Victor David Hanson in his latest Article, History or Hysteria, takes to task the whining harbingers of doom who whimper and cry about how bad they think the war has gone. After a little less than two weeks of war we have gained an unprecedented amount of ground with very few casualties. People with no knowledge of the overall situation rant and whimper because they see a small pieces of information and from their perspective it looks bad. Yet they ignore those who know better, and fail to consider the lessons of history, rushing off to write another scathing attack on one of the most generous and altruistic nations this world has ever known.

How many nations in history can stand and say that of all the wars they have fought, precious few have been for conquest. American’s have consistently given their lives for the freedoms of other people. Our military protects half the civilized world, and our money sustains a large portion of the international economy. Considering the fact that America’s population makes up less than 3% of the total population on this planet, that is no small feat.

I’m tired of the ceaseless rantings of an arrogant and knowledgeless minority. What the media has done has been inexcusable, and many bloggers have blindly followed along. All I can say is I have absolutely no respect for those who cry and whimper for peace, but have no stomach for the kind of measures that are needed to attain it. You have shown your face and it has been ugly. It’s a pity you scorn the very substance that gives you the right to whine. I rather wish you had been born elsewhere, for you certainly do not deserve the freedoms of America.

Other stuff: Oh and here’s some fun stuff by Mark Steyn

Addendum: I wanted to note that in a comment on Gail Armstrong’s blog I said I was tired of, “The ceaseless rantings of an uninformed majority”. I changed that quote when I used it here because I was uninformed. Apparently, the majority of Americans support Bush. And as a recent poll shows, so do a majority of Canadians. So with great pride I ammended my statement, for it is really the ceaseless rantings of a minority who is uninformed, and who refuses to accept the word of those who are..

Share.

About Author

I have been writing on the web since 2000. I am a christian , a photographer, an occasional poet, a recovering dreamer, an occasional philosopher, a software developer, an autodidact, and i resemble the INFP personality type.

6 Comments

  1. Prentiss Riddle on

    It’s not the war to date which worries me but the aftermath. If it turns out, as quite a bit of evidence so far indicates, that the people of Iraq are more upset by an invasion than they are relieved by the removal of their dictator, I don’t think the US has a clue what it will do next. I don’t think either the right or the left has the stomach for an Iraq-sized Mogadishu, nor should they.

    Also, I have to say I’m getting pretty tired of pro-war rhetoric about peaceniks being undeserving of freedom because they are unwilling to pay its price. There are two big holes in that slogan: (1) if you really believe in freedom for many and not just for a few then you won’t be quick to talk about who doesn’t “deserve” it; and (2) you assume that this war has anything to do with preserving our freedom. Even if you believe Gulf War II is about defending America or freeing the Iraqis, you can’t make assumptions about cowardice on the part of people who don’t believe so.

  2. I’m not sure what information you have that suggests the Iraqi’s are more upset by the invasion than relieved by the removal of Saddam. I think most are probably waiting to see how things work out before deciding one way or another.

    I’m also confused by your poor view of the US. These men and women aren’t stupid. I’m more than certain they are preparing for what to do next. To think otherwise isn’t really rational.

    Concerning peaceniks: I don’t assume they are cowards, I judge them to be foolish based on what they have said in public. Those who have not said anything, I don’t have opinions on. Its amazing to me that so many people ignore the lessons of history. WWI and WWII should have taught us that you cannot leave megalomaniacs in power, even in small countries, because they will cause us damage, damage that could potentially be devestating.

    The last paragraph in my above rant was directed to those rather vocal dissidents, whose rhetoric has been shameful, dishonest and most frustatingly, unknowledgeable. Cowards or no, they have scorned men and women who have given their lives for peace. And I have no respect for that.

  3. Prentiss Riddle on

    Sorry, but your position strikes me as that of the proverbial generals who are “always fighting the last (world) war”. Megalomaniacs are in power in numerous countries all over the globe, and our powers that be are quite happy with them as long as they think we can manipulate them to serve our interests. Bush and co. have got some private reason for singling out Saddam Hussein at this moment in history. The reasons they state publicly — WMDs, his oppression of the Iraqi people, his supposed support for Al Qaeda, etc. — either don’t hold water or were equally true in the years when they ignored him or, worse, were selling him weapons. I’ll confess I don’t know which conspiracy theory du jour to believe about the administration’s motivation. But even the conpsiracy theories strike me as less far-fetched than the cock-and-bull stories they cite as their justification for the war.

    What I fear the lesson of *this* war will be is that you can do far more damage messing with a hornet’s nest than quarantining it and letting it runs its course.

    About the lack of support among Iraqis for American and British liberators: the evidence so far consists of everything from suicide bombers, to crowds in liberated cities which accept food while displaying anger at the westerners dispensing it, to private opinions expressed in confidence to reporters in the I-hate-Saddam-but-foreign-invaders-are-worse vein, to the continued existence of civilian pro-Saddam rallies in US- and British-occupied territory and nothing of the kind in favor of the liberators. I *hope* you are right and most Iraqis are waiting for the outcome to be clear, whereupon they will start waving American flags and thanking us for their liberation. But so far the signs look very bad.

    I think that American anti-war protesters who scorn the troops who have died are largely mythical — there may be a few nut cases out there giving the rest of us a bad name, but the people in the pro-war camp who think that that attitude characterizes the bulk of the protesters are sadly mistaken.

    That said, I don’t think our troops are risking or giving their lives for peace, nor for our freedom; tragically, they are putting their lives on the line for a lie they’ve been fed, just as in so many wars in the past.

  4. Sorry about the line breaks, I haven’t implemented an automatic line break function yet. HTML is required still…

  5. Bush and co. have got some private reason for singling out Saddam Hussein at this moment in history. The reasons they state publicly — WMDs, his oppression of the Iraqi people, his supposed support for Al Qaeda, etc. — either don’t hold water or were equally true in the years when they ignored him or, worse, were selling him weapons

    How do you know they don’t hold water? Last time I checked, intelligence like that wasn’t available for public consumption… Saying it’s not true and doesn’t hold water doesn’t make it so. Truth is, you’re basing your understanding on considerably less information than what Bush and Co. have.

    I might point out that George W. Bush has only been in office for a couple years. What Clinton did and presidents before him cannot be held against him. But so what. Even if they did, you still don’t have enough information to in any way judge Bush’s foreign policy. As long as most of the intel regarding this situation is classified, you are in the dark. You just don’t know. Neither do I. Sucks to be us, but that’s the way it is.

    This whole lack of relevant information is what prompted the “rantings of a knowledgeless minority” remark. It isn’t that the arguments aren’t often times persuasive. It’s that the arguments don’t have any facts to base their assumptions on. And personally, when those who do have facts to make decisions with tell us that such and such action is necessary, it seems foolish to me to oppose them when I’ve got jack to base my objections on.

    This lack of information is pervasive in this whole argument. We don’t really know what the Iraqi’s think. There simply isn’t any way to gauge the mood over there. Of course the Iraqi’s don’t like the bombings… bombing would scare anyone. But then again, even those involved in revolution rarely enjoy the means by which they must achieve their goals. Consider this, the Iraqi’s don’t really know what to expect at this point. The US failed to finish what they started in GWI, and as a result a lot of Iraqi’s were killed. If I were in their shoes, I would be biding my time, waiting to see who is going to win and what is going to happen before I reveal any pro US feelings. Keep in mind, this war has only been going on for two weeks. That’s nothing. Give it a little time before you start trying to cast judgement.