an excellent movie reviewer.


Since you're a putative adult, I have to go with Western Bondbeam and point out that everything here has been said before, and better. Maybe you fell asleep right before 9/11, like Rip Van Winkle, and awoke only a month or two ago. That's the only way you could have missed the many comparisons of our early military engagements with the Barbary Pirates to the present-day conflicts with Islamofacism.

Even granting that, you commit one of the cardinal sins of the weak-minded, lazy essay-writer: you force the reader to connect the proverbial dots for you. Unfortunately, you don't provides more than a throwaway line in the final paragraph to make any explicit connection between Jefferson's foreign policy and our current situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Like most muckrakers, you throw out some red meat, and let others do the intellectual heavy lifting for you.

In other words, you're right--but intellectually lazy and/or incomptent. You don't get a pass just by agreeing with your audience for a change. Any fool can earn accolades by praising Athenians in Athens.

Maybe those years of reviewing movies didn't prepare you to actually THINK.

Stick to movies, Mike. You're out of your intellectual depth. Even why you make decent points, you remain an embarrassment.

Dirjj, you bother me too
Reading this article just reinforces my belief that Medved is not a conservative but comes from the historic extreme leftist tradition of T. Roosevelt, Wilson and other war mongers. First he decries our ingnorance but only reveals his own with some of the standard arguents about how some wars were never declared. Then he misrepresents those of us who adhere to the historic Republican foreign policy attitude of restraint and realism. First Dirjj, its inportant to know that we are not "Unjust War" folks but "Just War" advocates,ok, no one on our side is advocating Unjust Wars, except folks like yourself and your buddy Medved. The examples he gives of the Barbary impressment of sailors is perfectly consistent with the view of justified use of military action. There is no requirement to be a punching bag. Just War advocates dont believe that an attack has to be within our borders, if you find someone who does, share it with us. This is what Medved does, he misrepresents the position he is attacking and knocks it down, I believe they have a word for it, a strawman. Those of us who have a realistic foriegn policy believe that the world is always evil and to believe that our military might should be put into service to combat it is as utopian as anything any leftist could ever imagine. America helps the world by having nothing to do with the affairs of the world that do not effect our national interest or pride. All Medved has done is outline the disasters of the interventionism that we have engaged in, not given an argument against it. First I noticed he doesnt use the Quasi War since folks like Tom Woods have debunked that that was an undeclared war. While Congress never formally declared it the Supreme Court ruled that Jefferson's privatizing ships into service was illegal unless Congrees authorized it. When they did only then was it ok.

Correction

"even WHEN you make decent points," not "why."

I went and stepped all over my peroration. I hate it when I do that.

I guess I only get a "leaner" on that one. Drats!


Norman the Ringer

JR--I'm with you (sort of)

I gather that you and I disagree on substance, as I believe that our military action in both Afghanistan and Iraq meet Constitutional muster and also can be supported by the Just War tradition that began with Augustine (to which I subscribe).

That said, I agree with you entirely in re Medved's arrogance, dishonest argumentation, and sneering condescension. He's at his worst when he's telling conservatives how stupid they are for not worshipping at the decrepit feet of John "Backstabber" McCain, so I can see how you would take justifiable offense at being similarly mocked.

Deadhead's a smarmy little teletubby who--based on his picture--is in dire need of a powerful colonic.

Why else would smiling cause him so much evident distress? Looks like someone snapped his picture, while he was seated on his throne, in "mid-pinch."

He's gonna blow an O-ring if he's not careful . . .


Cheers!

Norman the RINO-basher

to bribe or not to bribe
One point I picked up on was that Jefferson refused to bribe this pirates, or to coin a phrase, didn't want to continue on a path of the "failed ppolicies of the past." The money we we gave these knuckleheads, the more money they would have wanted. You can keep giving the playground bully your lunchmoney, or you can pop him in the face. Some people only respond to violence. The history is that the Dey of Algiers wasn't interested in sitting down and dicussing the matter, he was intent on disrupting our shipping and killing and enslaving our citizens, if we weren't going to give him money. So we popped him in the face, an action he understood.

Yes, I'd rather the US sit down and talk, when talking will work. When it doesn't, I don't mind when we have to pop some country in the face when they deserve it.

Paul--Lawyers and "Street Diplomacy"

Good points on "popping in the face."

Growing up in Brooklyn, I quickly learned the limits of diplomacy, as well as its importance.

What I learned was, first, that if the other guy knows you can't, or won't, hurt him, you're toast.

Second, if the other guy knows that you WILL hurt him, even if you're much weaker, he'll leave you be and look for someone else to bully.

I talked my way out of a whole bunch of fights as a kid because of the handful I got into--almost all of which I "lost." (Call it "street diplomacy.")

Everybody on my block knew that I would fight, and that I would hurt them--even if they hurt me more (as was usually the case until I got my moves downs).

I only earned that rep by refusing to back down when bigger kids tried to push me around. I got the snot kicked out of me a few times, but soon learned to hold my own. By the time I became even a half-way decent street fighter, very few people would mess with me--even though I was small and scrawny. I had earned my rep, what the kids today would probably call "street cred."

Conversely, when I hit my growth spurt and reverted to my more naturally reserved disposition, some LITTLE kids actually started picking on ME--till I pounded one of them. That put a quick end to it.

Then I got to read my books and play chess in peace. I figured that being big and strong would scare people off all by itself, but it didn't. People have to KNOW that you'll hurt them. Otherwise, a punk will try to make his rep by taking down a big, but lethargic, target. A punk is going to act like a punk, whether the punk is some street thug or a dictator.

Life is indeed 90% mental, but that 10% (i.e. "I will hurt you, badly, if you don't leave me be.") is critical.

I think we need fewer lawyers in government, and more people with real-life experience in "street diplomacy."

Moonkeeper
What is it about "nation-build[ing]" that makes it a favorite pejorative for the Ron Paul followers and other libertarians? Are you saying it's OK to remove a Saddam Hussein and then leave the country in chaos? Or are you suggesting that we never remove a dangerous tyrant if doing so means we will have to stick around and help the people rebuild?

The justification Medved offers here, in relation to your point, is that the U.S. has always seen fit to defend its economic interests around the world. Those who like to claim the Founding Fathers would oppose such "adventures" or interventions are just plain wrong. If it's OK to have fought the (First?) Gulf War, then we were also justified in finishing the job when Saddam refused to abide by the cease-fire agreement. The "nation-building" was a necessary follow-up to that mission, lest we turn over Iraq to the radicals and terrorists.

Moreover, removing Saddam was not about retaliating for 9/11. 9/11 changed the way we viewed emerging threats. We realized we could no longer ignore those who were clearly at war with us, even if we didn't acknowledge it. Saddam was not only passively refusing to cooperate, he was shooting at our planes almost daily. The incompetence of his forces does not mitigate these attacks. And, of course, he plotted to assassinate Pres. George H.W. Bush.


I agree with Joseph that Congress needs to declare war, even if not in those exact words. Congress did that this time around.

Lestat

Well-said. You managed to make the case for war without looking down your nose like Medved did. Nice. (Seriously.)

You wrote what Medved might have written, were he not a retread hack movie reviewer without the brainpower to make a cogent argument of his own. I swear that I read this "clum" elsewhere, or something very, very close to it in 2003.

I can't recall where, but this whole clum looks extremely familiar. Wouldn't surprise me if this hack found a column from 2003 that was written by an actual thinker, and "adapted" it for this correct, but trivial and incomplete, piece.

I believe that George Will used the Barbary Pirates as a parallel instance to Al-Qaeda at some point not long after 9/11. In any case, this clum of Medved's is nothing new. If he's just going to resurrect an issue from five years ago, he could at least have brought something new to the table. This is just a rehash of what others have written about extensively--and far better then Michael Medved, who wasn't even a good enough movie review to keep up with either Siskel OR Ebert.

Anyway, good post. Thanks for making the case so clearly.

Hey, they should give YOU a column! :-)


Cheers!

Norman the Admiring

Norman
Thank you for the kind words. My posts are rarely original, though, so I doubt they'd make great columns. But I do have to say that I've been using the Barbary Wars example here at TH since I first joined - without having read the George Will column that you cited. I have trouble understanding why otherwise intelligent libertarians and conservatives continue to make the same assertions even after they're challenged with this example. They still believe they are the only legitimate heirs of the Founders by virtue of their non-interventionism. They also don't realize that non-interventionism and free trade are incompatible: the latter is quickly lost when we refuse to defend it. We can't remove every dictator from the world, but we can and should when we have other interests at stake.

I guess it's like the old truism that people cannot be argued away from strongly-held beliefs if they aren't open to persuasion.

Hey Stallion!

A warm welcome to the Wabbits' weally wirile wabble wouser (hence "Stallion")!

Where do you stand on changing WBABT (the "Wirs BBQ and Bash Team" or "Wabbits") to RBABT (the "RINO BBQ and Bash Team" or "Rabbits")?

The vote is currently deadlocked. What say you?

