There has been much wailing and gnashing of teeth over how the US has "squandered" the "good will" of our "allies". It's a ridiculous statement on several levels, but for the most part Americans have been polite enough not to belabor it.
But it does get very tiresome. And it's dangerous, in the sense that any great misunderstanding between nations is dangerous. So I want to refer you to a stunner by Dean Esmay, who lets loose with both barrels and tells it like it really is in this post.
Europe, this is how most Americans really feel about things.
The money quote:
In fact, let me be even more blunt with you: What the hell does your "good will" mean to us if, when we ask you for your help in our time of darkest crisis, when we need you in our most important moments, all you do is slander us, interfere with us, call us imperialists, call us murderers?Why don't you people start asking yourselves why we should even want your good will?
I mean it. What the hell have you ever done for us? If you aren't there for us when we sincerely ask for your help, then why do we even want your friendship? Why? So you can continue to spit on us, call us murderers, call us imperialists? Hmm? Is that what your friendship is worth?
And this:
I, as one American, frankly no longer give a rat's ass what people like you--people who call us imperialists, call us murderers, call us oppressors--think. Indeed, I find the question of why we are willing to squander your good will to be breathtaking in its arrogance.Why are YOU so willing to squander OUR good will, my friend?
Exactamundo!
France, Germany, and Russia are not our allies. France and Germany aren't anymore, and Russia never has been. All three are neutrals vis a vis the United States. Charles Krauthammer lays it all out very clearly. Hat tip to Cold Fury, who has cogent comments.
Two, two, two at once! World wars, that is
A couple of pieces recently went 'click' in the noggin, and allowed me to figure out why so many (including myself, sometimes) are conflicted about what's going in the world today, and also why so many things seem to be at stake at once.
The Battle for the World's Future
I've realized that we're not just engaged in World War IV (or III, depending how you count). We're engaged in TWO world wars at once, and people, and countries, may be on either side of either war. Since these two wars are mixed together, that leads to positions and behaviors that seem anything from inexplicable to treacherous.
The first, and oldest, of these wars is the war for world domination by Transnational Progressivism. But really, that's the wrong way to put it. The Tranzis are just the latest standard-bearers of the Statists. Properly understood, this war of the Statists against the Individualists has been going on since the late 19th century. It has been expressed in all manner of political flavors from the Left and the Right. Communism, Stalinism, Nazism, Fascism - all different political trappings for the basic idea that the State is more important than the Individual, and that those in charge of the State have both a right and a duty to decide All Things for All Men.
The second of these wars, and the one more currently obvious, is the Islamofascist War. Our adversaries in the Islamofascist War are pretty obvious: Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, all Wahabists, all Islamic fundamentalists who advocate or even tolerate violence. In a larger sense, all Muslims who will not renounce the portions of Islam that discriminate against women and against other religions. These beliefs are completely incompatible with modern Western cultures and legal systems.
In the Statist War it's perhaps not so obvious, partly because this war has been going on for so long, and partly because Pogo was right: " I have seen the enemy and he is us!". The Democratic Party is largely lost to the Statists at the moment, as are plenty of Republicans. The staffs at our college campuses and in our mainstream media are perhaps 80% Statist. The United Nations, and all other NGOs and other institutions of Transnational Progressivism, are clearly and avowedly Statist. So too, the entire governing structure of the European Union.
Recently, our enemies in each of these wars have come to see each other as more than just fellow travelers and have begun to actively form alliances.
This explains the absurdity of Western Leftist organizations, supposedly the standard bearers of the humanist values of the Enlightenment, openly allying with (and pathetically making excuses for) groups which espouse and support terrorism, torture, the oppression of women, etc. At first glance this is both shocking and inexplicable. But when you see that these are each participants in two different World Wars, and are just allying against a common foe, then it makes perfect sense.
It explains how so many supposedly liberal and enlightened people at the United Nations could, when presented with a stark choice, choose to support the evil dictator Saddam Hussein over the United States, the world's most Liberal state. The Tranzis knew we were the real enemy in their war for world domination, and "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", so they became Saddam's friends. All as a matter of principal, of course.
Another example: Tony Blair. He's on our side in the Islamofascist War, but on the enemy side in the Statist War. Americans tend to lionize him because he stood by us during the run-up to war (whether this was a net plus may be debatable, but we'll leave that for history). Many English, having to live with Tony's unabashed championing of the Tranzi side in the Statist War, aren't nearly so happy with him.
There are dozens, hundreds of other examples that will readily spring to mind. Everyone has a stake in each of these wars, and the contradictions and strange bedfellows this is bringing forth are truly boggling.
But for me, even since I saw that there were two wars, not one, a lot of previously inexplicable things have become understandable, even obvious. So, try the idea on for size, re-evaluate the news from this context, and see what you think.
[UPDATE:]
Here's another piece that just reinforces my sense of unease about things. It ain't over, by a long shot.