Posted on 03/30/2006 4:54:10 AM PST by FerdieMurphy
The top neocon of the 20th century was Woodrow Wilson. His supposed idealism, symbolized in the slogan "Make the world safe for democracy," resulted in untold destruction and death across the world for many decades.
His deceit and manipulation of the prewar intelligence from Europe dragged America into an unnecessary conflict that cost the world and us dearly. Without the disastrous Versailles Treaty, World War II could have been averted – and the rise to power of Communists around the world might have been halted.
We seem to never learn from our past mistakes. Today's neocons are as idealistically misled and aggressive in remaking the Middle East as the Wilsonian do-gooders. Even given the horrendous costs of the Iraq War and the unintended consequences that plague us today, the neocons are eager to expand their regime-change policy to Iran by force.
The obvious shortcomings of our regime change in and occupation of Afghanistan are now readily apparent. The Taliban was ousted from power, but they have regrouped and threaten the delicate stability that now exists in that country. Opium drug production is once again a major operation, with drugs lords controlling a huge area of the country outside Kabul. And now the real nature of the government we created has been revealed in the case of Abdul Rahman, the Muslim who faced a possible death sentence from the Karzai administration for converting to Christianity. Even now that Mr. Rahman is free due to Western pressure, his life remains in danger.
Our bombs and guns haven't changed the fact that the new puppet Afghan government still follows Sharia law. The same loyalty to Sharia exists in Iraq, where we're trying so hard to stabilize things. And all this is done in the name of spreading democracy.
The sad fact is that even under the despicable rule of Saddam Hussein, Christians were safer in Iraq than they are today. Saddam Hussein's foreign minister was a practicing Christian. Today, thousands of Christians have fled Iraq following our occupation, to countries like Jordan and Syria. Those Christians who have remained in Iraq fear for their lives every day. That should tell us something about the shortcomings of a policy that presumes to make the world safe for democracy.
The Muslim world is not fooled by our talk about spreading democracy and values. The evidence is too overwhelming that we do not hesitate to support dictators and install puppet governments when it serves our interests. When democratic elections result in the elevation of a leader or party not to our liking, we do not hesitate for a minute to undermine that government. This hypocrisy is rarely recognized by the American people. It's much more comfortable to believe in slogans, to believe that we're defending our goodness and spreading true liberty. We accept this and believe strongly in the cause, strongly enough to sacrifice many of our sons and daughters, and stupendous amounts of money, to spread our ideals through force.
Pointing out the lack of success is taboo. It seems of little concern to many members of Congress that we lack both the moral right and constitutional authority to impose our will on other nations.
The toughest task is analyzing what we do from their perspective. We should try harder to place ourselves in the shoes of those who live in the Arab countries where our efforts currently are concentrated. We are outraged by a Muslim country that would even consider the death penalty for a Christian convert. But many Muslims see all that we do as a reflection of Western Christianity, which to them includes Europe and America. They see everything in terms of religion.
When our bombs and sanctions kill hundreds of thousands of their citizens, they see it as an attack on their religion by Christians. To them, our actions represent a crusade to change their culture and their political systems. They do not see us as having noble intentions. Cynicism and realism tell them we're involved in the Middle East to secure the oil we need.
Our occupation and influence in the holy lands of the Middle East will always be suspect. This includes all the countries of the Arabian Peninsula, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Naively believing otherwise will guarantee continuing hostilities in Iraq. Our meddling will remain an incitement for radicals to strike us here at home in future terrorist attacks. All the intelligence-gathering in the world will serve little purpose if we don't come to understand exactly why they hate us – despite the good intentions that many Americans hold dear.
Catch and elimiate.
I despise it when people do this. I thought Ron Paul was better than this.
Ridiculous. Time for a new religion over there anyway ~ one that gets it right this time.
And Wilson, America's last "W" President prior to "W"? He did one thing right ~ locked up his political enemies for the duration of the war.
Stopped reading here. Wilson was against reparations. It was the French who insisted on them.
Reparations led to the hyper-inflation in Germany and played a signficant role in causing the Great Depression.
Wilson was against them and certainly cannot be blamed.
Like so many of the major hisotrical blubers of the last 200 years, France was the key driver.
Whatever Wilson's faults, and they were many, he tried to ameliorate a harsh peace for Germany. I think history has proven his attempts correct. Also, I don't think Ron Paul is knowledgeable about what the Arabs want. He is applying what he thinks the Arabs would think instead of studying how the Arab/Muslim world generally does think.
Why? Because the world hates Jesus and will continue to hate and persecute His followers.
If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. John 15:18-19
Woodrow Wilson was possibly a greater failure than LBJ... and that's saying something.
"Without the disastrous Versailles Treaty, World War II could have been averted – and the rise to power of Communists around the world might have been halted."
I seriously doubt that would have happened. Given the extreme fascination socialism and its many variants had for many of the elites in the early 20th century and the destruction of the old European ruling order by the war before we joined, the USSR was a foregone conclusion. The Nazis amy not have gained power if not for the Versailles Treaty, but some other group would have capitalized on the resentment felt by many Germans that they had not been really defeated and would have probably started another war anyway. Or more likely, Stalin would have tried conquering Europe and WW2 would have been against the USSR, which would have flushed the closet communists out into public view.
If we remove a bloodthirsty tyrant who's hero is Josef Stalin, they see it as an attack on their religion...
If we remove a bunch of ruling mullahs whose idea of a soccer game half-time show is a public beheading, they see it as an attack on their religion...
It will never dawn on those who write this drivel that anything that we do, including exist, will be seen as an attack on their religion.
Ron Paul is a steaming load of dung who somehow got elected. I am no big fan of Woodrow Wilson, but blaming him for WWI, WWII, and communism is ludicrous.
While he may have directly admired Josef Stalin, he also indirectly emulated Adolf Hitler too, via his fevered admiration of his uncle, who regarded Hitler as his role model.
Saddam Hussein is the embodiment of those two dynamic Socialisms -- Proletarian Socialism (Communism) and National Socialism (Nazism). /sarcasm
You've read the Bible AND UNDERSTOOD IT!
You are absolutely right. All who try to spruce up the planet for Jesus' return are suspect, because they run against scripture completely.
If it enables the blaming of America, Wilson will be portrayed as absolute dictator of the treaty conference. Paul should get his history right. The British and French were out for revenge and would have been satisfied if the German people had simply starved to death, and this would have happened had not Wilson arranged or at least allowed a young civil engineer, one Herbert Hoover, to organize a relief effort.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the Blame America First crowd were to theorize that the young United States was somehow responsible for Robespierre's reign of terror and the subsequent Napoleonic Wars that devastated Europe.
You are right. If anything, if Brtain and France would have listened more to Wilson, then the conditions in Germany would have been much better after WWI, which could have forstalled the rise of Hitler. Something I learned in History class while a freshman in College. Paul must have majored in General Studies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.