Norman and Lestat
Hey guys, good discussion going on here. First Norman we seem to agree on quite a bit but permit me to ask, how do the Iraq Wars qualify as just under the Just War Doctrine (JWD)? The tradition as it would be developed later by the Spanish scholastics was to prevent wars from being waged by powers in the name of progress or of the "good". They knew that wars waged for liberating people (democracy) or any other "good" was just as bad as those waged for conquest. It was to restrict nations to a purely defense posture. This does not mean that a nation today would have to bear a first strike, but if good actionable intel was available, there could be preemptive defense action, not to be confused with preventitive attacks. Before you go A HA! gotcha, even Bush didnt believe Iraq was on the verge of attacking the US. But I want to discuss the first Persian Gulf War. How were we in the Just according to JWD? It seems nice that we went to rescue Kuwait and protect Saudi Arabia but even if you want to defend these wars they dont have JWD support for it. To the credit of many defenders of this first war they dont pretend to, they just like Medved and his kool aid drinkers, Dirjj, ridicule the JWD as a "fad" (Medved's words in a article he wrote long time ago) Protecting Kuwait against Iraq was like protecting one mob family against another. We were their hired hitman. We do have economic interests but this has never been the basis for war under JWD. AS for Lestat the fascination with "nation building" is the same one W. had back in 2000. My how times have changed. Look forward to hearing your thoughts, thanks.

JR--Just War Theory

Just War Theory is generally thought to have originated with Augustine of Hippo, the famous late-classical philosopher and theologian, and to have been brought futher along (some say to completion) by Thomas Aquinas. (Cicero, the renowned first century B.C. Roman orator, wrote about Just War, but did not formulate a comprehensive theory.)

When I was a college professor, I actually taught a class that addressed Just War Theory, so this is a topic of considerable interest for me.

Iraq clearly meets Aquinas' central criteria, viz. that the war must be winnable, it must be morally defensible (being waged either to undo a wrong, or to prevent one), and it must be reasonably expect to involve less suffering than not waging war.

I also don't see any problem with Afghanistan from a Thomistic perspective.

Thomas was, however, more "liberal" than was Augustine. Augustine didn't even necessarily advocate self-defense; indeed, he saw the soundest moral justification for war being that of defending another country (one's metaphorical "neighbor") from aggression.

Both Aquinas and Augustine would have approved of the Gulf War, and also of our invasion of Afghanistan. As a technical continuation of Desert Storm (which ended in a unilaterally imposed cease-fire, not a peace treaty), our invasion of Iraq in 2003 could get by on a technicality, but substantively is a closer call. I do not think either Aquinas or Augustine would have been strongly impressed with the WMD justification, but Augustine would have supported the invasion on the basis of Saddam's mass murder and Uday and Qusay's fun and games in their rape rooms--even without any other cause.

I also believe that Aquinas would have shared Augustine's opinion, if for slightly different reasons.


Cheers!

Norman

Medved
Michael, Great article with one clarification. Jefferson sent William Eaton to attack the Pirate Coast of Tripoli, only to withdraw his support to William Eaton by sending Tobias Lear to negotiate terms with the tyrant leader of Tripoli. This apparent betrayal left Eaton, eight marines and a misfit band of men in the Arabian Desert. This account can be read in the latest book of Richard Zacks' book: The Pirate Coast. I found it interesting that Jefferson compromised his values and settled for negotiation and tribute, which led to the consumate battle you mentioned in 1815.

I do agree, in principle, with your points. Thank you for allowing me to bring some clarity to this often forgotten account in our nation's history.

Paul

You're really too kind. Medved is a sloppy thinker, and a sloppier researcher, as your (in my humble opinion too gentle) correction makes clear.

Medved spent ten minutes in lexis-nexus and/or Wikipedia, then pounded out this correct--but shallow and sophomoric--clum.

Like you, I agree with Medved's points, but then it is easy to praise Athenians in Athens.

It's still a sloppy clum. Even a loose cannon hits something every now and then.


Cheers!

Norman


What should be taught in school
Medved: "The war against the Barbary States of North Africa (Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli—today’s Libya)"

Algiers is in Algeria. The name kind of gives it away.

Joseph: "I would say the US was attacked at Ft. Sumptner too, no?"

Yes, but that was us (North) getting us (South). Medved said: "Of more than 140 conflicts in which American troops have fought on foreign soil, only one (World War II, obviously) represented a response to an unambiguous attack on America itself."

The Civil War was not fought on foreign soil (unless you recognize the validity of the Confederacy breaking away). The name kind of gives it away.

Norman
Thanks for the response, Norman. Im afraid however I disagree with your interpreatation of JWD. First, while some would say that Aquinas was the culmination on the theory, like I mentioned previously the Catholic Spanish scholastics such Vitoria and Suarez had much more to conribute and can rightly be considered the fathers of international law, (long before Grotius)in the classical medieval tradition.

Their thinking wsa that wars were fought not to get the bad guys but to maintain a condition where wars were limited to the offending nations and to keep others neutral. They wanted no more Wars of Religion. The idea of "collective security against aggresion" is out of step with the JWD and is a liberal Wilsonian doctrine that gave us that beauty of US entry into WWI. It was not meant to be a moral crusade against evil. One of the criteria deals with who decides the legitimacy of the moral good. Who is the legitamte authority of the moral good? If a nation A attacks Nation B, can Nation C say that they are going to war and is that covered under JWD? I say no. The JWD was meant to keep nations in a defensive posture not to have every nation come in a battle royal. The classical lawyers knew that evil and war would exist until the end of time and to believe this meant that they sanctioned moral crusades is wrong. Think of it this way the JWD would be a license, actually a mandate, to be in a state of war all the time. You say that Iraq II is a continuation of Iraq I and I agree but if I was justified than II must be a no brainer. I believe that Iraq I was unjustified and therefore Iraq II is unjustified since we had no authority to impose sanctions or restrictions.

MEDVED THE MORON - BARBARY = SLAVES!
Medved is so darn stupid. The Barbary wars ordered by the biggest slaveholder in America were not fought on any hallowed sea - they were fought to protect our slave ships! He is an idiot!

Medved at it again!
It's amazing, though expected, that Medved forces his worldview on any subject that he encounters. For Medved to ignore the overwhelming statements of the founding fathers on the need to stay out of foreign conflicts is quite astounding. His using a minor conflict like the Barbery Pirates incidents and then try and draw a parallel to our current situation in Iraq is preposterous! But then again, he mentioned on his radio program today that the war of 1812 did not involve the U.S. being attacked! What exactly did the British do when they burned the White House down to the ground, Michael?

And this is the same guy who just a week or so ago blasted a caller for saying that the cost of a barrel of oil 10 years ago was at about $8.00 a barrel. Guess what Michael, it really was that low! If Medved were half as smart as he thinks he is, he might be worth listening to.

/...Muslim Pirates
Hey, Bela, it's news to me that SLAVE ships would be transiting the Mediterranean in the vicinity of N. Africa. The infamous Triangular trade went from N. England (haven of liberalism) to W. Africa, and directly back across the Atlantic - - nowhere near the haunts of the Barbary piractes - - yes??

JR

The tradition you cite ultimately degenerated into a thinly veiled pacifism, similar to that exhibited by the American Catholic Bishops before, during, and after virtually every conflict in which we are involved. It's a theological cover for pacifism, which is not consistent with either Scripture or Church History.

At its base, Just War Theory does not require a defensive posture, and rightly so. The Just War Doctrine you cite does have such a requirement, which just doesn't wash.

So I must say that, with all due respect to you personally, I do not have much regard for the tradition you cite. I respect the Roman Catholic Church, but the doctrine it promulgated during the Middle Ages was designed to enhance the Church's power, which was rarely impressive from an secular perspective (except perhaps under the "Warrior Popes").

Again with all due respect, if the Vatican had had a half million Swiss guards at its beck and call--rather than the handful it usually employed--the teachings on Just War would have quite different.

Just War Doctrine did not stop the Catholics from launching the Crusades, e.g. Aquinian Just War Theory would support the Crusades (as I do); the Just War Doctrine that you cite would not. So there's a serious issue of doctrine vs. praxis at work there.

All I need to know is that...
Chertoff first says no one can say 'jihad', then he says they have to search the computers of US citizens legally crossing the border due to possible radical,violent 'jihad' being on their computers.

Does that mean they're searching to see if citizens are saying 'jihad' on their computers?

I know it must be important since he broke his own rule of saying 'jihad' himself. (Choke)

Self-Flagellating Imbeciles!
The definition of Leftists, Pacifists and Isolationists.
Were you people kicked in the head by a horse when you were children? Or, were you just BORN stupid?
Constitutional muster?
"International Law", The Constitution and its Bill of Rights, Due Process, The Geneva Convention and "Love Thy Neighbor" are not going to do you a damn bit of good if you are DEAD at the hands of some Medieval Fascist nut-job who cares NOTHING about those things . . . because he thinks he has a "right" to pirate what belongs to you and slice your head off with a dull knife while you are still breathing . . . all in the name of a "heavenly" reward. The pirates that are plying the waters off Somalia are MUSLIMS who are trying to finance whatever specific Muslim clique their particular group of cut-throats belong to.
I don't give a rat's behind what Augustine or Aquinas said about "Just War". This world belongs to those who are still living for JUSTICE . . . not to the dead. We will all, inevitably, make some mistakes because we are human. However, it IS in our COLLECTIVE interest to fight against genocide and ethnic cleansing IF and WHEN we can. There are NO perfect answers. There are only WORSE alternatives.

history lessons
This article is an excellent history lesson. Unfortunately, liberals are not particularly interested in history which distracts from their work toward our defeat and the resulting chaos which they hope to exploit to gain power, be it real or vicarious. Read up on Lenin and his efforts to undermine the imperial Russian war against Germany. Did you know that Lenin and Stalin were in Germany's pay?

Norman
Your experience with school yard bullies closely matches mine. I too learned that it is better to resist, and then not be harassed again, even if one gets the worst of that seminal encounter. The inanity of some of these well-meaning types totally sheltered, totally unfamiliar and incompetent to deal with the realities of violence, frustrates me. I hear something really stupid like "violence never settled anything" and i just want to punch the speaker in the nose and say it settles whether your nose hurts. Usually i just remark that when attacked there are 3 courses: accept defeat, call for help, or defend yourself. The first is unpalatable, the second not always possible.

