Blame whom? (A precise damnation of Spain, Greece, and other European appeasers)

Victorhanson.Com ^ | March 14, 2004, 10:00 p.m. | Victor Davis Hanson

[NZerFromHK]

Let me get this straight. Two-and-a-half years after September 11, on a similar eleventh day of the month, 911 days following 9-11, and on the eve of Spanish elections, Al Qaeda or its epigones blows up 200 and wounds 1,400 Spaniards. This horrific attack follows chaotic months when Turks were similarly butchered (who opposed the Iraq War), Saudis were targeted (who opposed the Iraqi war), Moroccans were blown apart (who opposed the Iraqi war) and French periodically threatened (who opposed the Iraqi War).

[prognostigaator]

Just a simple bump....
to the clueless and the complacent whose multi-drives and multi-emotions are essentially also simple...
all they want and chant and hymm is "PAZ".
Idiotes!

[duckln]

From the article

A precise damnation of Spain, Greece, and other European appeasers
The Spanish will never go after the killers of their own citizens, much less the countries...

IMO the 'appeasing' began when Germany/EU lead the charge into the Balkans, demonizing and making an example of Milosevic to the cheers of the Islamists.

Which country leader would risk such a corrupt cabal in ferreting out terrorists? You just cannot 'do shadow boxing' in fighting this worldwide menace. Countries and groups have to be taken on, at least as forcefully as Milosevic did, and then some.

'Never the twaine shall meet' is becoming a truism.

[Havisham]

The Spanish people, not merely their hyper-liberal elites, have capitulated. Something I never expected. I believe the British electorate will do the same either before or after Al-Qaeda strikes their country. Do the Islamists have the nerve? Or is it even necessary? After all, the European people, with the exception of the Poles who really understand what is at stake, have already surrendered.

[Tolik]

Belated PING

Victor Davis Hanson moral clarity huge BUMP

[please freepmail me if you want or don't want to be pinged to Victor Davis Hanson articles]

If you want to bookmark his articles discussed at FR: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/k-victordavishanson/browse

His NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp

His blog: http://victorhanson.com/index.html

Yes, he is listened by the Bush Administration; they like him maybe as much as we do: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1085464/posts?page=6#6

[CatoRenasci]

Every country has a right to insist that people who would live in it, other than those clearly there in temporary capacities such as businessmen, students, tourists or diplomats, place loyalty to that country above any other allegience. Or, at the very least, that they will take no action against the interests of that country, as the country defines it. We have a right to do it, and, regardless of your history, so does Germany.

I do wish more Germans would actually learn about their history rather than simply feel burdened by it. I have always been astonished at how little German history the educated Germans I meet these (aged from 20-60) know. But, then in my life, I have been fortunate in knowing Germans ranging from a niece of den Herr General Feldmarschall Reichspraesident Graf von Hindenburg, several Kaiserliche Offizieren, a nephew of Kanzeller Adenauer, a friend of Oberst Graf von Stauffenberg, Wehrmacht und Kriegsmarine Offizieren, to exiles in California such as Rudolf Carnap, Lotte Lehman and many other German scholars, businessmen and members of the Adel.

Germans seem like a boy once burned by putting his hand in a fire who will not throw water on a fire in his house for fear of being burned.

You suggest (perhaps contradictorily) that I am impatient with the Germans, on the one had, and that current German policy is all of a piece since the end of WWII. (But, you are not clear whether by the end of WWII you mean the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall or the 1945 collapse of the Tausendjahriges Reich.)

In any event, I disagree on both counts. Given the billions we have spent defending you and protecting you from the very real threat of the Soviet tyranny, I should think intelligent, educated Germans would have a much broader view and be able to quickly grasp the threat of Islamofascism. As to the continuity question, there are elements, to be sure, in the sort of opportunism represented by Bruno Tisches in Wir Wunderkinder (one of my favorite post-War German films), but I do not think the German professors, officers and citizens I knew in the '50s, '60s and '70s and beyond represented such a cowardly turning from responsibilty. Perhaps my sample of Germans did not represent the durchschnittsmensch. Pity.

You say only a non-German could suggest a test of Germanness. Perhaps you're right, but sometimes one cannot see the forest for the trees. I'm not suggesting any mistreatment of anyone, simply a determination where loyalties lie, and the will to require that those who could consititute a threat leave Germany.

[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

You can't change a terrorist, but you need to withdraw the reasoning- and propaganda-basis for them, so there won't be as many future terrorists attracted to this evil cause.

Or you can withdraw their voice from the debate by terminating them with extreme prejudice.

