America is Alone

self | 8/29/02 | Prysson

[KC Burke]

As far as decadance has led us, there is still other history beyond Rome to look to for guidance. As Russell Kirk says:

Yet let us explore the question of whether a reinvigoration of our culture is conceivable.

Surprise Turning Points. Is the course of nations inevitable? Is there some fixed destiny for great states? In 1796, a dread year for Britain, old Edmund Burke declared that we cannot foresee the future; often the historical determinists are undone by the coming of events that nobody has predicted. At the very moment when some states "seemed plunged in unfathomable abysses of disgrace and disaster ' Burke wrote in his First Letter on a Regicide Peace, "they have suddenly emerged. They have begun a new course, and opened a new reckoning; and even in the depths of their calamity, and on the very ruins of their country, have laid the foundations of a towering and durable greatness. All this has happened without any apparent previous change in the general circumstances which had brought on their distress. The death of a man at a critical juncture, his disgust, his retreat, his disgrace, have brought innumerable calamities on a whole nation. A common soldier, a child, a girl at the door of an inn, have changed the face of fortune, and almost of Nature."

The "common soldier" to whom Burke refers is Arnold of Winkelreid, who flung himself upon the Austrian spears to save his country; the child is the young Hannibal, told by his father to wage ruthless war upon Rome; the girl at the door of an inn is Joan of Arc. We do not know why such abrupt reversals or advances occur, Burke remarks; perhaps they are indeed the work of Providence.

Your hope for frontiers is good, but frontiers still can be bridged in the minds and hearts around us as well.

[GOP_1900AD]

Indeed, the Cold War "ended" (or, is "morphed" a better term? Hmmmmm....). And then, throughout the 1990s, as our own graying hippies, yippies and Red Diaper Doper Babies proceded to accelerate the Gramscian long march, gut our miltary capability and destroy our core values, a new Axis started to form united by their envy of the USA. The core of the Axis were the same countries we supposedly "won" the Cold War against. And then came all their friends, aided by overt military capabilites and trade, all towards one goal - get the USA. Now, indeed, we stand nearly alone. Our only real friends are Japan, Taiwan, Australia, Israel, Turkey and few others who are on the fence. Ironically, the way for us to have more real friends would be to discard liberalism and strategic ambiguity, embrace a strictly geopoltical outlook that includes trumping so called "free trade" and asks our leaders to commit to lines in the sand, and, to do what is best for the West and ignore all else. All the envious whiners will no doubt pipe up, however, in the end, those Western nations, and real allies thereof, who wish the West to resist destruction and conquest by savages, will follow our lead. And the rest can go to Hell.

[idkfa]

From http://www.civilization.ca/cwm/disp/dis009_e.html

"By the mid-1960s, the Soviet Union's growing nuclear arsenal had begun to undermine the credibility of the West's nuclear deterrent. In 1966, France, openly sceptical of American promises of nuclear support, withdrew from NATO's integrated military structure (though not from the Alliance) and ordered Canadian and American bases there closed. Pearson, then prime minister, wondered sarcastically whether Canada should also bring home the bodies of its 100,000 dead from two world wars, many of whom were buried in France."

[RightWhale]

Somewhat messianic. A civilization can wait a long time and be destroyed while waiting. It could happen that someone or something will come along to give a fresh breath to the old civilization, but it's not something a person should bet on.

On the other hand, sometimes a civilization will be uprooted and move to a new place like Troy moved to Rome, which moved to England, which gave birth to America in a continuous sequence. In the mind of the poet anyway.

[Brian Allen]

<< The only allies we have who are worth a damn are Australia, Italy, Israel and Britain. >>

Australia and Israel, Capital "A" Absolutely!

But Italy?

Britain?

On the days that suit them, perhaps.

But, most importantly, please do not forget our very very good FRiends in New Zealand!

[Just ignore their temporarily abberrant gummint!]

[dfwgator]

We've also got the Poles, they understand what's at stake. Go figure, an ex-Communist like Kwasniewski is now one of our staunchest allies.

[MacDorcha]

no prob in overlooking the guys, as i said, they arent noticed much. they stick to themselves and are actually selfsuficiant. no one notices them because they dont raise a stink about things, and they keep their problems their problems. we obviously cant do that because we are so important as a fighting nation. 90% of the world could be like us, but if noone is willing to fight, wed still be oppressed by other countries and tyrants. we must fight the good fight.

[MacDorcha]

"do what is best for the West and ignore all else"


you just summed up all of the points a true conservative would make. WE MUST BE COMPETETIVE SO THAT WE MAY ADVANCE!

