We Cannot Compromise With Evil

ChronWatch ^ | 8/25/03 | Jon Alvarez

[jonalvy44]

"We Cannot Compromise With Evil"
by Jon Alvarez
Monday, August 25, 2003

The other night I had to take a break from watching the news. The footage of the young victims of the latest bus bombing in Israel was especially disturbing and was causing my blood pressure to rise. So I decided to watch the old film "MacArthur", starring Gregory Peck. As I watched this film, I was amazed at how General MacArthur's words spoken nearly fifty years ago still ring true today.

MacArthur was a strong leader, filled with conviction and determination. This seemed to alienate many who seemed to be quite jealous of his popularity in this country. Sound familiar? In his battle versus communist China and N. Korea, political enemies, too, hindered him in his quest for victory. Sounds familiar, right? In many ways, President Bush is in the same situation General MacArthur was over fifty years ago. MacArthur also said something that really seemed to stand out. He stated, "We cannot compromise with evil". Truer words have never been spoken. Fifty years later, we are still battling not only with evil, but those within our country who are willing to compromise with evil.

In light of this past week's bombings in Israel and Iraq, it should be perfectly clear that there is no reasoning with terrorists. Yet, were one to tune in to any news broadcast, you'd hear politicians and news analysts calling for Israel to exercise restraint while her citizens are being targeted for murder. When will the lesson be learned that we cannot compromise with evil? How many innocent children are to be slaughtered by radical Muslims before enough is enough? It is time to either unleash Israel or to join them in destroying Hamas, Hezbollah, and other like-minded terrorist groups, as well as their supporters within the governments of Syria and Iran.

To achieve peace in the Middle East, the terrorist-supporting regimes in Syria and Iran must be destroyed. That is the true road map to peace. Syria should be held responsible for Hamas and the attacks against Israel. Has Syria done what Powell told them to do in Damascus with regards to Hamas? NO. Iran is backing the attacks by terrorists in Iraq and is on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons. It is time to act before it is too late. In both instances, the road map and the war on terror are inter-connected, as they were Iraq. America and the world are both safer today because Saddam Hussein is no longer in a position to sponsor terrorism.

Getting back to MacArthur, history has proven that MacArthur was right...50 yrs later N. Korea is still around and is currently resorting to nuclear blackmail. Compromise has not solved anything on the Korean peninsula; it has only exacerbated the situation. Let's look at what MacArthur told Congress in 1951 after he was relieved of command:

"There are those who claim our strength is inadequate to protect on both fronts, that we cannot divide our effort. I can think of no greater expression of defeatism..

If a potential enemy can divide his strength on two fronts, it is for us to counter his efforts. The Communist threat is a global one. Its successful advance in one sector threatens the destruction of every other sector. You cannot appease or otherwise surrender to communism in Asia without simultaneously undermining our efforts to halt its advance in Europe...

There are some who for varying reasons would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement had led to more than a sham peace...

Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only alternative."

Not only was General MacArthur correct in his assessment of dealing with the threat of communism, but the dangers of appeasement as well. Some critics argue that we cannot fight on more than one front. That did not stop us during WW2 when we had to. This is America; we can do anything we put our minds to.

We are once again at a crossroads in history. We not only have a threat, once again, from N. Korea, but from terrorism as well. Will we rise up to the challenge? MacArthur believed that we could not and should not compromise with evil. History confirms this as a truism. Just look at Nazi Germany for further evidence of how compromise and appeasement failed and ultimately, force had to be used to defeat evil. Examine the situation in N. Korea fifty years later; the threat is still there and has become much worse. Can we afford to deal with terrorism in the same manner? General MacArthur would say no.

"In war there is no substitute for victory."
- General Douglas MacArthur

[WestPacSailor]

"To conquer, we must destroy our enemies. We must not only die gallantly; we must kill devastatingly. The faster and more effectively you kill, the longer you will live to enjoy the priceless fame of conquerors." -- George S. Patton

[Chi-townChief]

What amazes me most about the film "MacArthur" is that the part of Harry Truman seemed to be played by Ross Perot.

