Posted on 10/30/2001 8:56:40 AM PST by sheltonmac
This is a well-written, terse attack on neoconservatism, and I suppose, a defense of paleo-conservatism.
The nationalist has to prove his country is always right. He reduces his country to an idea, a perfect abstraction, rather than a mere home. He may even find the patriot’s irreverent humor annoying.
Although reading Sobran is always a joy, I am distressed to see that he has apparently been hit with a case of Rockwell Flu, which causes the patient to obsessively rail against neo-conservatism, to the detriment of his judgment.
It's nationalism if we start it, it's patriotism if the other guys start it.
Couldn't have said it better. America is more than dirt and trees, it is ideas and believes. I love America because it is good and right and it is my home. It is the greatest nation on earth because patriots are willing to sacrifice to make it so.
It's long but EXCELLENT!
I believe it was Alexis de Tocqueville.
On occasion, I put a fragment of the original post in italics, just like I did now, to explain which part of the post my comments refer to. This practice shouldn't be novel to you.
Usually, it is sufficient, when responding, to point out a thing or two in the original post and not repond word-by-word. Many do that: put the entire original post in italics and sort of annotate it but I find this practice very irritating. If you think that I do not address something in your post as I should, feel free to focus on that and ask again.
TRAINED [...] What does that mean?
That is the word used by UnBlinkingEye but I heard it before. I am sure you can't just give a Stinger to someone and expect him to be able to use it without training, so I assume some training of the mujahedeen by us did take place.
Concrete purpose?
The purpose was "to facilitate their fighting the USSR", as my post #18 says. That is concrete enough, to my mind. It is true that now they use the acquired skills and some of the materiel against us, although I haven't heard of them having any success with the Stingers lately. Why they do it? Beats me. I don't think they should. I think they're wrong.
Legitimate purpose
The USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979 after their attempt to install a pro-Soviet government there ended up in a coup. The mujahedeen were a classic case of indigenous guerilla trying to repel a foreign invasion; assisting such group is of course, legitimate. Besides, any effort to thwart the advances of Soviet Communism was a legitimate effort in the Cold War context.
Let me know if I left anything unanswered.
You: That is because what is currently termed "rogue nation" has a precise connotation: a nation that would assist terrorists is a rogue nation;
Me: We assisted and trained the Taliban and Bin Laden not to mention the KLA.
My point was that your above definition of a rogue nation could be applied to the United States given the fact that we assisted, armed and trained the Taliban, Bin Laden and the KLA. I can understand the thinking in assisting the fighters in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, although now it has come back to haunt us, but our association with the KLA and the attack on Serbia is a national disgrace and war crime.
Close, but not quite a crime as we were ostensibly helping the Kosovar minority that was oppressed by the Serbs. Criminally, we get off on a technicality. It is a disgrace because we did more harm than good in an area unrelated to our national interest.
Hilaire Belloc in his book 'Survivals and New Arrivals' writes (and warns) a bit on Nationalism:
"But the essence of Nationalism, in its present form as a menace to religion, lies in this: that the nation is made an end in itself. When that mood appears, there is present, in the strictly technical sense of the word, Heresy; there is present false doctrine, and all the dangers of spreading and ramifying evil which spring from false doctrine as from one poisonous seed."
"Let us take a few tests and judge by them the quality of the thing."
"Go to a public park on two successive Sundays. On the first, stand upon a chair and declaim at length against the discipline of religion. Ridicule the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the right of a Christian society to enforce the practice of Christian ritual. Nothing will happen to you."
"On the second Sunday get up on a chair and declaim at equal length and with equal zeal against the country and its conduct in the late war. Praise enthusiastically some more specially unpopular foreigners-enemies for choice-laugh at the heroism of the troops, call them cowards and go on to denounce with vigor the obedience rendered to their officers and soldiers and sailors. A great number of things will happen to you. Even after the police have rescued you from the hands of the mob, the State will proceed to deal with you in a fashion which will enlighten you for good upon the limits of toleration."
written in 1929. Imagine what would happen if one were to 'take the test' that Belloc mentions above today.
Tell it to the Serbs.
Brigadier
What do you think would happen? I think, nothing would happen to the speaker in both cases. A veteran or two will swallow hard and move on.
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.