I've given up on getting anything intelligent out of NRO. They seem to be in permanent "provocative mode".
Francis advocated a politics of uninhibited racial nationalism
Much like what Frum advocates for Israel. Liberalism isn't race neutral, it is virulently racist against whites, and Frum is a supporter of that genocidal racism. It's a zero sum game, a point he understands when it comes to Israel, but pretends not to when it comes to Europe or America. People who advocate mass Arab (or any non-Jewish) immigration into Israel are advocating the destruction of Israel - he understands this which is why he doesn't support multiculturalising Israel. People who advocate mass third world immigration into Europe and America are advocating the destruction of Europe and America - he understands this as well, which is why he does support multiculturalising Europe and America.
Justin Raimondo isn't a conservative and neither is Lew Rockwell. Apparently he lost his scorecard.
Good God. I didn't know Pat swung that way.
Great article.
However, in reading some of this article, I am reminded of Bush's 2000 campaign promise where he stated that he "wouldn't waste a $10 million dollar missile to kill a $50 camel in a $10 tent" (I am quoting from memory).
Before I get flamed I wish to state that Bush's paradigm, which sounds reminiscent of Paleo philosophy, went out the window on 9/11/01 when we ALL realized just how far the neaderthalic followers of the schizoid, pedophile prophet would go. Instead, it is the Paleo's that 'stayed-the-course' with regards to extreme foreign interventionism, where Bush et al. adapted to this threat. What Bush has/is doing has/is been needed to be done for quite some time. Unfortunately, there are too many vested interests in the Middle East (the wacky Mullahs of Iran, the Fascist Mafia of Syria, the bloated smiling two-faced Saudi Arabians, Turkey's non-help at the beginning of the war, and farther afield the duplicitous Russians and Chinese) to make the Iraq policy a quick turnaround of fortunes.
Drivel....all drivel
Which is akin to George Steinbrenner saying "I respect and admire the Cubs, who have been a far greater team than we shall ever be."
... but, oh! OH! Don't even dream of referring to either of the repugnant little toads (Raimondo or Buchanan) as "anti-Semites," for heaven's sake -- ! :)
So here it goes, a book plug for a fellow Marine whom I served with who had such a fine grasp of the foreign policy vision of two generations of President Bush back before it was fully articulated by the second Bush. In my opinion, this articulation needs to be repeated over and over again [like I’ve attempted here, in post #75] lest we forget that vision and our purpose for being in Iraq, for the second time! The book is titled Tip of the Spear: U.S. Marine Light Armor in the Gulf War and it was written in 1998 by a Marine NCO. This is what he wrote back in 1998, eight years ago mind you, reflecting on what was happing from 1990 through 1991:
Despite the degree of commitment and motivation that energized us throughout the deployment, all the marines on my crew suffered from homesickness. It was very frustrating for us to be in the desert so long away from our families. My wife and I had just had our first son the previous spring; my gunner’s wife was due to have their first child the coming spring; one of my scouts wanted to be with his little girl. We just wanted to go home.Another frustration was the fact that no distinct time line had been set for our going home. We had heard rumors we might be home by Christmas, but hope faded quickly as the year progressed. When President Bush issued the January deadline to Sadaam Hussein, we finally had a dim light to look forward to. I remember writing my wife on 3 November that it would really be depressing if they told us we wouldn’t be going home until 31 March (which, ironically, turned out to be the very date I did leave for home). Of course the way we all wanted to go home was by having done the job we were sent to do – quickly.
In addition to the overall positive attitude we had about our mission and our reason for existence in the theater, we shared a strong dislike for Sadaam Hussein. We heard news of his exploits, including his having patients’ life-saving equipment unplugged at hospitals and babies taken out of incubators in order to preserve resources for his war machine – babies who were left to die on the cold hospital floors. Hussein was destroying lives and futures; and as far as we were concerned, he deserved to die painfully. I can still remember vividly the distaste we felt for what he and his army were doing. There was no love lost between the Iraqis and us, the crew of Blue 5.
Perhaps the most pivotal moment in Blue 5’s quest for understanding of our purpose happened during one of the battalion operations in November: the crew was privy to a sight that would live indelibly in our minds. There was nothing particularly dramatic about the sight, but the circumstance, and the meaning behind what we saw, strengthened the resolve had already started to develop. We were on the left wing of the company formation when we passed a Kuwaiti position in the middle of the Saudi desert. I looked over from my turret hatch and saw tiny Kuwaiti flags flying proudly from every antenna of every BMP (an armored amphibious infantry combat vehicle). Some of the flags were makeshift, constructed by the BMP crews in memory of the freedom they had lost.
I told the crew to look as we passed the position, we all stared in silence. There were no words required: each of reflected solemnly on the pain that the Kuwaiti soldiers must have been feeling. Yes, we all wanted to go home, but when we spoke these thoughts aloud, we realized they were selfish. These warriors before us did not have a home to go to! I think at that very moment I realized that no matter what the official position was, I could never believe that the war was about oil. Later, as a crew, we talked about that moment often. We all agreed. We all saw and felt the same things: the war was about freedom lost, a freedom that had to be regained. Our desire to go home was tempered by that brief passing in the sand.