Another Conservative with Empire fever!
So, here comes this fellow seemingly happy that now America has forsaken her sovereignty completely as up to 40 million of illegals now have to be plead with by both candidates for votes, while completely and ending up justifying it as in reality necessary for America to keep conquering the world for the so called good.

Oh yes, it was even and it still is necessary for America to go to bed with hoodlums, as it did with Saddam, as Mr. Rumsfeld greeted him in Baghad and encouraged him to keep after the Iranian regime that kicked out the Sha, the oil boy of America.

Oh yes, Mr. McCain the darling of these so called conservatives who seemingly could not even keep his word in this: "Until death do us part" as he divorced his wife and married the present lady only after a month. If it is true, that fellow is out for me!

If I read this Medved correctly the Founding Fathers were really nothing but idiots for saying what they said and the Constitution they provided America's future generation with!

Room does not allow printing some of them. Besides, most born Americans know little or nothing about their own nation and how is came about and for what purpose if was allowed to be born. I find it appalling as a legal Immigrant of 52+ years, and having read much about such. Public Schools do not teach American history as they should. Public Schools cannot really teach it as a system of education.


Pirates them, pirates now
need to be hung from the yardarm, or just shot.

Judi
What ARE you talking about, other than you don't want to open your computer when you cross the border?


Bela

The Muslims were making slaves and prisoners of the seamen and going after goods and loot.

Try studying your history:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/barbary.htm


six frigates
The book, Six Frigates, by Toll details the war and the American response. If the past is prologue, Bush was right.

GW's problem is that he is inarticulate. In an era of non-stop talk, he is the silent leader. That doesn't make him wrong. It does reduce his effectiveness.

Morphed by the Left
We covered the Barbary Pirate wars in my late '50s (pre-PC) high school history class. My teacher said the watchword of the day was, "Millions for defense; not one cent for tribute!" That has now been morphed by the Left into, "Millions for tribute; not one cent for defense!"

Michael
Is not trying to justify the war, he is only answer critics who say we have never attacked a country who did not attack us. He is explaining our military history. that is all.

Barbary Pirates
IN the face of the collossal ignorance assaulting the senses day after day on our nation's airwaves , you have made this US History teacher in Dallas , Texas smile this morning Michael . Thank you !!!!!!

Barbary??? Pirates
Even back then it must have not been politically correct to say Muslim Pirates.

Fantastic article!

Cut To The Chase
Point 1: Radical Islam was the norm in the early history of the World and so the Corsairs & their ilk killed and butchered and enslaved any and all infidels they ran up on. It was what they did. Regardless of what any of you might have to say about Saddam or AlQueda or George Bush, the hated Republicans or Micky & Minnie Mouse - Radical Islamists remain committed to killing Infidels at any given opportunity. It is an unending tradition with them; it's what they do. When Gen. Black Jack Pershing went to the Phillipines and buried a few thousand Muslim insurrectionists, for butchering visiting American citizens & a butt load of their fellow countrymen - just for drill, it was because that was the only negotiating ploy the Muslim insurrectionists understood. Guess what guys, same bunch - same paradigm today. Truth is, the Radical Islamist would very much enjoy the chance to cut your head off and rape & pillage your family. He doesn't care that you are politically opposed to specific things or to everything you can think of to whine about; don't care if you are a Democrat, a Republican or just a moron. It's what they do, stupid. More later.
D. Cleveland

Cut To the Chase 2
Point 2: Moderate Islamists are terrified of the Radical Islamists. They have good reason to be. As far as the Radicals are concerned the Moderates are Infidels to. So, since the Moderates may not actively support the Radicals, they aren't breaking any records for standing up against the Radicals agenda. That is the same as condoning the Radicals behavior; that's a problem.
So, for me the only question is - how many Radical Islamists do we have to exterminate to make the threat go away; and how soon can we start on a real program to achieve that goal. Screw your smarmy, cowardly whining about how wrong that might be. My family and your family is at terminal risk and when that type issue comes up, it's time to kill sumbitchs and let God sort them out. All they have to do is declare peace and stop cutting peoples heads off and my attitude will moderate immediately.
If that hurts your feelings, color me indifferent to your stupidity.

Dwain Cleveland

Cut To The Chase 2
Point 2: Moderate Islamists are terrified of the Radical Islamists. They have good reason to be. As far as the Radicals are concerned the Moderates are Infidels to. So, since the Moderates may not actively support the Radicals, they aren't breaking any records for standing up against the Radicals agenda. That is the same as condoning the Radicals behavior; that's a problem.
So, for me the only question is - how many Radical Islamists do we have to exterminate to make the threat go away; and how soon can we start on a real program to achieve that goal. Screw your smarmy, cowardly whining about how wrong that might be. My family and your family is at terminal risk and when that type issue comes up, it's time to kill sumbitchs and let God sort them out. All they have to do is declare peace and stop cutting peoples heads off and my attitude will moderate immediately.
If that hurts your feelings, color me indifferent to your stupidity.

Dwain Cleveland

Moonkeeper says:
"he modern equivalent would have been to go directly after Al-Quaeda, "
And where should we have gone? the Phillipines? Malasia? Africa?
You are more vague than Obama. You'd make a good politician

Yes, let's try Nationbuilding, but...
Certainly, let's try to build democracies instead of simply deposing unfriendly dictators or anti-democratic governments. But don't forget the lesson of what happened In Gaza. With our enthusiastic support, the citizens of Gaza had the opportunity to go to the polls and vote, some of them for the first time in their lives...and they promptly voted in as their duly-accredited representatives Hamas, an organization whose goals are more in line with Al-Quaida's and Osama bin Laden's than ours. So we promptly disavowed Hamas and refused to recognize their government. Either we nation-build and accept the results, resigning ourselves to continuing problems with a known terrorist organization, or quit pretending we actually support democracy, and PUT in place the governmental leaders we want there. The lesson many Muslims took from our refusal to even negotiate with Hamas after the election in Gaza was a clear understanding that what the US really wants, needs and expects when people vote in that region is simply another subserviant governmental partner in the Middle East. And that we act like a sore loser when we don't get it!

Merrily we roll along
A game of twister from which he will need to do some yoga poses to unkink.

poorgrandchildren.com
The region from which the pirates operated was known as the barbary coast. They were called the barbary pirates because it was an accurate description of who they were. Why is it politically correct to be accurate?

IF ONLY WE STILL HAD CAHONES

.....HOW TO STOP SUICIDE BOMBERS ...

.....Scrap up their remains and grind them up with sausage ...then feed the mix to wild dogs and send the dog feces to the relatives of the bomber ...

.....Advertize that all suicide bombers will be treated in this manner until the bombing stops ...quick, simple and neat but unfortunately not PC ....OH!...if only we still had cahones .....COLOSSUS

JUST a War
That which enables human survival---voilition, culture, population density---also guarantees that there will be war.

America consists of human beings. Therefore American will be at war fairly frequently.

Every empire did not start out as a republic. But every successful republic has become an empire in self defense. Republics have a republican form of governance. That is why they are successful. The non-republicans are less successful and therefore envious. Envy has to be stopped or all will perish.

The problem has been that in bcoming empire, republics lose their republican form of governance. This does not have to be America's fate. Our exceptionalism allows us to implement republican systems elsewhere and take care of that envy problem.

To do this, to cement our victories over there, we will need to engineer less government here at home. Those logistical requirements are nothing less than a gift from God.

All of which I believe will satisfy the essentials of JWD.

First step though is for all to realize that
war will be around so long as H Sapiens is around. And that YOU dear reader, SHALL be involved, like it or not. So more it be!

Can't wait for the book
I'm awaiting eagerly the release of Michael's book, next month, I think it is. There's so much crap published these days, but as an amateur historian, I look forward to an expansion of the essays he's posted here and at his site.

Obama delenda est.
"Can't I just finish my waffle?!"

Norman and Lestat
Excellent input:-) Thanks.

Norman the General.
Hello Norman.

I'm up for changing the WBABT to RBABT. I have been in and out of town over the last couple of weeks and don't recall if I voted or not.

Good point regarding connecting the dots for Meddie Vedder's clum here. He seems to be unaware that the shortest distance is a straight line. He's trying to connect A to B by using C,D,E,F,G,H,and I. Just go to B already and be done with it.

Lon
Just how is it accurate to omit the word Muslim from the description of the pirates of yesteryear and the terrorists of today?

What the Founders REALLY believed:
"War should only be declared by the authority of the people, whose toils and treasures are to support its burdens, instead of the government which is to reap its fruits." James Madison

"Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government. " James Madison

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." James Madison

"It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad. " James Madison

"Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government. " Thomas Jefferson

"I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind." Thomas Jefferson

"I hope our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us, that the less we use our power the greater it will be." Thomas Jefferson

"It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it." Thomas Jefferson

Max Boot
To the morons above who believe Medved is rehashing Max Boot's "Savage Wars of Peace," which I've read, you've got to be kidding. You obviously don't believe that Max Boot was correctly denoting history. History is history. Medved is giving a documented account of actions directed by revolutionary war heroes before end during their Presidencies.

Try to have a modicum of common sense and try not to change history.

Ed and nation building
Let's try to build republics instead of democracies. Read Article 4, Section 4 and remember: Unlimited democracies allow the left and right wings of Control Freaks Unanimous to cram any damn things they choose down all our throats just by buying and stealing 50.01% of the votes.

sandcrab
It's not the documented accounts we object to, but Medved's sloppy presentation.

Medved should ask for his $19.95 back from http://www.clumsRus.com.


