Mark Steyn: We tried appeasement once before...

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 03/23/04 | Mark Steyn

[DuncanWaring]

"The people of Madrid are reaping the fruits of our intolerance towards those of different races and religions. The war in Iraq was never going to solve the problems of that region but instead inflamed Arab people all over the world to new heights of anger towards the West."

All those who spout this claptrap can never explain why the Taliban destroyed the thousand-year-old statues of Buddha.

Somehow, I doubt it is because they don't like America.

[FreedomPoster]

>>"Neville again" would be a better slogan.

Devestatingly accurate. Steyn weilds words like a rapier.

[Billthedrill]

That's why the fact that thousands of Iraqis are no longer being murdered by their government is trivial when weighed against the use of Anglo-American military force required to effect their freedom.

That's also why every one of them prefers to talk principle rather than result. That is, in fact, moral cowardice.

Steyn has hit a sore spot here - a sharp point, and it isn't, IMHO, particularly humorous. It is simply this: under the principles of national sovereignty, intervening at Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen to save the Jews was wrong, despite the clear common-sense humanitarian moral imperative to do so. When this sort of dissonance is experienced, it's time to re-examine these principles. But the left refuses do so - and that is the moral cowardice of which I speak.

[Gritty]

BTTT

[jocon307]

"Actually, that would be fine with me EXCEPT I know we'll get sucked into it...AGAIN!!"

Well, forget about that part of it for a minute. The Islamofascists will not stop at Eurabia, they want Amerabia and Aisan-abia as well.

We've got to end all immigration, if only to keep the Muslim population from growing here.

[Travis McGee]

Which EURABIAN country will be the first to adopt Sharia law?

[jordan8]

I gave my niece's son a Vietnam GI Joe a couple of years ago . They took away his M-16 and knife. They left his claymore, though.

[Susannah]

Thank God for Winston Churchill!

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Winston Churchill

[Rummyfan]

Bumpity-bump-bump!

[Faraday]

I agree with you that this column did not engender the kind of amusement so frequent in Steyn's work. Sure, the clever turn of phrase evoked a few grins, but predominant in my reaction was sadness and anger.

But I disagree with the notion of "humanitarian moral imperative," even if moderated by "common-sense," as a guide for national involvement in international affairs. I guess I'm a little more "realpolitic," a little less "neocon." Human injustice cries out from around the globe. We should intervene only where our national interest dictates. True enough, the war on terror has certainly expanded the neighborhood, when rag heads in Kabul plan the destruction of the lower end of Manhattan. This we have to crush. And we have to try to leave behind a middle east that will be, at best, a place unlikely to generate the psychopaths of al Qaeda because of a decent social order in their countries, or, at worst, a place that understands that the costs of messing with us are socially unbearable. I believe we should police our nearby region--beginning with the abomination that is Cuba. But the Balkans should be a Europeon responsibility. And Africa must develop regional powers which can play a guardian role. (In theory, Egypt and South Africa could be such, unlikely as that seems now.) I believe it is in our national character to avoid "foreign entanglements" and we should adhere as much as is reasonable to this. Besides, we do the most good, in the moral, as well as physical, sense when we encourage trade and capitalism--our greatest genius.

[spodefly]

Brilliant, as usual.

[irv]

A neighbour of mine refuses to let her boy play with "militaristic" toys

There are more and more of these imbeciles around. Worse: they keep getting jobs as teachers.

[spodefly]

Brilliant, as usual.

[Tax-chick]

Steyn bump! Greatest journalist since Ambrose Bierce, and much more cheerful, even when he's really mad, like this time.

[lainde]

Excellent as usual!

[GOPJ]

Talk about short and too the point...

"Never again" has evolved to mean precisely the kind of passivity that enabled the Holocaust first time round. "Neville again" would be a better slogan.

[Billthedrill]

Sorry for the late reply - I don't disagree with the notion that we should intervene when our national interests are at stake, but I suggest to you that there comes a point at which one of those national interests is to make the statement that there are abuses that will not be ignored however cleverly the abuser hides behind the constraints of sovereignty. In short, a little unpredictability is a healthy tonic, and to keep a tyrant guessing when the hammer might fall is more of a restraint on his abuses then a clear, ineluctable set of rules within which he finds it safe to maneuver. There's been all too much of the latter, IMHO, and if a Kim Jong Il can guess how far he can push a Clinton he is perfectly free to exploit the knowledge, and so he did. He does not have that luxury with Bush.

The notion that because we intervene in a certain set of circumstances we MUST intervene wherever and whenever a similar set of circumstances arises is a fallacious one. We may, in fact, feel justified in doing so, but we are not compelled to do so. Our intervention in Iraq, for example, does not make an intervention in North Korea compulsory, but it does make it justifiable, and just that much more possible, and Kim knows it perfectly well. So did Gadafi, and Assad, and a host of others who look at the rhetoric of the left and the reality of the 3d ID on the ground and know that the old games aren't going to work anymore.

[brewer1516]

"...Great multitudes of oppressed people on the doles."

M. Steyn makes an interesting point (in the following link) by suggesting that governments are subsidizing terrorists by having them on their payroll (welfare).

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1083964/posts

[walden]

Your analysis is spot-on. I would only disagree that conservative, or neo-con, or any sort of label applies to this kind of foreign policy-- in my view, it's just clear-headed good sense. I expect that the Bush administration would agree completely, except that fixing Cuba just isn't politically possible now, and likely won't be anytime soon.

[Imal]

Steyn is never without his trademark wit, but it's clear form this article that he really is worried about what's going on.

Just like anyone else watching where this is going should be.