We were getting American newspapers and magazines sporadically throughout the deployment. Each time we read the articles the presses were publishing, we got mad. We saw protesters in America who believed the war was about oil – they chanted slogans like No blood for oil! We read the letters to the editors in the news papers and found the protesters there, too. We talked about these articles and these people on the home front, and we were disgusted. These Americans simply did not know what it was like over here; they did not understand. We were able to remind ourselves, however, that America is a free society and that freedom of speech, and of personal opinion, is part of our national birthright. So with all of our disgust the only thing we could do was continue to believe in ourselves – and in our actions.
The one element of the publicity that we could not tolerate, however, was the letters from service personnel in the Stars and Stripes. We had to accept civilians who didn’t understand as we did and who chose to exercise their opinion, but we didn’t have to accept the same from service members. I read letter after letter written by those in-country who were complaining about the conditions of the deployment, about fighting for Kuwait, about being away from home, and about little things like showers and food. I was shocked. It was one thing to hear such things from a civilian, but hearing them from a military member, who has sworn to carry out the orders given, was appalling.
I began to wonder why these people joined the service at all if they were going to complain at the first hardship to hit them. And I could not believe that NCOs could not control their feelings but had instead decided to air grievances in a forum that all service personnel could read – including their subordinates, the ones they were setting the example for. Adding to the whole problem were the scores of service men and women back in the United States who elected to exercise their right to object to the whole war for one reason or another – and those were the ones who claimed conscientious-objector status.
I am very serious about my business as a marine, and I could not understand any of this. I wrote a letter to my wife on 10 November [the author, who always seemed to find appropriate locations to add explanatory commentary in this book, surprisingly omits the fact that this letter to his wife was written on the 224th Anniversary of the Marine Corp’s founding] in frustration and disgust – “I don’t understand the total, utter selfishness and lack of compassion…who has lost their rights? Let’s think about the thousands who’ve lost their country! It’s not about oil; it can’t be! I wont believe it! It’s about my comrade, and his tiny Kuwaiti flag flying high above his vehicle – that’s what it’s about!”
Take that Jack Murtha types. Oh yeah, and you, too, paleoconservative isolationists. The pings are coming!
---------------------------
To those who consicer Sobran, McDonald, Raimondo, Buchanan et al conservatives, in the context of electoral Republican vs Democrat politics, not conserving vegetables, fruits, and potted meat, my sympathies. Cindi Sheehan is a conservative too. As is Putin, Arafat, Hamas and Iran, all victims of the colonial aspirations of Comrade Wolf.
Great read! Bookmark for later reading of comments.
bump
An (Islamo-fascist) enemy of the people of Israel is perceived as a friend by neo-Nazis--even those who are too cowardly to admit the reason for their support of our Islamo-fascist enemy.
And BTW, did you ever wonder who the dishonest word, "anti-war," is commonly used to describe those who are antidefense? We're all against war. Neo-Nazi, Euro-identity traitors are against the defense of our country. They're anti-defense.
Buchanan and Novak seem to be very anti-Semitic.
NR Goes to War
http://toryanarchist.wordpress.com/2006/06/09/nr-goes-to-war/
That's the title of Neal Freeman's article in the June 2006 American Spectator. It's well worth picking up. Freeman, a longstanding member of NR's board of directors, believed all along that the Iraq War was unwise and made the case to his fellow board members. You can guess how well that went down. (He also argued that the magazine should print an apology, to Robert Novak at least, for David Frum's "Unpatriotic Conservatives" hit piece — "As America went to war," Freeman writes, "NR gave its warm endorsement to the invasion but then — rather than rallying reluctant conservatives to the flag and cause — it turned abruptly to the settling of intramural scores.")
In our final meeting before the balloon went up in Iraq, I pleaded with my NR colleagues to reconsider their drum-beating for war. I rehearsed my old arguments and added the prudential point that we should husband our resources to meet the real threats in Iran and North Korea. I thought then and I think today that if NR had opposed the invasion it could have made a decisive difference within the conservative movement and, radiating its influence outward, across the larger political community. There were no takers for my brief. For all involved, I suspect, that last pre-war evening was difficult. I probably pushed too hard against the carefully tended fences of collegiatility. In an overwrought phrase that I regretted instantly, I characterized the decision to invade Iraq as "stupid, dangerous, and hubristic." (I recall the phrase only because it was tossed back at me repeatedly in the early months of the war, as if it had been memorialized on a plaque in the Hall of Crazy Sayings.)
The Frumpurge, where NR tried to do to antiwar conservatives what it had long ago done to the Randians and Birchers, was just about the last straw.
I continued to attend board functions, holding a grin-and-bear-it pose as the editors reported, early on, how swimmingly the Iraq campaign was going and then, in a later analysis, how Rumsfeld's inept tactics were botching Wolfowitz's brilliant strategy.I hung in there because I had enjoyed a great run with the magazine. Hell, Bill and our little gang had repainted the map of the known world. I had deep reserves of affection for hte magazine and for my band of brothers and I just dind't have it in me to tell Bill I was quitting.
When Buckley himself stepped down as owner, however, Freeman followed him out the door.
PING for later.
David Frum is pro-abortion and has continually defended large-government policies. I'll take my definitions on the word "conservative" elsewhere, thanks.
Buchanan? Sobran? Yuk!