What differences?
What was the difference in 1942 between a Nazi and moderate Germans? We had to fight them all.

What was the difference in 1942 between a Japanese war lord and moderate Japanese? We had to fight them all.

What is the difference in 2008 between a radical Muslim and moderate Muslims? We now... (you fill in the blank).

Not new to the rest of the world either
Great summary of the first Barbary Wars.

The Muslim conflict isn't only not a new one for the US, but goes back much farther into history.

Read Steven Pressfield's 'The Afghan Campaign' a fascinating account of Alexander the Great's experiences in the Afghanistan region. If you didn't know the time period of the book, you could mistake it for today.

Which should also be a cautionary tale, do we think we can change the mindset of a culture that hasn't fundamentally changed in thousands of years?


Quotes Without Commentary - Useless
Tiffany offers rambling quotes without commentary .....

So, what?

Op / Ed Articles Are Not Theses
Norman offers, "In other words, you're right--but intellectually lazy and/or incomptent. You don't get a pass just by agreeing with your audience for a change. Any fool can earn accolades by praising Athenians in Athens."

Lighten up. Self absorption is not pretty in public. Maybe you are just too intelligent for the common blog world and its columnists.

You sound like you may have spent way too many years contemplating your navel, in academia parcing minutia into finely ground perfection or in front of a mirror.

I think Mr. Medved does a good job at getting his point across with reasonable comparison to writers and readers of TH.

sedonaman says:
"We covered the Barbary Pirate wars in my late '50s (pre-PC) high school history class. My teacher said the watchword of the day was, "Millions for defense; not one cent for tribute!" That has now been morphed by the Left into, "Millions for tribute; not one cent for defense!"
------------------------------------------
Right. Where did you copy that talking point from?

Do you need me to interpret ENGLISH?
Mac, You really don't understand the point of their words? I think they are fairly clear in their meaning. Do you really need me to tell you what to think about it? Oh, yeah, I forgot, you listen to Medved, I guess you do need someone to tell you how to think. Fact check some of his stuff, that's all I'm asking.

I posted the quotes because they contradict what Medved says they believed.

Islam is supremacist political ideology
The Arabs, especially the Quraish tribe, are, according to Islam, the master race of the universe. Other Muslims are their helpers, and the rest of us are called kuffars. According to the sharia law, Arab women cannot marry non-Arab men because Allah has chosen the Arabs above others. The word kuffar is as pejorative as the word nig-ger; it means a non-Muslim beast in a human form. Muslims who treat the kuffars as human beings are apostates, so they must be killed, preferably by their own families. (According to the hadith, a special reward in paradise is reserved for the killers of apostates.) Muslims broke world records of genocide (270 million victims), slavery, religiously sanctioned rape, abuse of human rights, and prohibition of scientific inquiry. Two years after Adolf Hitler became the Chancellor, the Haavara Agreement permitted emigration of German Jews to Palestine. Haj Amin El-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, persuaded Adolf Eichmann and Adolf Hitler that Jews should be killed before they flee Germany. Islam forbids Muslim emigration to the lands of the infidels because a Muslim minority cannot enslave the infidel majority. Despite this prohibition Muslims emigrate to the West, not as migrants, but as conquerors. They live in sharia mini-states and expand these mini-states by terrorizing infidel neighbors and driving them out. Any society not willing to subjugate itself to Islamic authority is, according to Islam, in a state of war, or Dar al-Harb, with Islam. Arabic proverb says "first comes Saturday, then Sunday." It means that Arabs are going to exterminate Jews before they exterminate Christians. It also means that Israel is the first line of defense against Islam. Another Arabic proverb (al-fikr kuffar) says that the very act of thinking (fikr) makes one an infidel (kuffar). Islam, like cancer, has the sole purpose of making more of itself. It will kill our civilization unless it is cut, poisoned, and radiated into remission.

Lestat
Well said!

Tiffany
Taking quotes from the Founding Fathers out of context does nothing to bolster your argument but in reality just makes you look stupid.

Furthermore if you think that the Founding Fathers were above playing politics...THINK AGAIN! They may have banned together to create this country but they scrapped in the political arena with the best of them. Idolization in place of study is nothing learned. It is a poor carbon copy for knowledge at best. Information is not knowledge.

Start by reading the letters between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and the reason for those letters.

Thanks, aspacia

I also think that JR deserves recognition for highlighting another perspective (despite our divergent opinions). Even when I don't agree, I think it's important to recognize a well-presented, civilly-argued point of view.

I truly appreciate your kind words, and I'm sure Lestat does as well. Thanks!


Cheers!

Norman the Open-Minded ;-)

Hey Mac!

You, too, can be a TH clumnist!

Just get a subscription to lexis-nexus and set "Wikipedia" as your home page!

That's what Mikey did! Don't you want to be like Mike?

At the risk of sounding like an egghead navel-gazer, I'll dare to try a little reasoned explanation with you. I hope you don't mind.

When intellectual featherweights like Medved try to support a position I happen to favor, I feel sort of like the groom receiving slurred, incoherent praise at the reception from that drunken uncle that was not invited but showed up anyway.

Did you get that, or was it too subtle? I'd use fingerpaints and crayons, but that would just mess up my screen. Sorry . . .

As for your aversion to expressed intelligence, ignorance seems to suit you--so you should by all means continue to play to your strengths.

For what it's worth, the smartest person I know is a cousin of mine who lives in NC and never finished high school. He's a carpenter (and a very good one, too).

If you think MY putdowns are nasty and elitist, well . . . you'd probably think he was a snob, too.

It's called "insecurity." If you know how to use a dictionary, perhaps you can drive to your local library and look it up (if you can drive, that is--with all those gears and things, it can get a bit tricky, Park, Forward, Reverse--who can keep it all straight?!).

In "La Vie de Henri Brulard," Stendahl wrote "Te es laid, mais personne ne te raprochera jamais ta laideur." ("You are ugly, but no one will ever fault you for your ugliness.")

So neither will I reproach you.

Have a sweet day.

Western Bondbeam

In eighth grade in New York City, my Geometry teacher told me that, rather than get right to the point of it, I tended to construct round-about proofs.

As he put it, "you get from Brooklyn to Queens (which are right next to each other) by way of the Bronx (which is far north of both)."

He was right, too.

The same is true of Medved, and I'm glad that you took my point.

He's also one of McCain's creatures here on TH, so he gets no slack from me.

RINO's Delendi Sunt!
No Mercy!
No Quarter!


Cheerios with Grand Marnier!

Norman



Western Bondbeam--Name Change

Ok, well with your vote having broke the previous deadlock, we're now officially the "RINO BBQ and Bash Team" aka "RBABT" aka "Rabbits."

I think, though, that we can allow the old "WBABT" or "Wabbit" to be used by traditionalists like The Lovely and Talented Anna.

Personally, I will use "RBABT" but continue to refer to us as "Wabbits," out of regard for the fun and games we have with Peter J. Wirs, the ueber-RINO.

"Rabbits" is also acceptable, of course, with the name change having passed.

We conservatives embrace TRUE diversity, doncha know?

(For anyone who has no idea what we're talking about, please feel to check out my Blog or simply ignore us. Either way works.)


Cheerios with Apple Sauce!

Norman the Flexible

Dear Buck/Stallion:

As with your previous post, I cannot tell whether I am the object of sincere affection or playful mockery from our favorite irrepressible pledge. (I suspect that the answer is "both.")

This is quite an accomplishment, since I am usually more adept at distinguishing a true friend from a mere drinking buddy.

But if drinking buddies we are to be, let's order another round (put it on Bernie MacArthur's tab!!!).

If Bernie Mac wants to come back and have another go, I shall take great comfort in the knowledge you will "be there" for me.

I will sleep soundly tonight.

Myk

Yes, we were born stupid.

That must be it.

That's why we actually THINK about how to defeat our enemies, without becoming barbarians ourselves, rather than just getting angry and expressing ourselves in demi-literate, ungrammatical diatribes heavy on emotion and light on reason.

Yup, you've got us pegged. WE are the stupid ones.

A helpful suggestion: If reasoned discourse gets you this riled up, why don't you go sit in the corner and eat some delicious paste with the equally excitable BernieMacArthur?


Anti-Cheers!

Norman the Ironic

Pistol--Violence Never Solved Anything?

I agree 100%.

The correct application of violence has not only solved all sorts of problems, it is indeed at the base of civilization. This is an irony that our cosseted elites overlook, either deliberately or because they are the victims of high-cost, low-content "educations" at our elite universities (like Harvard, whose instruction of the empty-headed, utterly vacuous B. Hussein apparently started and ended with "American is bad").


I doubt that even the most moronic leftist would object to the "violence" done by a police officer's 9mm to a man about to shoot a child, e.g. I would call that a real solution to a real problem.

But then, you never know. I have been trying for years, without success, to parody the moral idiocy of the American left, but their actual statements always outdo my parodies for sheer stupidity.


Cheers!

Norman

Bondbeam, Your 2:51 post . . .

. . . had a great line.

"Medved should ask for his $19.95 back from http://www.clumsRus.com."

My sentiments exactly!

Thanks for the laugh!!!


Cheers!

Norman the Jocular

Norman
Good evening. Nice to see your post. I don't know whether its the number of idiots, or the depth of the idiocy, but i'm really feeling bummed out. I've been sort of hopiong Obama would be elected, since he would be an obvious incompetent disgrace, but right now i fear even if he is and does, 3/4 of the voters will believe his excuses and re-elect him. At least the jerks who elected peanut Jimmie realized their error. Obama's supporters are sticking with him right through continuous and obvious disconnection with reality. Yikes.

