Posted on 06/05/2006 7:57:14 AM PDT by FreeKeys
Two weeks ago, I pointed out that we live in something close to the best of times, with record worldwide economic growth and at a low point in armed conflict in the world. Yet Americans are in a sour mood, a mood that may be explained by the lack of a sense of history. The military struggle in Iraq (nearly 2,500 military deaths) is spoken of in as dire terms as Vietnam (58,219), Korea (54,246) or World War II (405,399). We bemoan the cruel injustice of $3 a gallon for gas in a country where three-quarters of people classified as poor have air conditioning and microwave ovens. We complain about a tide of immigration that is, per U.S. resident, running at one-third the rate of 99 years ago.
George W. Bush has a better sense of history. Speaking last week at the commencement at West Point -- above the Hudson River, where revolutionary Americans threw a chain across the water to block British ships -- Bush noted that he was speaking to the first class to enter the U.S. Military Academy after the Sept. 11 attacks. And he put the challenge these cadets willingly undertook in perspective by looking back at the challenges America faced at the start of the Cold War 60 years ago.
"In the early years of that struggle," Bush noted, "freedom's victory was not obvious or assured." In 1946, Harry Truman accompanied Winston Churchill as he delivered his Iron Curtain speech; in 1947, communists threatened Greece and Turkey; in 1948, Czechoslovakia fell, France and Italy seemed headed the same way, and Berlin was blockaded by the Soviets, who exploded a nuclear weapon the next year; in 1950, North Korea attacked South Korea.
"All of this took place in just the first five years following World War II," Bush noted. "Fortunately, we had a president named Harry Truman, who recognized the threat, took bold action to confront it and laid the foundation for freedom's victory in the Cold War."
Bold action: the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan in 1947, the Berlin airlift in 1948, the NATO Treaty in 1949, the Korean War in 1950. None of these was uncontroversial, and none was perfectly executed. And this was only the beginning. It took 40 years -- many of them filled with angry controversy -- to win the Cold War.
The struggles against Soviet communism and Islamofascist terrorists are of course not identical. But there are similarities.
"Like the Cold War, we are fighting the followers of a murderous ideology that despises freedom, crushes all dissent, has territorial ambitions and pursues totalitarian aims," Bush said. "And like the Cold War, they're seeking weapons of mass murder that would allow them to deliver catastrophic destruction to our country."
The New Republic's Peter Beinart argues that Bush, unlike Truman, has shown no respect for international institutions. But the Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan were unilateral American initiatives, and Truman used the United Nations to respond in Korea only because the Soviets were then boycotting the Security Council. Otherwise, he would have gone to war, as Bill Clinton did in Kosovo, without U.N. approval. Bush did try to use the United Nations on Iraq, but was blocked by France and Russia, both stuffed with profits from the corrupt U.N. Oil for Food program.
But as Bush pointed out, we have worked with 90-plus nations and NATO in Afghanistan and with 70-plus nations on the Proliferation Security Initiative. We're working with allies to halt Iran's nuclear program.
"We can't have lasting peace unless we work actively and vigorously to bring about conditions of freedom and justice in the world," Harry Truman told the West Point class of 1952. Which is what we're trying to do today -- in Iraq and the broader Middle East, in Afghanistan, even Africa.
Reports of Bush's West Point speech noted that Truman had low job ratings -- lower than Bush's, in fact. But does that matter now? Bush, as Yale historian John Lewis Gaddis has written, has changed American foreign policy more than any president since Truman, and like Truman he has acted on the long view.
"The war began on my watch," Bush told the class of 2006, "but it's going to end on your watch." Truman might have made the same point, accurately as it turned out, to the class of 1952. We're lucky we had then, and have now, a president who takes bold action and braves vitriolic criticism to defend our civilization against those who would destroy it.
The Truman/Scoop Jackson wing of the Democratic Party is gone. The Henry Wallace/George McGovern/John Dean Wing is in control. Their wing controls the MSM; it dominates our Universities, and it spreads despair and defeatism whenever it can. If there is anything to be pessimistic about, that is it.
