Pat Buchanan: U.S. Pays the High Price of Empire

Los Angeles Times ^ | 09/18/2001 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[Pokey78]

As the twin towers of the World Trade Center came down in flames, taking 5,000 Americans with them, an unserious era in U.S. history came to an end. "All is changed, changed utterly," wrote poet W.B. Yeats. President Bush has now received full authority to wage war against all who abetted the slaughter. It must be done. Our American family cannot permit the mass murder of our brothers and sisters to go unpunished. But as the president directs the moral outrage of his wounded nation, he will need the wisdom of Solomon.

[sneakypete]

>>From where does this drivel come ?<<

"Drivel"? I think not. Didn't Pat say publically that all US troops should be brought home from foreign countries,and that the US military only be used as a self-defense force that could be called up (reserves) if America were invaded? He even made references to this was the intentions of our founding fathers. No standing military other than the Navy,as it is un-Constitutional. Yes,he DID say these things,although he never did say what he thought about the Air Force,since it isn't mentioned in the Constitution.

[major-pelham]

I'm sick of reading your boiler plate crap. You write so many words and say so little. Why don't you define Isolationism ? Just what does that term mean to you ? Once you do that, we can ferret out just who advocates what.

[AshleyMontagu]

For all those who hate America Firsters like Pat, read what this commie idiot had to say.

GEORGE WASHINGTON'S FAREWELL ADDRESS

Pertinent passages start at 32. Here's a sample:

The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.

[Un-PC]

Nephi

The same people who are critizing people on this board for calling attention to an arrogant and bullying U.S. foreign policy that may have contributed to last week's terrorist act are the same ones who have their lips permanently affixed to the rear end of the Republican party. In their minds, freedom and liberty take a backseat to partisan party politics.

Those who call attention to this country's interventionist foreign policy are branded as "traitors" and "turncoats." The my-country-right-or-wrong patriots don't want to be bothered with why terrorists attacked us last week attack. All they want is revenge, not just against the perpetrators of this attack, but against against all Muslims. The mindless calls for massive retaliatory strikes (and the use of nuclear weapons), which will result in the deaths of hundreds or even thousands of innocent civilians, will merely inflame the hatred of Muslims and create a new wave of terrorism. Buchanan is right on target in his criticism of this country's interventionist foreign policy, calling it the "incubator of terrorism." Why is that so difficult for some people to understand?

Thanks, Nephi, for bringing a tad of reason to this forum. And thanks for posting the excellent article by Pat Buchanan. Whatever one thinks of Mr. Buchanan, no one can dispute the fact that he has been out front warning of the dire consequences of this country's meddling -- and often murderous -- foreign policy, which has made enemies of the United States around the world. Is anyone listening?

[Austin Willard Wright]

I have bashed Pat many times but this is a very brave and noble act on his part.

[Zviadist]

All the bombing has done over the last 10 years is waste American taxpayer money.

Nothing about the innocent "collateral damage"? Oh I forgot, for your type the only kind of life that counts is American life. You think hitting the other side relentlessly for years would not eventually result in that side striking back?

[Cincinatus]

So why do we pursue an Israel "Uber alles" policy there?

We don't, as the U.S.-brokered agreements on Palestinian "autonomy" indicate. However, as the sole pluralistic democracy existing in this region, Israel's continued survival is in our interests, particularly as its standard of living and GDP (compared to its Third World neighbors) show the benefits of market economies and democracy.

[l0newolf]

I guess it would be too much of a mental leap for some posters to understand that it isn't a matter of "blame America first" but rather a a matter of "blame the USG first". But all you shrill go-to-war crowd "patriots" can come forward and convince us that the USG is entirely blameless because;
A) We elect them and
B) We have reneged on vigilance to the point that the USG has broken every single Constitutional link in the chain our forefathers thought would bind them.

[AppyPappy]

Pat changed all that, didn't he?

After he used up all the abortionists money, sure.

[eskimo]

America doesn't have international financial interests, its financial interests are in the homeland. Corporations do have international financial interests and they have nothing to do with America, but you free traitors refuse to see that.

The "free traitors" are comfortable living the lie that trade is free. Whenever some truth is injected into their fantasy, their response is more instinctive than intellectual, sort of like a dog's reaction to its bone being taken away.

You know you are witnessing one of these primal human spectacles when truth evokes nothing but howls, growls, and childish innuendo and the primitives show clear signs of wanting to destroying anyone who might even think of walking too close to “the bone”.

[Willie Green]

particularly as its standard of living and GDP (compared to its Third World neighbors) show the benefits of market economies and democracy.