[TexasRepublic]

Oh yes, you chaps certainly gave the jerries their lumps at Dunkirk! I'm not discounting the Russian sacrifices, but England needed our war material and fighting men!

[skeeter]

I think it's perfectly fair for the British public to ask what's in it for THEM.

The rest of the world had better pray the majority of Americans don't start asking this same question.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Speaking as someone who lives in Britain and sees the other side of the issue, I'm sick of British politicians kowtowing to American interests when those interests clearly clash with popular opinion and what is good for the British people.

Oh, good. An actual, real-life Guardian reader, here on our very own FR. We don't get too many of your lot around here but when we do, its a load of fun.

Popular opinion here did not support a war in Afghanistan

Regarding the US or Britain? If the US, then I defecate on said 'popular opinion'. If Britain, then you deserve every piece of contempt we have to throw at you.

, yet Tony Blair sent British soldiers there to fight and die for America.

How many died? Have we reached the level of US dead in WWI yet? Who dragged us into that war? I forget...anyhoo, I thought we were being 'nice' by asking for support? It was not so much as needed as it was to give a chance for some supposed 'allies' to share in the glory. Note how many suddenly appeared on the scene within milliseconds of the Taliban disentigrating.

How did the Americans thank Britain? By slapping a 30% duty on steel!

And how much of that did Britain pay? And why are a bunch of highly protectionist wankers griping about this anyway? Physician, heal thyself.

Britain isn't even a favored trading partner...we have the same status as China...and the British are supposed to be grateful?

If you had the will to join Nafta, you could but you prefer the troglydytes on the Continent. Your fault.

Hah! Britain feels like it is taken for granted, then shafted by America. I think it's perfectly fair for the British public to ask what's in it for THEM.

Then what the *hell* was in it for us in WWI, exactly? And in WWII, you criticize us for showing up late. Now, we can clearly see based on the present situation along with the pathetic pacifist mindset at the time, if the situation was reversed, you Europeans would have *never* came.

I along with the British strongly disagree that Britain would be under German control now had America not intervened in the European theatre. Hitler had no plans to invade Britain after 1941...Americans did not arrive en force until 1943.

I'm sure once Germany had the bomb, that they would have peacefully coexisted with you. I'm more than sure if they had the bomb by 1943, history would be the same. Its not like they couldn't ring your island with subs and blockade in the meantime. No, I'm certain that was impossible.

The Soviets are the ones who can take credit for turning the tide in World War II. Had Hitler not focused his attention on the Eastern Front, America wouldn't have stood a chance of ending the war by 1945. 20 million Russians died in World War II...soldiers and civilians who were starved to death by German blockades. Let us NEVER forget that. They contributed enormously to the Allied victory.

Yada yada...same old revisionist history marxist indoctrination crap that Euros are so fond of. At least this gets to the crux of the matter, your collective lips can't be removed from the anal orifice of the 'Soviets' with any amount of enlightenment. These are the same Soviets who made an alliance with Hitler, right? And even when the Nazis invaded, and had the benifit of the weather and a large landmass for the Nazi invaders to cover, not to mention massive US aid, it was still a tough fight that could've gone either way. What would've happened if the Soviets were fighting on *two* fronts during the whole war, not just one? Somehow, the US was able to do that but you Euros always conveniently forget that.

The Russians did well in the end, but they had a lot of help, but I wonder why you place their contributions ahead of the US if its not for underlying socialist marxist sympathies.

On to your point about ending the war by 1945, that depends on when the Manhattan project would've been ready. Even if not, Germany was thoroughly beaten in the air and just about so in the sea. It would've been academic either way. Just explain why you Euros are so dismissive of the US contribution in WWII and the Cold War and yet so ready to hype the Soviets?

[DoctorMichael]

...........and fourthly: To the winners go the spoils.

[skeeter]

The rest of the world had better pray the majority of Americans don't start asking this same question.

Forget about ancient history. We may begin wondering why we're being asked to maintain 350 billion dollar military and 200 thousand troops permanently deployed overseas.

The stability the American taxpayer has provided for the past 50 years sure has been good for business, no?

Rationalize it any way you please, but deep down inside you can't help but feel like a totally dependant yet still ungrateful wretch, am I right?

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

He's worse than Bush.

So where do Clinton, Gore, and Schroeder fit into your scheme of Great World Leaders? What was Clinton's foreign policy, anyway? Hard to answer because there was none, but he did try very hard to be Europe's lap dog, which was why he is still so popular there.