What good have Muslims ever done?

I hate to post this so late in the day, but I just got here. I didn’t read every word here, but I scanned most of them.

Did you notice that not one person, that I read, had anything good to say about the Muslims. That’s not a surprise is it?

Look back over history, and look where Muslims have gone to escape their sandy cesspool, and you will not find even one thing of value to the human race, that came out of their culture.

Don’t tell me about algebra, and a few others things developed by an individual, I’m talking about a culture.

Look at the Iberian Peninsula, the Balkans, Africa, France and England today, and parts of the USA (Mich.), and you find nothing but trouble follows the Muslims.

In mid-1989, as the recent war was starting I was in Skopje and Pristina, and believe me, I could feel for the Serbs. Now please understand, I don’t really know much of the history of that area, but when the home of the Serbs for generations, is over run by Muslims, and a high percentage of the residents call themselves Albanians, can you imagine the problems.

Just like the problems we are facing, and it will get worse before it gets better, with all the Mexicans and other illegals that are messing up our country.

There were many men with a white rounded cap that sort of slopes to a rounded tip. We assume they are Muslim, and in this part of the country they are most likely Albanian.

Nationalism can be nice in some respects, but for hundreds of years these Albanians have lived in what is now called Yugoslavia, but they still consider themselves Albanians. If they are Albanians, why aren’t they in Albania? Their nationalism has caused a lot of problems, like getting themselves killed, kind of problems.

But I say again, name me one thing that the Muslim Culture has done of value for the human race, and name me a place where they have done it.


Buck

Glad you're on OUR side, Stallion.

I backed the "EAT ME" float over BernieMacArthur twice, just to be sure.

He was still twitching a little when I drove off, but I'm sure that was just his autonomic nervous system shutting down.

So no worries . . .


I am one of those wild-eyed, intolerant, bigoted, homophobic, misanthropic, right-wing, evangelical misogynists, and so not Jesuit-trained. I do admire the Jesuits, though, and studied under a former Fordham prof, and earnest Catholic, when I was in grad school.

Keep the keg primed, and don't lose the tap! (We need to get our deposit back.)

Speaking of obscure theological issues, "How many angels can dance on the head of a liberal?"


Cheers!

Norman the Drinking Buddy


Medved Neglects One Serious Point
The fledgling US nation back then did not engage in the UNCONSTITUTIONAL, treasure-draining practice of NATION-BUILDING nonsense that the Bush administration has decided to do. They wounded their enemy, got him to change his ways, and moved on, and used severe force in the process to make their point. They never for a minute thought to fight a PC war or establish democracy in such a God-forbidden hellhole with a people with a religion hellbent on opposing all things Christian. The Constitution warns us specifically not to engage in foreign alliances or entanglements. George Bush specifically said he would never engage in nation-building when he was running for office in 2004. Guess what??? The fruit never falls far from the tree; he lied just like his daddy. Now, the American People are paying for a government that refuses to follow the mandates of its own Constitution, a government that seeks only to pay its corporate masters with American-taxpayer-financed wars, nation-building money-making opportunities in destroyed countries, corporate bailouts for their buddies on "K" street, socialist prescription drugs benefits for their pharmaceutical buddies on "K" street, AIDS drugs for Africa for their buddies in the pharmacy industry. Corporate whoredom in DC knows no bounds.

Pistol

I think that being bummed out is an appropriate response to the current state of affairs.

I believe that an Obama victory, as bad as that will be, will in the end be less destructive than the election of McCain. McCain's election will signal the success of the GOP's effort to rebrand conservatism as liberalism-lite. Since I see resurgent conservatism as essential to avoiding a repeat of the nightmarish 70's and the decline of our nation, I'd rather see Obama elected than McCain.

I do not support Obama. I think he's an idiot, and I could not bring myself to vote for a socialist. The problem is not so much that McCain is dumb (although he is), as that should he be elected he will be in a position to destroy traditional conservatism, and saddle conservatives--his ideological enemies--with the inevitable failures of his policies, which will be aimed at undermining American sovereignty and bringing the GOP position so much in line with that of the Dems, that we will be effectively living in a one party dictatorship.

If this sounds loopy, what word is more applicable to a situation in which approximately 90% of American disapprove of Congress than "tyranny"?

We have very little meaningful choice at present. If conservatism gets rebranded, there will be NONE, absent the emergence of a viable third party.


Cheer!

Norman the Pessimist


Fight Before Heads Start Rolling
Who are those masked bandits from the 15th century? It use to be that the Lone Ranger, Zoro, Superman, Batman, and Robin Hood were the only masked men fighting good against evil, but today, we have masked men fighting for evil against good. Better on their soil than our soil. We fight back against evil doers so we can secure our nation and protect our citizens from people who hide behind religion so they can perform criminal acts against innocent people. They definitely enjoy watching heads roll which is an act of terror. We must not back down and must rise up if they force us to prove who we really are as a nation of people who will fight for their country and their freedom as I do believe that they underestimate us nice and stupid Americans who let anyone into their country. But, they don't have a clue how much Americans love their country and hopefully, they won't have to find out and will turn their energies to prayers for peace. They really should concentrate on developing their cities, schools, businesses, and practice yoga and positive thinking. Tony Robbins, where are you when we need you?

Fight Before Heads Start Rolling
Who are those masked bandits from the 15th century? It use to be that the Lone Ranger, Zoro, Superman, Batman, and Robin Hood were the only masked men fighting good against evil, but today, we have masked men fighting for evil against good. Better on their soil than our soil. We fight back against evil doers so we can secure our nation and protect our citizens from people who hide behind religion so they can perform criminal acts against innocent people. They definitely enjoy watching heads roll which is an act of terror. We must not back down and must rise up if they force us to prove who we really are as a nation of people who will fight for their country and their freedom as I do believe that they underestimate us nice and stupid Americans who let anyone into their country. But, they don't have a clue how much Americans love their country and hopefully, they won't have to find out and will turn their energies to prayers for peace. They really should concentrate on developing their cities, schools, businesses, and practice yoga and positive thinking. Tony Robbins, where are you when we need you?

lady of the evening checking in
Good job Mike?


We don't need to go to war with the Moslems. All we need to do is stop buying their freaking oil. We are funding the war against ourselves.

They'd still be thinking refrigerators were evil, goats would be eating the garbage and the Ayatollah Khomanie(sp?) would be recommending sex with chickens as a way to maintain chastity. (The only moral question is whether to eat the chicken afterwards...he said it was OK if you gave it to your neighbor.)


The nutjob in Iran would be in serious trouble if oil revenues dropped. I for one would love to see him running around his own country trying to save his neck. (As opposed to making nice with Chavez and pouring tons of money into Central/South America)


I'd like to see the Saudi's worrying about their necks too instead of pouring money into our country to promote Islam and funding Madrassa's around the world.



Instead our leaders won't drill and we removed the guy who kept Iran in check. Is it possible they really didn't realize that Iran was and is the greatest threat? Who had the brilliant idea that Islam is compatible with Democracy?


WHATEVER




Norman
The egghead navel-gazer?

That's pretty funny.



````
Deadhead's a smarmy little teletubby who--based on his picture--is in dire need of a powerful colonic.

Why else would smiling cause him so much evident distress? Looks like someone snapped his picture, while he was seated on his throne, in "mid-pinch."

He's gonna blow an O-ring if he's not careful . . .

`````



Hydrogen Production Engineer
Preach it!


````
So, for me the only question is - how many Radical Islamists do we have to exterminate to make the threat go away; and how soon can we start on a real program to achieve that goal. Screw your smarmy, cowardly whining about how wrong that might be. My family and your family is at terminal risk and when that type issue comes up, it's time to kill sumbitchs and let God sort them out. All they have to do is declare peace and stop cutting peoples heads off and my attitude will moderate immediately.
If that hurts your feelings, color me indifferent to your stupidity.

Dwain Cleveland

Dear The Lovely and Talented Anna(1of2)

Well-said, of course.


In a related vein, we now find ourselves torn between two morons, feeling like a fool.


The first moron says, "well, I guess, sure, why not, let's do SOME drilling offshore, but today is Tuesday, and sometimes I change my mind on Wednesday, but by Thursday, maybe I'll say we can drill in that mosquito farm known as ANWR, as long as I don't forget to take my 'roid medicine and don't have to sit too long, gosh I hope I can hide my melanoma till November, why can't I focus on a single point and just keep rambling pointlessly, but then what will the New York Times say, o my gosh, I wish they still liked me, what should I do, where's Cindy, CINNNNNNNDDDDDDYYY!!!! now that the media has abandoned me, who else do I have, boy it'll be cool to be President and wipe away South Carolina 2000, where is my Atavan, CINNNNNNNDDDDDDYYY!!!! . . ."


CONT.

Dear The Lovely and Talented Anna(2of2)

CONT.

The second moron retorts: "I, er, um, well, I always was, you know, in favor of . . . Look we have to focus on, er, our, um, priorities . . . and embrace, uh, change. It's not enough to . . . Everyone knows that . . . Can I just finish my waffle, please? We are the oil we have been waiting for. Just inflate your tires, and the gasoline genie . . . will magically fill your tank with taxpayer supported ethanol. In closing, please let me say . . . that . . . we must move past the past, because it is past. We must focus on changing the past, because it is not the future, and the present is only future we have. Because just as the present becomes the future, so does the future become the past. And then we will need to change the future, because we don't want to live in a future that is really the past."

"It's all about the tires. We can't drill our way out of this, but we CAN inflate our way to energy efficiency!"


And to this mindless drivel, all the first idiot can do is to wage a lame one-day attack on the second guy's idiocy, then basically concede the point the next day while his surrogates hand out tire gauges.


We . . . are . . . SO . . . screwed . . .


Norman the RINO-hunter

(and reputed admirer of certain ladies of the evening)


FIN

Norman
Thanks for your kind words of acknowledgment, Norman. As for your previous post, I have to disagree that the later development of the JWD became a "thinly veiled pacifism". Perhaps it only seems that way because the more fully developed JWD tradition that you acknowledge that supports this viewppoint has strict requirements, none of which in my opnion has been met by the vast majority of modern wars. It is also important to note that the JWD has developed over the ages by thinkers who worked off of previous thinkers. The JWD of the modern times is very much in the tradition the Thomistic thought. Vitoria, a Dominican like Aquinas, qouted heavily from Aquinas and Scripture to defend the JWD that would keep nations from going to war to for reasons other than being attacked. Also its important to understand that the RCC did not promulgate this to enhance its power. If you recall Islamic invasions of Catholic Europe preceded the crusades by a mere three centuries. The Church put up with the Islamic conquest of Spain for all this time until the threat was too much. The Just War tradition like other aspects of Church thought goes through development and while you disagree with later development of it, it nonetheless stands in that tradition.
You said that if the Vatican had 500,000 Swiss Guards the JWD would be different. This is a new one, especially since the Swiss Guard were purposely kept small as a Vatican securty detail not an army. In the past if the Vatican wanted to go forth and conquer it would have done what it had always done, call European monarch to provide armies, to protect the Papal states, not conquer territories. Nonetheless, I really apreciate your thoughts and acknowledge your position as well, and look forward to your comments.

Norman

Yep, we are freaking toast.


McCain will drill like Jorge built us a fence.


And there's Obama....

"I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."