Thanks for the positive feedback; it helps.
I'm SURE it wasn't the first time. LOL btt
One of my prayers is that President Bush will live long enough to receive the gratitude of this nation. It's amazing to me to see so much of the "What have you done for me today?" attitude on this site. President Bush is a great president, and we are lucky we have him.
I agree. Overall I'm very pleased to have him and his Administration in place during these difficult times.
Bump!
People thought Truman was a dummy and vulnerable when he was in office, too.
The democratic party is a DPINO - in name only. (A best kept secret)
It has been thoroughly and according to plan, been first infiltrated, and now taken over by the Socialists.
Zel was not being factious when he said he had not left the party - it had left him.
Back 25 years ago, as an investigative reporter, I 'infiltrated' a "NO PRESS ALLOWED" meeting, literally in the shadow of our state capitol, of the DSOC - Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee. They had taken a beating when their Knight, TeddyBoy, had lost the primary. They were now regrouping and "strategizing."
Our state's Senator majority leader was there as the main speaker. He held up a card and said:" I, as you know, am - like you - a card carrying member of the Socialist Party of America. However, we are not yet strong enough to come out in the open. We must, for a while, continue to operate under and in the democratic party until we have taken it over."
They then went on to outline their strategies...which included infiltrating and taking over party organization from the local levels up.
They have been very successful - and were poised on the brink of victory - when along came George W. Bush. He crushed their little red wagon - they had come the closest to victory ever in their decades long ambition. Any wonder they are so hate filled>
There IS no Democratic party. It is, with the exception of Zel and maybe Joe L., The Socialist Party of America. This truth needs to be pounded in our media - the sheeple have to realize this. The old democrats, who still cling to the myth of a democratic party, may finally get the answer to their confusion over "what happened to my party?" They may well jump ship.
Why aren't we bringing this out???
Nailed it!
Thank you, Michael Barone for remembering History correctly
Ping
BTTT
BUMP
"epically when it means turning it into an immigration thread. /rolleyes"
That was NOT my intention, as I clearly stated! It was the one point I disagreed with. Sorry if it upset you. 8)
We complain about a tide of obesity, but in 1348, 1/3 of the population perished from famine and the Black Death.
We complain about Rap, but in 1374, they had the Dancing Plague!
Excellent idea. Let's call it what it is, the One World Socialist Party.
??. When did we have this policy?
Our state's Senator majority leader was there as the main speaker. He held up a card and said:" I, as you know, am - like you - a card carrying member of the Socialist Party of America. However, we are not yet strong enough to come out in the open. We must, for a while, continue to operate under and in the democratic party until we have taken it over."
They then went on to outline their strategies...which included infiltrating and taking over party organization from the local levels up.
Did you submit an article, naming names and witnesses? Whether you did or not, would you write it now and post it here? You'd be providing a great service, you know...
It was printed in a state-wide paper - one that was put on all desks in the state senate chambers ;o)
I happened to be in the capitol bldg the next day, to meet our minority senate leader for lunch - his office was just outside the chamber doors. I was walking down the hall, just about to go into this office when the 'card carrying socialist' Senate majority leader came out of the chamber doors. I held my breath as he passed me, then stopped dead in his tracks and turned to look at me.
I was now in heels, nice suit, make up and hair in place - unlike when I infiltrated their meeting, looking like one of them : borrowed beat up son's jacket, hair in long braid, no makeup, etc.
He got a puzzled look on his face and then, apparently decided I wasn't the one he saw at the meeting..and continued on his way.
I am going to try to find the article - unfortunately, it was in 1981 - before computers and file storage - and the paper shut down 20 years ago...no archives to access.
But I am going to try to find a copy in my boxes/files somewhere...I'd like to mail it to Rush et al
Thanks for the ping, MO!
Pinz
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.