I guess what bothers me about all of this is that Europe (as a whole, not necessarily specific individuals) bad mouths the United States until the advent of one occurence:

When Europe, because they spend almost nothing on their collective military establishments, preferring to take their collective tax takes and spend it on "fixing" (enabling, really) the various social ills, has a crisis that will only lend itself to the violent solution of war they call upon America to bail them out.

America will bail Europe out of this mess, in spite of itself. That is what the leadership of the United States appears headed to do. The leadership of America is doing this, obviously, without consulting me. I would have told them to let Europe fend for itself.

But that is rhetoric that is not very productive. Like it or not, this is World War III. It is being fought around the globe, and there are only two outcomes: (1) the destruction of society as we know it; or (2) the destruction of those who wish to destroy society.

I vote for number two.

Since the terrorists will not negotiate, kill them all.

Then we won't have to worry about it.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Internal security in Europe is clearly not up to snuff.

Al Qaeda could do this in NYC right this second. This is just something that is hard to stop.

[GraniteStateConservative]

How are they a staunch ally? It seems that this is patently not the case. If they did not commit resources how else were they to help us? And if they helped us some other way why would they not be attacked?

They are (were) a staunch ally. All KB is saying is at what cost do we ask a counry to give us a meager number of troops to use? Spain could have supported OIF verbally, helped us to get international support, etc. and not have been attacked, IMO. The Popular Party was more helpful than the new regime will be on intelligence and such fighting the WOT, too.

[duckln]

But Germany's motives of concern of the past two years are less sinister than you make them

I see a 'land grab' going on in the Balkans and a lot of sick retribution against the Serbs.

- either completely critizise Germany's history past-WWII or not at all, but the past two years have been pretty much in line with the rest.

It was a corrupt cabal in Germany supporting the 78 day bombing of Belgrade. To Germany's credit, the people marched against it in droves.

[GoLightly]

Europe 'only' differed strongly with Bush on his phony arguments on the Saddam-issue - and as history showed on WMD, who was right?

Right, give the inspectors more time... Who provided the pressure to get the inspectors back into Iraq again or do you think that was brought about by diplomatic pressure?

Some people know that Desert Storm wasn't over, never ended, including some bad guys using infidels stationed in Saudi Arabia (to maintain a no fly zone) as a recruitment tool.

Germany is quite aware that a "big one" could also happen here due to our engagement in Afghanistan.

Germany's inclusion in darul-Harb (zone of war) has nothing to do with Afghanistan.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

Since most interviewed on the street expressed greater anger with the United States than they did with Islamic terrorists, let us hope that their pique extends to asking American air and naval forces to leave their shores as well

Looks like most of europe is bent on becoming the new Vichy France and the US plus a few are left to deal with an even bigger mess in the near future.

[paul51]

Now we've lost a staunch ally in the WOT

Laughable

I've posted this before and will post again

Please spare us

[KantianBurke]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1097870/posts

Yeah. Really funny.

[CasearianDaoist]

But if the allegiance if maintained only by 6 or so seats in their Parliament how "staunch" is it? It turns out the Spain is not our ally, just one of their political parties.

KB problem is really with Bush I fear, I agree with the other posters remarks on his buchannanite leanings.

If they cannot stand the heat then they should not have gone in the kitchen. Bush did not order those troops in, Aznar did. You argument seems to imply that it is a mistake to expect the Spaniards to defend their own civilization. It is not. Is Bush suppose to go around to each nation in the EU and promote a particular party? How can we fight a war that will last for many years with that approach? Bush made is case repeatedly before the whole world, perhaps Anzar should have made his case before his own people with more force. Each nation must (and will) decide for itself. The Socialists' position (and by inference the position of the EU elites) is ridiculous on the face of it. That they can cling to it shows how deep in self-delusion they are. Not much can be done about it now. If moral suasion and self interest cannot reach them then what are we to do? Remember, BTW, that Spain "sat out" WW2.

Events are in the saddle, we are at war. Nothing could be clearer, if the Eu cannot not face this then in the end they will be a victim. We face the same challenge here. Let us hope that it wakes Bush up so that he does not merely run on domestic issues, that he points out the threat. If Kerry wins, it may not end the WOT but it could postpone it until their is another major attack on us.

[tpaine]

CatoRenasci:
Two points: If you agree with my major premises, that we are in a war, that it is for the Moslems to differentiate themselves and that we must do whatever is necessary to defend Western civilization, then how can you defend an appeasement, law enforcement model?

_______________________________________


Berliner Baer:
It is a large terrorist campaign - determined people throwing burning matches into our direction, hoping the West will blow up and retaliate in a brutal fashion indifferently against Muslims before these terrorists are caught. And then our brutal reaction shall spark their global Jihad amongst all Muslims. -147-


___________________________________________


CatoRenasci:
The fact that the enemy is hiding among an apparently sympathetic population in a number of moslem countries does not make it any less a war.