`````
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyzes 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 civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."
`````

We know Europe has already fallen.

Dear The Lovely and Talented Anna

Did you cite my potty humor (the reference to Medhead's pained "I really gotta GO" expression) in order to express your:

A. Appreciation;
B. Opprobrium; or
C. Appreciation with just the thinnest veneer of disapproval???


Inquiring minds want to know.


Cheers!

Norman the Playful


P.S. Did you see that we're the "RINO BBQ and Bash Team" now? I worked out a deal where individual members could still use "WBABT" or "Wabbit." I'm still calling us the "Wabbits" informally, while using the new name in other circumstances. Sorry, but that's how the vote broke . . .


JR--Thanks

Thanks for the reply. Even after reading it, though, I don't see how Aquinas could be used in the way stated, but I am not familiar with the referenced author.

I am quite familiar with Thomas, however, and don't see that as consistent with his thought. Indeed, one of the most marked changes Thomas made to Augustine's teachings on Just War was to eliminate, or at least strongly modify, the requirement that one act in the interests of a third party, or only in the most dire straits if attacked directly.

Thomas rightly saw the absurdity in having to ask a neighbor to defend one's own country--or surrender to the invading foe--because one could not morally justify defending oneself.

I really don't have anything to add. I respect your position, even though I do not agree, and I sincerely thank you for an interesting and productive discussion.

I look forward to further discussions on this and other threads.


Cheers!

Norman of Missouri (The "Show Me" State)

oopsie

The quote is by Churchill.


a couple more!


The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.


Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.


Cheers! I am off to bed!



Norman
Well, you know I am your greatest admirer. (The pen being mightier than the sword.) It is amusing when someone takes you on...it is esp amusing if they try to insult you!


You know I have to at least keep up appearances with the tempering bit.........Ratas caught me refering to certain nocturnal events and I was duly chastised.


However..."Why else would smiling cause him so much evident distress? " Is simply too true.


Thanks for the laugh!

Saw this sign the other day and shared this with the Rat.


No trespassing
Violators will be shot
Survivors will be shot again

Think they could put it up at the border?

Dear The Lovely and Talented Anna

So that would be "C," then?

I thought so! ;-)

(Actually, I KNEW so. Me and my "90%-95%" . . .)

Thanks as always for the kind words on my "anti-Troll" capabilities. . . .

I really DO try, you know.


Glad you've been corresponding with RyR, but speaking of that:

Where IS the Rat?!

Where IS BrianR?

Where IS Chris?

Where IS CVN65?

Where IS anyotherRABBITWABBITwhomImayhave
neglectedtomentionandtowhomIapologize???

We've had a decent showing, but not what we need. We need to pummel RINO's like Medved. I want these guys to tremble at the mighty name of WABBIT!

(Then again, if I really wanted them to TREMBLE, as opposed to "giggle," we probably shuda picked a scarier name, eh? Que sera . . .)

Hi ho, and all that.


If you see anyone around TH, please ask 'em to drop a verbal bomb or two on the RINO Deadhead.

This IS our new clubhouse, after all, and we need to drive these RINO losers out of TH.



Cheerios with Nutella!

Norman the GuyWhoCan'tThinkofaCleverNameRightNow

Anna-
As always, you have great quotes that need no further commentary...(unless you happen to go by Michael Mac Moore, in which case they become useless; like a leaky water vessel. Granted sometimes the obvious does need explaining. I wonder if Mac Moore's head leans to one side?)

BTW I may have been wrong on Kudlow's timing. He had two clums to Meddie Vedders one.

Honey Nut Cheerios with melted marshmallow!



Norman the Observant.
How's that navel doing?

5 checkmarks for you Norman on your last bit about tire pressure and drilling. Very funny.

To counter the tire pressure thing with Obama, rumor has it that McCain is taking his energy plan one step further and suggesting the entire nation convert to Amish. This will blow Obama's tire pressure thing right out of the water.

McCain will still have to face the global warming freaks though with all the added horses and their flatulence. Can't have all that gas and such heating up the planet.

This will appease all the code pink groups though as we will no longer be engaging in any wars here or abroad as everybody will be turning their cheeks.

Ah, Cheerios with Nutella indeed!

jim from CA
Michigan has muslims? I thought we were famous for those backwoods militias.




Anna of great Talent
A friend of mine used to have that exact same sign hanging in his office window. He keeps a gun in his desk drawer too.

He took the sign down though when he found out that these signs are magnets for gun theives.

Guns have street value and are easily sold for cash. Junkies on meth like the quick cash and also do not fear being shot by the property owner. IOW,the draw of meth is bigger than the fear of being shot. They even target policeman by following them home from work because most police have guns in their homes.

I know off subject but when I read your post about the sign, it reminded me of that story.

The sign also poses problems for the homeowner if he actually shoots an intruder. Michigan has castle doctrine now so not as bad, but still gives an overzealous prosecutor some ammo to lock up a guy simply for protecting his home and family.

I wonder if the signs posted every 50 feet along the border would be cheaper than a fence. The way our ever expanding govt spends money, probably not.

Cheers!



Western B
I have a friend whose brother in law was sued when someone broke into his house and then was unable to get out. The burgler got stuck in his garage. He was in there a few days. The burgler sued the homeowner and WON! (San Diego) Got several thousand dollars if you can believe it.

Our country has gone insane.


Obama has a bill that would have Americans register their guns with the UN. Really scary.


http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2008/02/25/c ongress_contemplates_giving_cash_to_foreigners


Cheers!


Be on the lookout for CVN and let him know about the new club house.

I will join you on Kudlow. He is CFR and totally disingenuous...one more guy being paid to say what we would like to hear so we'll vote for McCain. SCUMBAG

I wasn't actually thinking of putting up that sign myself...but thanks for the heads up.

Western B
I have heard Detroit(?) has a huge Moslem population. That true?


How old is your son?

Nutella

YUM!

Anna
Yes Detroit has quite the large Moslem pop. Suburbs mostly I think.

I didn't figure you were putting up the sign just when I read that it jogged a memory.

That's California for you though. How exactly does one break into a house/ gargage and then get stuck there? On top of that for three days....sheesh. What is it like a giant human mousetrap?

Glenn Beck has a funny bit about a California town that has passed a law that imposes a fine of $500.00 for setting off a nuclear weapon (not having possesion of the weapon mind you, but setting it off) inside the city limits. Another one about two environmentalist neighbors who are in court. One put solar panels on his house to save trees and his neighbors giant redwood trees are blocking his sunlight, so he is suing to get him to cut the trees down. I think they both drive Prius'. Insanity ensues. Both true stories.

That UN stuff drives me nuts. They can't decide on a definition of what a terrorist is, but they can attempt gun control on the U.S? Scary indeed.

We have 3 kids. 12, 9 and 4. More than I deserve most days.

Good to see you on here in the daytime.:-)

Cheers!


Another perspective.
regarding the moslem situation.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis.asp

Check out the archives for more speeches. There was a good one a few months ago regarding the normalizing that the UN is pushing on all countries.

forced comparison-1
The comparison made in the article are something of a stretch:

1. American ships were attacked and American citizens were taken as slaves. That is generally seen as an attack on the nation itself.

2. It has always been understood that the executive branch can launch small scale expeditions of limited duration without congressional approval. Before the development of radio this was often done by the commander in the field, without the permission or knowledge of Washington. Most of the 135 incidents alluded to are of this kind. It’s only been since 1950 that we have committed to major wars without a congressional declaration. Of the 100,00 dead mentioned 36,000 were in Korea, and 58,000 in Vietnam. That leaves 6000 for the Boxer Rebellion, chasing Pancho Villa, Granada, Operation Praying Mantis, etc.

3. Although the Barbary pirates used Islam defend their predations, they were only in it for the money. After all, they preferred bribery to actual piracy. Also the idea that there is a continuous enmity between the US and Islam doesn’t wash. We had no trouble with Islam, as a opposed to individuals like Ahmed er Raisuli and Saddam Hussein who happen to be Muslims, from 1815 until 2001.