[.cnI redruM]

We will end up dealing with terrorism in this manner. The US had moral courage in WWII. Today, quite sadly, we have Howard Dean.

Voters don't select leaders. They elect themselves goody packages. They routinely vote for despicable human beings who promise them craddle to grave nanny care.

Americans today believe Santa Claus exists. They thinks the early January Visa bill is a figment of paranoid imaginations.

The terrorists will probably win. They don't stop because the take a few casualties. They are not deterred because it costs $4 more this week to fill up their SUVs.

We still have a chance against Islamofacism, but we arn't going to cash it in unless we radically change who we are as a society.

[JohnGalt]

McCarthur is closer to Wesley Clark, perhaps that would be a good candidate for you to support? Both made a name for themselves killing American citizens before they emerged on the international scene.

[jonalvy44]

Patton rocked...He wanted to take out the Soviet Union after WW2. Too bad he wasn't listened to.

[jonalvy44]

Care to elaborate?

[WestPacSailor]

Both made a name for themselves killing American citizens before they emerged on the international scene.

Da comrade! Perhaps you could iluminate the great unwashed masses of the proliteriate as to just what the hell you are babbling about???

[JohnGalt]

You mean it wasn't in the movie?



Waco Wesley Clark:

http://www.counterpunch.org/waco.html
http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtml?a=2003/1/4/154041

Macarthur vs US Veterans, Bonus Army 1932

http://www.felsted.essex.sch.uk/~jms/usa/partb/bonus.htm

John Ross's account in Unintended Consquences is the best I have read in putting Macarthur's behavior in comparison to

[JohnGalt]

Yes, I think the author is part of the "Marxist Right" as well. On that we agree.

[Ole Okie]

Well, I cheered when MacArthur and his wife and child escaped from Corregidor.

But the soldiers left behind suffered a cruel fate.

Douglas MacArthur was, in my humble estimation, one of the most ego-driven men of the 20th century. I had a close relative who was in the group that made it to the Chosen Reservoir in Korea; and that turned out to be a MacArthur led fiasco when the Chinese entered the fray.

62 years after Corregidor, I'm still conflicted about the General.

[Democratshavenobrains]

During 1932, did most of the American public support the Bonus Marchers?

[JohnGalt]

I have no idea as there would be no scientific polling to build such a case. However, the revulsion to Hoover's and Macathur's tactics in dealing with the Bonus Army was capitalized on by FDR who ran as a conservative libertarian in 1932, only to unleash a fascist state on the country when he was elected.

That suggests that if many did not support the people, they were repulsed by the un-American response...much like Waco.

[JohnGalt]

Thanks for the reactions on a different part of the 'American Caesar's' life.

[jonalvy44]

So MacArthur was called in to put down a possible rebellion in the 30's is the equivalent of Clark? Kind of a stretch.

From various posts of yours I've read, you kind of come off as a dickhead.

[jonalvy44]

Methinks this guy has spent too much time in the college libraries...I picture him as the guy in "Good Will Hunting", the one who was quoting passages from college textbooks to try and impress the girls.

[JohnGalt]

From the 'articles' I have read by you, you come across as a phony who cites movies.

Turn off your tv and read a freakin' book.

[jonalvy44]

sorry you feel that way. I bet you feel the USA deserved to be attacked on 9-11 then...for past sins?

I truly can't understand such thinking. Of course, that is your right.

[jonalvy44]

Thx for the advice...I've served my time. Read plenty of books in college to recognize that I'm as integral a player in the political world as any college professor who has become so engrossed in his research that he has no understanding of the real world. I am quite capable of disseminating what info I need from the boob tube as well as from my daily life. I am the American public. Nothing phony at all about me. I work, I vote, I help my neighbors, I volunteer, I care about my country.

I also think there's something to be said for attending "the school of hard knocks".