Investor’s Business Daily
has an editorial telling us all about “Bush’s Big Victory
Because some conditions have improved in Iraq, IBD asks us to accept
that this justifies Bush’s invasion of a country that was no real
threat to the United States.
IBD maintains that because there is:
1. More support for democracy by Iraqis,
2. Security is better,
3. Iraqis are more concerned with their economy than war,
Bush “got it right. Mission accomplished.”
What a crock.
Support for “democracy” (majority “rule”...and I mean “rule”...) is a
fool’s game and a tool of tyrants. How about supporting — and
implementing — freedom
for a change.
Iraqi security — what there is of it — has been purchased by the blood
of our soldiers and the hard-earned money of our citizens...and would
likely deteriorate precipitously should Americans really
leave Iraq (as opposed to The Great One’s bogus “withdrawal” that leaves 50-60,000 American soldiers in Iraq).
Improvements in Iraq’s “general state of affairs” comes as we
waste trillions of dollars in that sand pit while our
economy nosedives, at least in part, by that diversion of wealth to those who neither earned it nor deserved it.
The most egregious part of this editorial, however, comes here:
“You might disagree that Bush was right to depose this
murderous thug. But in doing so, you would then have to defend the
deaths of thousands of innocents.”
1. The sole purpose of our military and our government is to defend the rights of AMERICAN citizens.
2. Only the acceptance of unearned guilt would lead to the
false conclusion that American citizens who accept (1) are somehow to
blame for the evil and destructive acts of any pissant tyrant who is
slaughtering his own citizens. I can condemn murderous policies and
still realize that it is both impossible to prevent them all and a
violation of the purpose of government to pretend it is our duty to
sacrifice ourselves to save every sorry soul on the planet. (And this
ignores the thousands of Iraqis who died as a result of our invasion.)
3. If we accept IBD’s heinous statement, then those who wrote that
editorial are defending Stalin's murder of 50,000,000 citizens, Mao's
murder of 60,000,000, and the murder of millions of others killed in
genocides in Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere simply because
those writers did not advocate invading all those nations and deposing
all those thugs who felt it proper to wipe out those they were supposed
Despite IBD’s pretensions, Bush did
lie (for example, he constantly changed his rationale for this unconstitutional and immoral invasion); Congress was
(willingly) “bamboozled on WMD” (there were none; even if there had
been, the mere existence of WMDs would have been an invalid reason to
invade); the “surge” was not
the main factor in decreasing violence (buying off local thugs was a bigger influence).
What Bush “won” was a massive ratcheting upward of presidential power;
a huge increase in government in both size and control over the
American populace; and a tragic and continuing loss of freedom and
rights for all of us.
Bush’s “big victory” is nothing more than a big disgrace, a victory
only for those who oppose everything this nation once stood for. Bush’s
defenders should be ashamed that they continue to be complicit in the
destruction of the United States of America by praising a philosophy
that declares the ends justify the means.