4. The captives were slaves. Slaves have generally been badly treated in all places and times.

5. Yes, America fights for economic reasons. So has every great power throughout history. Caesar invaded Gaul, Pizarro invaded Peru, and Bush invaded Iraq. But that’s not what the American people were told. We were told that Saddam Hussein represented a direct threat and that we liberating the Iraqis. Of course, Caesar claimed his invasion of Gaul was really defensive and Pizarro sought to bring the blessings of Christianity to the benighted Incas.



forced comparison-2
6. True. I’ll give you credit for this one.

7. The United States merely launched a punitive expedition against the Barbary pirates to convince them that the cost of capturing American ships was greater than the benefits. It wasn’t even the first. The British, Dutch, and Spanish had all done it. (The pirates had a nasty habit of capturing ships even of those countries that had paid them off.) The US had no capacity or desire to eradicate the pirates. That happened with the French conquest of Algeria in 1830.

Western Bondbeam--My Secret Video

My navel is just fine, thank you, and sends its regards. (Well, it didn't REALLY send its regards, since it's only a navel, but it's all about proper social form. Even apostate WASP's, like me, strive to be civil at all times, doncha know?)

I just downloaded a video from the net. It was taken secretly on someone's cell phone. It's very "hush hush," but I trust you. Here's the text. Just don't tell ANYone. Ssshhhh!


UI White Haired Guy with Anger Management Issues and Several Melanoma Scars That Are No So Cleverly Hidden With Makeup:

"Everybody, LISTEN UP!!! I have a GREAT idea. No just LISTEN people! I'm going to the CENTER, the CENTER, NOT the RIGHT!!! If Obama wants to take me on, that's fine with me BABY! Those Gooks couldn't break ME and this wimp from Chicago won't either! We're gonna tell everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, to start living like the AMISH! Get it?! They don't use ANY oil, NO oil at ALL!!! It's BRILLIANT I tell you, BRILLIANT!!! Where's my Zoloft, i'm out of ativan, cindy usually brings me my zoloft by now but now i can't think straight and i'm getting all stressed, oh no it's happening again i'm all confused and you guys are all really gooks aren't you you can't fool me no i can't lose it now between this and the melanoma i'm toast and then bush will have WON, WON I tell you!!!, over south carolina 2000, i can't forgive that bast*rd . . ."


Ladies and Gentlemen, the GOP nominee for President of the United States of America . . .

WBB and TLATA--of Arabs and Nutella

I had nutella on a crepe-like, very thin pancake yesterday morning that my lovely and talented wife was kind enough to make for me.

That is what prompted the "Nutella" sign off.

I bought my first Nutella crepe from a street vendor near the "Bonne Nouvelle" Metro station in Paris. It was the first of many. Before long, the fellow would start making the crepe as soon as I walked up.

I'm nothing if not predictable.

The proprietor was an Arab gentleman, naturally. The French are too good for that sort of thing, doncha know?

I've been hooked ever since . . .

No blood for Nutella!!!



Love and Rockets,

Norman the Slightly Unbalanced

Paris Hilton '08

Am I the only one who thinks that Paris Hilton came across as more articulate and (here's the real shocker) more INTELLIGENT than either Obambi or McAmnesty on energy policy?

Welcome to Bizarro America!

Paris Hilton '08???

Putin's Invasion of Georgia
is a test run to see how the Presidential candidates will react to more of his games in the future. Putin has some very ambitious military plans for Russia and her allies. With the American government currently being run by the party of TREASON and ECONOMIC LUNATICS, Putin is laughing his butt off at the whackjob wimps, idiots, hippie-retreads, and peaceniks like Pelosi, Obama, and Reid in our government who are so incomprehensibly daft that they won't even drill for oil for our nation's survival. Al Qaeda is licking her chops and salivating at the overwhelming open-door, open-border opportunities posed by either an Obambi or McShamnesty presidency. Israel likely will bomb Iran into oblivion, and the price of oil will skyrocket very soon. Get ready, people, for a bumpy ride. There will be lots of needless death, mayhem, economic and hopefully political ruin. Depression will be much more than just a bad state of mind. Just as Clinton and Bush were tried by terrorists when they first took office, so, too, will the next President, but this time, even 911 will pale in comparison. If you have a house, sell it now because you will surely lose it when prices for everything else start to skyrocket in the awful economy. Get a car or motorcycle that is great on gas mileage. Prepare yourself for God's further judgment on this nation for seeking to divide the land of Israel. His holy scriptures cannot be mocked:"I will seek to destroy the nations who seek to divide the land of Israel!" Since 1991, Presidents, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and Bush Jr, have all been playing the land-for-peace, PC, terrorist-negotiating diplomacy game and making God very angry. God is not through with His anger; He's only just getting started!

Paris Hilton 08
Where can I get a bumper sticker or a Tshirt for that?

Her global warming gig would run something like this:

"Hello America, don't worry about climate change. Global warming is, you know, HOT so naturally, I shouldn't be the only one who is...HOT. With the climate getting HOTTER, everybody will experience what it's like to be me, you know America...HOT. so if you want to be HOT, vote Paris Hilton for president, under the newly formed H.O.T. party."

McCain or Obama wouldn't stand a chance.

Norman Swartz (cough)
Hey is there a link to that video on YouTube?


Western Bondyoder....no, Bondmiller...ah nope Bondtrager ah yes that works.

Now if I could just get those idiots to stop using my horse feed for making ethanol, I will be all set. Soon we will be importing 70% of our corn. I hear some knuclebrain in congress wants to turn our farmland back into native forests and is imposing a NO TILLING bill in the house.

Western Bontrager, proud new owner of a horse and buggy. It even has cruise control and auto pilot. Take that GM and Ford.

Western Bondtrager

Yes, there is a link to the YouTube video, but no, I cannot share it with you.

The Internet requires energy, which is supplied by that wicked "petroleum." We neo-Amish Luddites cannot in good conscience do anything that might encourage us to remain addicted to the source of all evil.

Even John ("How DARE you say I have IMPULSE control issues, you stinkin' GOOK!!!") McCain recognizes that Algore was right all along.

What are you, anyway? Some kind of devil worshipper? Oil, schmoil!!!


Hey, are you coming to the hay wagon race tomorrow?! It'll be a hoot(enanny)!

I've smeared the axles with rendered chicken fat for speed and filled ol' Bessie up with butterbeans for that extra "umph" we'll need in the stretch. "Let 'er rip!"

We neo-Amish have such WACKY fun!!!

Jedediah and Malachi have been talking trash all week, detailing their old nag's coat, and giving her those tricked-out horseshoes, but we'll take 'em, Brother Vesten Bondtragerich!

With wholesome fun like this, who needs NASCAR? Those oil burning, world-destroying HERETICS!

BURN THEM! BURN THEM, I SAY!!! (But be sure to bind them with ONLY organic hemp, and remember not to use any oil-based accelerants.)


Visualize Whirled Peas,

Norman the Neo-Amish Luddite



ModMark--FLAG THIS POST!!!

I'm so fu . . . freaking disgusted with the assh . . . idiots running for President that I might just consider voting for the skan . . . "lady" in question.

While Brother Vesten Bondtrager's suggestion for the H.O.T. is an excellent one, I think that Paris' lack of experience may become an issue. It was such a problem for Obambi that he spent his whole summer camp in Europe trashing the country he wants to lead!

So I think we should choose a name that emphasizes both her unique "attributes" and the fact that she is obviously a quick study.

Let me propose the "Smokin' Lush Under Tutelage"
party.

Then we can ALL be S.L.U.T.'s, just like Paris!!!


Love and Rockets,

Norman the Flaggable

S.L.U.T.'s
I saw that Paris thing too.


I'd like to think that the traitor scumbag b*stards (what I really think) who want to run our country are just stupid. But stupid people will actually get it right sometimes (if only by accident). Viz...Paris gets it!

They know exactly what they are doing. Read their handler's (globalist) literature. The might of America stands in the way of their "new world order". China is drilling off Florida? They want to break our country. I depise them.




This is from another poster...

The one thing neither Pastore nor the interviewee elaborated on is corporate participation in carbon rationing. If you believe that the government is acting alone when formulating methods for dealing with "global warming" and carbon credit trading, you have a lot to learn. The global warming agenda is almost entirely fascist-socialist in origin and intent. As with most environmenetalism, it's about establishing who makes money and who pays under specific conditions and restrictions. And it's the greatest fraud in modern human history.

Get familiar with the how's and why's of the World Bank and it'll all make sense.