____________________________________________


You two have had an interesting exchange to this point.
The european viewpoint seems to be that it is indeed a different kind of war, one they don't want to see evolve into another conventional world war..

I see VD Hanson, in his article above, slowly coming to that same realization.
He wrote:

"I can sympathize with the administration diplomats when they insist that we are not alone in Iraq. But they are only right to a degree.
We, with the exceptions of some English-speaking allies and eastern Europeans, are in fact absolutely alone in our larger struggle for Western civilization and have been all along well before Iraq, which was merely the latest excuse for ongoing European appeasement.
We should not like all this, but we also should not deny that it is so."


________________________________________________


Which leaves the question.. Should the USA bring the world to the brink of a 'global jihad'?

Will western civilization be saved by such a war?

[My2Cents]

High-five!

[My2Cents]

Sounds like your support for the President and this war is a tepid as the Spaniards.

You are perceptive, and correct.

[CatoRenasci]

Which leaves the question.. Should the USA bring the world to the brink of a 'global jihad'?

I think your question represents a fundamental historical misconception.

It is not the United States which is bringing the world to the brink of a 'global jihad'. Rather, it is the Islamofascists who declared war on the West.

Beginning who knows precisely when, but surely no later than the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, Al Qaeda declared war on the West. The Iranian mullahs declared war on the West some 25 years ago and more. And, on 9/11/01, the government of the United States of America, and most of our people, woke up to the FACT that we are at WAR.

We do not have a choice. We did not start this war, nor seek it out. Our choice is victory or, ultimately, death and slavery to Islamofascism Anyone who does not understand this is a fool!

The only question is how should the West defend itself. Our choices are equally stark: let the enemy bring the war to us, or bring the war to the enemy.

America chooses to fight the enemy abroad. The Europeans choose appeasement, hoping the enemy will go away, while actually emboldening the enemy to bring more war to Europe.

Soon, we may have to make some grand gesture that will make the price of supporting Islamofascism clear.

[Berliner Baer]

I do wish more Germans would actually learn about their history rather than simply feel burdened by it. I have always been astonished at how little German history the educated Germans I meet these (aged from 20-60) know.

Does the average John-Doe-American really know so much more? Though I admit, IF an American happens to be interested in history, it's usually accompanied with an overwhelming amount of detail knowledge, as I had learned a number of times.

I guess, I have an average amount of interest in history due to the fact of living in Berlin - mostly in tying locations to their historic importance. Golo Mann would be also my favourite history-author for Germany as well, as he is quite accessible to read.

(But, you are not clear whether by the end of WWII you mean the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall or the 1945 collapse of the Tausendjahriges Reich.)

It's a mix of both, as communist occupation of East-Germany was a direct result from WWII.

As to the continuity question, there are elements, to be sure, in the sort of opportunism represented by Bruno Tisches in Wir Wunderkinder (one of my favorite post-War German films), but I do not think the German professors, officers and citizens I knew in the '50s, '60s and '70s and beyond represented such a cowardly turning from responsibilty. Perhaps my sample of Germans did not represent the durchschnittsmensch. Pity.

We talked of political and military confidence, representative of Germany's size. This never was a light task for post-WWII-Germans, also not in the 50s. We took confidence since WWII in many other fields, like building cars. (The "Made in Germany"-seal was our pride)

One of the most heated political debates early on was over Adenauer's push for "Wiederbewaffnung" - Rearmament of Germany, which lead in 1955 to the birth of the Bundeswehr.

But I wanted to quote you the handling of a Brecht-quote, which is symptomatic. The peace-movement used it by shortening this quote to: "Stell Dir vor, es kommt Krieg und keiner geht hin" - "Image there comes war and nobody will go to it"

But the full quote from Brecht (though IMO more about the fight of proletarians) is: "Stell Dir vor, es kommt Krieg und keiner geht hin - dann kommt der Krieg zu Euch!" - "Image there comes war and nobody will go to it - then the war will come to you!"

And it continues right in the same spirit - very different from what peacenicks made of it. Even it wouldn't be Brecht, it would fit for the calls on these boards. :-)

Stell Dir vor, es kommt Krieg und keiner geht hin
- dann kommt der Krieg zu Euch!
Wer zu Hause bleibt, wenn der Kampf beginnt,
und lässt andere kämpfen für seine Sache,
der muss sich vorsehen:
denn wer den Kampf nicht geteilt hat,
der wird teilen die Niederlage.
Nicht einmal Kampf vermeidet,
wer den Kampf vermeiden will:
denn es wird kämpfen für die Sache des Feinds,
wer für seine eigene Sache nicht gekämpft hat.

[My2Cents]

Why is it a Freeper can connect the dots, but our major media cannot?