Sometimes the thinking of progressive socialist democrats is so bizarre as to produce a state of wonder and disbelief. In this particular post, we find the progressives suggesting that republicans love war because those pesky Civil War Southerners love war and the GOP is the party of the South. [My comments in blue italic]
The Reason Republicans Love War So Much -- The GOP and the South can’t stand the fact that Obama seeks diplomacy.
[Considering that President Obama entered the Office of the President with no foreign relations experience and has surrounded himself with hyper-partisan advisors who are more interested in domestic policy and the power politics to advance a near-socialist agenda, one wonders if President Obama is even capable of understanding history, current world affairs, and what it means to lead from the front? It appears that Obama and his advisors do not know that war is inevitable when diplomacy fails to bring about a desired political outcome. And, as we have seen in Iran – and in the Muslim world in general, diplomacy is a tool to allow the opposition time to train additional recruits and replenish their cache of materiel before the next big battle. ]
“Southerners are a military people. We were back then, still are today,” says a North Carolina Civil War enthusiast in 1998’s Confederates in the Attic.
[This is one man’s opinion that cannot be simply extrapolated into today’s environment. Very few people who have gone to war or who have lost loved ones like war or the personal devastation it brings Most Southerners, back then as now, simply want to be left alone to do their own thing. They are not more warlike than the Northerners who were expansionists and control freaks when it came to pursuing their own political agenda. Let us not forget, the civil war was more state’s rights and preserving the union than freeing the slaves. One could make the case that one of the more pressing issues was the industrialized North’s demand that the more agrarian South sell their cotton only to the industrialized North rather than ship it for sale abroad. Most Southerners did not own plantations, nor did they own slaves. While Southerners were more likely to own firearms that were used on a daily basis, that did not make them more bellicose or dangerous to anyone except animals.]
That's why the Republican Party is piling on President Obama as he seeks a diplomatic peace in Ukraine. The United States is acting like a nation in decline in its dealings with Russia rather than projecting strength, say former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, while Sen. John McCain has criticized Obama’s diplomatic efforts on so many occasions in a way that suggests if we don’t start bombing Russia in the next 72-hours, the senator from Arizona will chew through a lamp post.
[Let the progressive socialist democrats realize that President Obama was not and is not an “engaged” president capable of leadership. An empty suit who believes a well-crafted and well-delivered speech is the equivalent of action. President Obama lost any effectiveness a few years ago when his ineptitude and desire for a political public relations win demanded that he pull a defensive missile shield from Poland and cede negotiating strength to Russia in order to deal with Syria and Iran. The truth is that President Obama and his cadre of progressive socialist democrats do not know history, do not know how to protect the United States, and tend to project American values onto our enemies. Values that simply do not exist on the side of evil. There is no suggestion that John Bolton, a student of history, and John McCain are eager to engage in war. But they do serve as a counterpoint to Obama’s subservience to dictators and his willingness to go along to get along – anything to avoid interrupting the pursuit of his socialist agenda and ideology.]
On Tuesday, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that even a “trained ape” has better foreign policy skills than President Obama. Mind you, Rumsfeld also said in 2002, “That even a trained ape knows Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.” Just kidding, but that's the guy we're dealing with here.
[Right out of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, the author attempts to denigrate Rumsfeld with a lie … and then excuses his bad behavior with a “just kidding.” What is so damn funny about this subject that it promotes “just kidding” levity. While Rumsfeld had his shortcomings, his re-working of the ossified set-piece military toward a faster and more mobile aggressive force of special operations personnel was what was needed to deal with the counterinsurgency in wars where there were no clearly defined enemies and un-uniformed enemy combatants faded back into the civilian population after a skirmish. About Obama, he was dead right – Obama does not appear to have any foreign policy skills.]
The Republican Party is the party of the South. The Republican congressional delegation is disproportionately southern, and unsurprisingly a majority of the party’s leaders talk with a southern accent. If you want to know why there has never been a war the Republican Party didn’t want another person’s kid to fight, it’s the Republican Party’s slavish devotion to the monolithic South. In Better off Without 'Em: A Northern Manifesto for Southern Secession, Chuck Thompson writes, “The southerner’s enthrallment with war and bloodshed, his veneration of defeat and disaster, his zeal for religious crusade, and easy compliance with the corporate profit motive, has repeatedly dragged the nation into unnecessary wars.”
[Sheer idiocy on behalf of the author. Does he not know that the GOP is governed by Northeastern Liberal Elites – Bush and Kerry alike were Yalies and members of Skull and Bones? And, if anything, it was the Carters and the Clintons that were the corrupt Southerners in power. It is a scurrilous and cowardly charge that the GOP wants “another person’s kid to fight.” As for unnecessary wars, the mistake was attempting to be good guys – rebuilding the damage we did to our enemies during an ongoing conflict. We should have pursued the terrorists and left any rebuilding to the Arab nations. And, ignored the simpering liberals who wailed about collateral damage. While we cannot deny that there were billions to be made off the conflict, these cannot be solely ascribed to the GOP, because corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle were profiting mightily from the contributions of the special interests trying to keep the dollars flowing.]