`````

Corporate participation is the operative word.


“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.” Benito Mussolini



The election is a sham. Both sides are working for the same thing. It's just a fight over who gets the spoils.




the lunatics are running the asylum!
Daschle in talks on ethanol lobby job

By Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Financial Times, August 7 2008



One of Barack Obama’s most important backers is in talks to become an adviser to the Renewable Fuels Association, the most powerful ethanol lobby in the US capital.


Tom Daschle, the former Democratic Senate majority leader who has long been an influential champion of the ethanol industry, told the Financial Times about the move in an interview.

The news underlines what ethanol proponents already believe: that in spite of Mr Obama’s remarks that the US might have to reconsider its ethanol policy in the wake of criticism about its impact on global food prices, the Democratic candidate and his advisers fundamentally support the industry.

However, he would advise the lobby group on addressing concerns about ethanol’s impact on the environment and food prices as well as how the industry could make a transition from the initial phase of ethanol production to “something more sophisticated and more diverse”.



Mr Daschle, who some tout as a potential chief of staff to Mr Obama, sits on the board of Mascoma, a company that is developing technology for cellulosic ­ethanol technologies.


``````
How it warms my heart to see the cast of characters surrounding Obama...Madeline Albright, Brezinski, etc. And now Daschle?!


Manischewitz




H.O.T.-S.L.U.T. party
"House Of Training-Smokin' Lush Under Tutelage" Party

I can see the campaign signs already.

Mod Mark VP choices....there are so many.....maybe Brangelina could pull it off in shifts.





Anna
I only caught parts of the Hilton ad but I think everyone here is at least in agreement that she did make more sense than the other two.

As they say even a broken clock is right every 12 hours.

I am off for the day. Shucks, just when the party was starting up again.

Norman
I did see that I was outvoted!


Being old-school in some ways and sentimental as well........I am sticking to WBABT! (stubborn too!)


I don't think "a rump in the hay" will ever be topped.



WBB
I had time this morning to read your links. Did you read the Schlafly article? I am sure after the election all that stuff will be back along with amnesty.


I LOVE Mark Steyn.


"But don’t worry, the brain trust at the University of Amsterdam is on top of things..." !!

Ultimately, our crisis is not about Islam. It’s not about fire-breathing Imams or polygamists whooping it up on welfare. It’s not about them. It’s about us. And by us I mean the culture that shaped the modern world, and established the global networks, legal systems, and trading relationships on which the planet depends.

To reprise Sir Edward Grey, the lamps are going out all over the world, and an awful lot of the map will look an awful lot darker by the time many Americans realize the scale of this struggle.


````
IMO authentic Christianity is the bulwark against which the advancement of evil can not pass. When nations forsake God evil advances. Europe is just further along the continuum than we are. Canada seems innocuous enough. But their hate speech laws have parts of the bible banned. They've lowered the legal age of consent for sex to 12. And of course what is going on with Steyn.


People living in darkness are blinded by the darkness. Suicide it is!


WBB/Bolton
I was very happy to see Bolton at the UN and thought he was just the guy to crack some heads.

"America's Interests and the UN"

I think it would be in our best interest to bulldoze the place.


My feelings about Bolton are ambivalent at this point. He is CFR. You are in that organization by invitation only and there is no ambiguity what their aims are. Regionalization and ultimately one world gov...the new world order.

Globalists are for surrendering our national sovereignty to a supranational governing body. Look at Obama's bill and L.O.S.T. as just two examples.


`````
Although I want to talk about some of the U.N.’s failings in the international security area, I first want to mention an issue that doesn’t get as much attention, but which in many respects is more troubling and affects American interests in ways that could have a profound impact well into the future. This is what our friends in Europe call “norming.”

“Norming” is the idea that the U.S. should base its decisions on some kind of international consensus, rather than making its decisions as a constitutional democracy. It is a way in which the Europeans and their left-wing friends here and elsewhere try and constrain U.S. sovereignty.
`````

Of course I agree completely with the above. But how could Bolton belong to an organization that straight out says that national sovereignty is an immature concept?

Volker was sent in to investigate and propose reforms? The Fed (private banking cartel) is itself a corrupt institution that should not exist. Volker is himself a globalist.


cont....

WBB cont.
NAFTA created an economic trading bloc with the US, Canada, and Mexico, but the ultimate goal is political convergence and then a larger vision for the region. In the Trilateral Commission 1993 annual report, Honorary Chairman Paul Volker noted, “Interdependence is driving our countries toward convergence in areas once considered fully within the domestic purview. Unfortunately, this convergence will mean a lower standard of living for Americans. “The standard of living of the average American has to decline…I don’t think you can escape that”, Volker said before a Congressional committee.




So what is it with these guys? They are talking out of both sides of their mouth. The "convergence" Volker is talking about is the NAU. Interdependence? The US needs Mexico to suck the life out of us?


What do they REALLY think? It will be OK to surrender national sovereignty if the UN is reformed? L.O.S.T. has us surrendering sovereignty over our territorial waters to the UN and the US paying global taxes.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55 729



A lot of wolves walking around in sheep's clothing these days.

Michael the kook.

The fight with the Barbary pirates was justified only in response to KIDNAPPING Americans.

As it would have been wrong in the past for the US to go to war simply because we couldn’t go somewhere we wanted to go on the planet, it would be wrong to go to war simply because we cannot, this day, go anywhere we want to go on the planet. That is not how the world works.

If Jefferson took the country to war without a declaration, it violated the Constitution as much if Bush does it or any future president. And it is no sound reasoning to commend immoral or unconstitutional acts done yesterday to justify immoral or unconstitutional acts done today.

Jefferson seemed to, often; make a mistake of taking every injury suffered by Americans, in our conflict with the British, into every other conflict he became embroiled in thereafter. He supported the disastrous French Revolution because he was sure that their revolt from the monarchy would be as righteous as ours. He was wrong.

He supported attacking the Barbary pirates in keeping with our attacking the British “in part” for kidnapping American colonists (which is correct) but he also demanded they conform to our political view of friendly trade. It was his position that the North African powers be made to heel to our political viewpoint. He was wrong about that.

We had every right to attack the British for kidnapping, and more, because our “Rights of Englishmen” were being violated. We had no such rights in agreement with Tripoli or Algiers. We were in THEIR territory demanding our political rights. That was folly. That is what we still do in the Middle East— in THEIR territory demanding OUR political rights. Nonsense!

It was just to attack at Tripoli to rescue our kidnap victims (Iraq did not kidnap Americans), but it was unjust to attack them because they did not accept our view of peace and friendship. Jefferson felt it was just.

How stupid can we be? Ask Michael.

Anna
Glad you liked the links.

Hillsdale usually has some pretty decent talking points. One of the few conservative collages left in the nation and right here in Michigan believe it or not. They pride themselves on zero Federal Tax funding (one of only a handful in the nation).

The only downside is when signing up to get a free subscription for the imprimis speech digest (the paper one they mail out each month) one of their questions they ask is "How did you hear about Imprimis?" and then it lists several names there to choose from....and you guessed it, Old Meddie Vedder mustache and all is listed right there at the top. I found that out when searching up the archives for the link. I have recieved the paper newsletter for years and never actually checked out the website until now because I thought the Mark Steyn speech seemed relevant to some of the discussion and I wanted to post a link to it. Then you brought up the UN and of coarse I remembered the Bolton speech as well.

Yeah wolves in sheep clothing sounds about right. I had hopes for Bolton being a trojan horse but the UN is too far gone. Get out the bulldozers is the only viable option.

Soon it won't be Cheerios, but those cheap knockoffs in the plastic bag. Oval Oats or some such thing. Thanks a lot CFR scumbags.

THE GLOBALIST CASE OF OBAMA & BREZINSKI



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDpLK0e0QoU


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCc9QGj0NWc


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJTv2nFjMBk

OBAMA AND BZRZENSKI NEW WORLD ORDER





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX1JGJAc5hg

Western Bondbeam--H.O.T.S.L.U.T.

I like the new party name. I'm ready to "get behind" Paris Hilton.

I'd probably also give her my vote. ;-)


(Come on, The Lovely and Talented Anna, let's have some of that "tempering" you're so good at!)


Cheerios with All-Natural Yoghurt!

Norman the Untempered

BRZEZINSKI IS OBAMA GLOBALIST ADVISOR

My Polish is not that great but I finally got his last named spelled right...third time is always a charm....

Even though Brzezinski is a Fabian Socialist Globalist...or Marxist...he does make some good points on what is going on with the Iraq War.
However, with that said and the fact that he was successful with the Camp David Accords...he is still a Globalist New World Order Traitor.
I believe that he and Carter must have offerred the Israelis and the Egyptians billions of dollars not to fight each other.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dol__KIIAJE

Norman the Untempered

"I'm ready to "get behind" Paris Hilton."


EXCUSE ME! Inspiration from our pal Wirst? BAD BOY!



````
On a serious note. How bad is it that one of the first things worth noticing about McCain's campaign is his endorcement by a vacuous girl ("hot") who managed to star, not once, but twice in homemade sex videos with her boyfriends. It never occurred to her to think there might be a problem when the guy thought it was a good idea to turn on the video camera? Not even the SECOND time. I'm thinking when God was handing out brains, she thought he said trains and didn't get hers.



Cheerios with almond milk


Anna....delicately nurtured and observant

Dear The Lovely and Talented Anna

OUCH! Comparing me to Wirst! Low blow!!!

All I meant was that, given the poor choices available to us, it was important get on top of the situation (or get behind it, either way, I'm flexible, and I'm betting Paris is, too!).

Given Paris Hilton's distinguished career in home movies, she's just the gal for the job.


Having been duly and justly chastened, I shall now desist from my ungentlemanly behavior as I nurse myself back to health, after having been compared to P.J. Aguacabesa, La Pinata Humana, by the Lovely and Talented Anna.

How deeply you cut me, Sister . . .


Cheerios with Amoxicilin,

Norman the Wounded

Piracy still exists, and we wimp out
My son is a Marine on the ship Peleliu that came to the rescue of a merchant ship (the Gem) just a few days ago. Unfortunately, they weren't given permission to deep-six the b...ds so they had to let them go. You'll have to trust me that they asked for permission - it's not in these stories. The question is why was it refused?

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/08/ap_pirateattac kmct_080808/

http://northshorejournal.org/peleliu-stops-pirate-attack

This kind piracy happens quite often.

I would feel a little better
if Medved's people and Max Boot's people had a history of fighting in America's wars instead of just cheering them on. Then again, fighting in wars is a very goy thing to do after all.

Hats off to Stephen Decatur

The next time I am in Washington D.C., I definitely plan to visit the statue of Stephen Decatur in Lafayette Square.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.