As subsidized and propped up by $91 Billion U.S. taxdollars. (Source)

[sneakypete]

>>Could we be the target because, we are a dominant culture, and they are afraid of becoming like us?<<

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong,but isn't this the same thing I said,and you want to argue with me by saying the same thing?

>>Could we be the target because, we attack them, and talk of Democratizing them, when they are quite happy with being ruled by dictators, kings or shahs.<<

No. Well,the last part about them being happy being ruled by kings or other dictators seems to be right,but the rest of it is based on false premises.

>>Could we be a target because we have an arrogance of position, we aren't exactly quiet about our successes, or humble about our blessings.<<

Ahhh,the old "It our fault because we are successful",excuse! It's also known as the "I robbed him because I didn't have any money,and that SOB had too much",and the "I'm poor but tax that SOB who gets paid 1 more dollar a week than me! He doesn't deserve to be paid that much,and needs to be taxed out of it to correct this inequity!" defenses. Been a while since I've seen them.

>>I gave you several choices, now why is yours correct. If yours is correct, why, and why is Pats, or anyone elses incorrect.<<

If you can't understand this already there is no way it can be taught to you. It would be like trying to teach a legless man to tapdance,or a blind man to paint.

>> We can't hear all points of view, if a person is ridiculed for differing from the mainstream of thought,<<

Jeffery Dahmers dietry practices were out of the mainstream of thought too,yet you don't see a lot of people defending them.

>> Are you sure you aren't being led around by the nose, by say Rush?,<<

ROFLMAO! I think Rush is a pompous ass,and have stated so on FR before. Besides,the only radio I ever listen to is classical rock and blues.

>>or maybe you are just part of the crowd of lemmings, that once pushed in a certain direction, will continue until you are required to jump off the cliff.<<

Oh,YEAH! That's me! I'm just a "follow the leader" type of guy who is scared to express his own opinions. LOL!

>>If we as a nation, think we can blow away our enemies with sheer power,<<

Well,yeah,we can. In this case we don't have any other option. They attacked with sheer power,and we have no choice other than to respond in kind.

>> There must be a rational, reasoned approach to a solution, and it will require much thought, not blind followers. That is for the Taliban, not America.<<

Correct me if I'm wrong,but don't BOTH sides have to be rational and reasoned for discussion to have any chance of providing peace? Even you admit in the quoted paragraph that the Taliban and other radicals don't have these qualities.

BTW,when I say we need to use power in respone to the attacks,I do NOT mean we should use nukes on them or anyone else in a "first strike". I am 100% oppossed to attacking a innocent civilian population to take out the guilty parties.

[Greg Weston]

Bout time someone started making some sense. Very refreshing Mr. Buchanan.

[RobbyS]

Did it ever occur to you that supporting Israel may be the right thing to do? They are a democracy, in a region where that is not a growth stock. They are an outpost of civilisation in an area which has none to speak of. Furthermore, Israel was founded by a people whose suffering throughout history can scarcely be imagined - one gets a glimpse by visiting Auschwitz, as I have done. They are our bretheren, and it would be entirely wrong to turn our backs on them.

Do you not realize that you are describing a European colony, and that the establishment of such a colony in 1948 was NOT necessarily a good idea? On the other hand, that was then and now is now. How do we deal with True Believers who think that Israel is a stick in the eye and many ordinary Palestinians who think they have had a raw deal? We are between a rock and a hard place. We cannot abandon Israel but must suffer the consequences of doing so.

[duckln]

After he used up all the abortionists money, sure.

Well, was the money spent worth it? You're doing the old rope a dope, but point by point you can be brought around.

[eskimo]

After he used up all the abortionists money, sure.

That would be considered a surprisingly ignorant remark even from some poor demented fool who insisted on conveniently distilling all events in life down to some monetary transaction.

[Gunner9mm]

What Buchanan is using here, and what you have apparently bought, is a typical Liberal argument of "moral equivalency". If some thug decides to murder 5000 Americans, and the Americans are not prepared, then the blame rests equally on America (or the government, or the CIA, or the FBI, or congress or any other group you care to name) for not forseeing the future and preparing correctly. In other words, you are as responsible as the burglar that ransacked your house because you did not install the proper safeguards on your doors and windows. It is a specious argument, and one that Buchanan likes to make in order to get his name in the news.

No government is perfect, ours is far from it. But blaming America just shows how deeply you and others like you have been duped.

[Greg Weston]

It's not even close to "blaming America". It's about looking after Americas best interests. Pat is 100% correct.

[Psycho_Bunny]

Patrick J. Buchanan - a very intelligent, and sometimes insightful, jackass.