Shortly after September 11, I wrote this article, “The Virtue of Self-Defense.” Ten years later, I have greatly revised it.
“If the guiding moral compass has these two goals, in order of importance, 1) remove the enemy and 2) have as little loss to your side as possible
the wanton use of nuclear bombs starts to seem ideal. This is a horrifying position that should be shunned.
The Virtue of Self-Defense
Political freedom is not an absolute but a contextual conclusion that flows from the virtue of self-defense. This conclusion changes in wartime.
My analysis of the Olso terrorist. I also make the point that he is not just anti-Islam but anti-Muslim. There is a difference.
Analyzing the Motives of the Oslo Terrorist
To associate Breiviks actions with Tea Party values, conservatism, or pro-American or pro-Western values is completely dishonest. If anything, his views are reminiscent of past European dictators. Like Hitler, he favors nationalism. Like Mussolini, who advanced fascism, he favors a totalitarian state.
A quick and short article I wrote with a simple message: “What could be is possible, if not for the ideas that hold it back.”
What Could Be
I had a dream last night. Human rights were respected in the Middle East; Africa was a robust civilization; and racism was a thing of the past.
CONGRATULATIONS U.S. FORCES ON KILLING AND CAPTURING OSAMA BIN LADEN!!!
Our brave soldiers deserve a big THANK YOU for the heroic and dangerous work they do and their success in finding, killing, and capturing Osam bin Laden!!!
This is a major victory for the U.S. Not only is it a huge morale boost for our nation and a devastating one for our enemies, the likely extensive, ongoing, and expensive efforts to find bin Laden can now cease. It also may put an end in sight to this war. I support the war and do not want to end it early, but a successful outcome which ends most efforts would be welcome. Most importantly, killing Osama bin Laden is a victory as it brings justice to his 3,000+ victims.
I agree however that this is not an end to it all. And I disagree with the President: Islam very much is the problem and inspires people to terrorism. It was tasteless that he used his speech to defend Islam. Islam is a fighting ideology with an uncanny hatred of infidels. So as long as this religion is given respect, it will inspire the next Islamic terrorist. Mohammed himself was a terrorist. Please read and spread my article “Islam on Trial: The Prosecution’s Case” where in 17 pages I dissect the Koran and show how it is nothing but one long battle cry against infidels. PLEASE do not tell me Islam is peace or Christianity is “just as bad” without reading the article! The PDF is FREE!
A Note on Using the Military for Social Agendas
What I am about to write is such common sense that it makes almost no sense that I have to write it. But I feel I must: The militarys only purpose is to defend our nation.
Further, the job of our military is a very difficult and dangerous one. Soldiers put their lives on the line so that the rest of the country can be free. Whatever support we can give them we absolutely should. All advantages that we can give to our military should be employed. However many lives it saves is worth it.
With that said, here is a logical conclusion: The only factor in weighing one military policy over another is how well it aids our troops.
The Peoples’ Revolt in Iran
The perseverance of the so-called Green Movement is something to behold. Millions of Iranians mobilized against the outcome of June’s fraudulent presidential election, and their protests were violently repressed. But the cause has only grown in scope, with the aim of many becoming nothing less than the death of a hated system.
I am *so* happy that the pro-freedom revolution in Iran is being picked up by mainstream media! Everyone in America needs to be interested in and understand this story. The Iranian people and Americans have a common enemy: the Islamic regime of Iran. There is a revolution happening in Iran of young students who have witnessed the heavy hand of the IRI and want fundamental regime change. Just like under communism, the people most opposed to communism are those under its heavy hand, the people in Iran are the most opposed to the heavy hand of the Islamic regime of Iran. The ***people*** of Iran are not our enemy and are in every way a friend. They do not in anyway implicitly condone their government. They have been vocal and active in opposing it. They DON’T share its ideology. Their noses are not in the Koran–they read the likes of Thomas Paine. This enlightened revolution, from the people up, is exactly what is needed in the Middle East, which will have major, positive effects on the national security of the United States and other countries, such as Israel.
Imagine, instead of having the most anti-enlightened theocracy/dictatorship in the Middle East, we had a government based on enlightenment, freedom, and a separation of religion and state. It IS possible. This revolution is at and in fact over critical mass.
THEY NEED WORLD SUPPORT ESPECIALLY FROM AMERICA!!!
One beef: GW Bush did not do much to show support for the people. However, he was better than Obama as at least he didn’t give legitimacy to the thugs who currently run Iran.
Obama: We must never stop until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of the earth.
Sarkozy: We live in the real world, not the virtual world. And the real world expects us to take decisions.
The rest of Sarkozys remarks were, well, remarkable:
President Obama dreams of a world without weapons
but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.
Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993.
I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map, he continued, referring to Israel.
The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr Obamas resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy.
If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons, he said.
Mr Sarkozy has previously called the US presidents disarmament crusade naive.
Why does anyone think that abandoning missile defense will “improve relations” with anyone? I know several people who carry firearms. They carry around each other even. They get along fine. Getting rid of a firearm would not improve the relationship.