The GOP and the South can’t stand the fact that Obama seeks diplomacy, or occasionally walks back from his own self-imposed “red lines.” They view his hesitancy to use military force as weakness, while at the same time forgetting the blood and treasure this country has forfeited in its previous rush to war; an invasion and occupation that cost 186,000 Iraqis and 5,000 Americans their lives. While also not forgetting that misadventure came with a $3 trillion price tag and an immeasurable moral cost.
[Does the author not realize that it is not the opinion of Americans that counts in the world of realpolitik strategy, and that our enemy has a vote that is more powerful that ordinary Americans? It is apparent that world leaders believe President Obama is a weak and ineffective President, likely to go to foreign countries and give speeches apologizing for America’s past behavior and disparaging a nation that has given more lives and treasure to bring peace and freedom to the world. If you cannot believe Obama’s word about “red lines,” how can you take anything he says with any degree of certainty or believability?
And, I find it abominable that this miscreant author has the temerity to characterize the Iraq war as an invasion and occupation that cost 186,000 Iraqi lives. Suggesting the war is illegitimate and that somehow Iraqi lives, listed first, are more important than American lives. Excuse me, but I have no moral equivalence and do not give a damn about Iraqi lives, except in the abstract and the fact that we freed the nation. In fact they have so much freedom that they told us to go to hell and are cozying up to Iran. Our mistake was nation building and trying to bring freedom to those who do not want it bad enough to revolt on their own.]
Interestingly, a 2003 Pew Research Poll showed that Southerners were by far the most supportive of the Iraq invasion, with 77 percent believing it was the right choice, as opposed to barely half of Americans in general. In fact, Southern whites expressed the strongest support for military action in Iraq with 83 percent saying it was the right decision.
Going back further, C. Vann Woodward noted in The Burden of Southern History, “Not only had the strongest support for the Vietnam War come from the South, but so also had the President and the Secretary of State who led the crusade.”
[Could it be that more Southerners are more patriotic and do not buy into the nonsense of political correctness, multiculturalism, moral equivalency, and America as just another unexceptional nation among the member-states of the international community? Did anyone notice that Vietnam was a military victory but a political defeat brought about by a fifth column of progressive socialist democrats trying to destroy America from within? The very same people who are attempting to bring about the transformation of America by writing anti-American articles such as this one that appears to be based on a phony supposition and filled with radical progressive thoughts. And, how can we forget the President Johnson was a corrupt progressive socialist democrat from the South? ]
The Republican Party’s new attack line is to blame the world’s woes on a weakened America. With the slow but steadily growing success of the Affordable Care Act, it appears the GOP is readying to roll out its old timey “Democrats are weak on national security” tagline for 2014 instead of attacks on the President’s signature legislation.
[There is little or no doubt in my mind, or that of anyone with the ability to remember history and engage in a little critical thinking, that America has been weakened by a wishy-washy President who votes “present” and leads from behind. A man seemingly devoid of patriotism and core American values. A man who confuses speechifying and action. It is true that democrats are weak on national security, and it is quite ballsy of the author to remind us that Obama’s signature legislation, Obamacare, is an abject failure that inflicts unnecessary pain and suffering on Americans to bring about a transformative socialist one-payer, government-controlled society.]
Read the rest of this screed at: The Reason Republicans Love War So Much | Alternet
Considering the remarks of Obama to Russia’s President, one wonder’s if this latest brouhaha is not actually being stage-managed by Obama and Putin to the disadvantage of America and for the purpose of distracting Americans from all of the scandal swirling about Obama and his progressive socialist democrat administration? Sorry to say folks, but I do not trust President Obama to do anything that is not politically expedient for the progressive socialist democrats. He was raised as a non-American socialist/communists and appears to be the consequences of a smart slacker with a chameleon-like ability to turn his rather bland façade into one that mirrors his audience.
How is it that the progressive socialist democrats fete and glorify socialist dictators and murderers like Fidel Castro, Che Guevarra, and Hugo Chavez while denigrating America and American values? It is time to throw the progressive socialist democrats out of the House and the Senate and restore American values. No more knuckling under to shouting illegal alien socialist activists or petty dictators. American has enemies folks, both foreign and domestic – and they are trying to use our own laws, our own institutions, and our own media against us. All brought about by corruption and the moneyed special interests. Remember this at the ballot box when you vote to save your own life and those lives of your family, neighbors, community, city, state, and nation.