Replies

Then you're against George Washington. Listen, we haven't won a decidable war since WWII. I'm of the opinion that America should use a true-defensive approach only and stay out of foreign entanglements. The only exceptions being when our VITAL INTERESTS deem it.

You're putting words into my post. In 1797, it was the proper course for a small republic dwarfed by European empires.

But this is NOT 1797. The circumstances HAVE changed to a large extent. We are not a small republic dwarfed by European empires any longer, and haven't been for a long time.

Back when Jefferson sent the Navy to fight the Barbary pirates, we were less than a decade removed from Washington's address and his words. The men running the government then knew the words, and they also knew the man who said them. George Washington, who you say I stand against, would not be part of ANY effort to appease a dictator when we had the power to stop him.

Washington would not wait to see a repeat use of airliners against skyscrapers. Nor would he await the provocation of a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack against us. Protecting our citizens IS a VITAL INTEREST. Particularly when there are those who choose to attack our citizens because we have made the choice to stand by those nations that share our ideals.

YOU need to listen: Appeasement is not honorable, nor have we EVER appeased any dictator or terrorist who made demands of us. We did not give in to the French when they demanded bribes, in what became the XYZ affair and the quasi-war with France. We did not give in when the Barbary Pirates demanded tribute. We did not give in when the British impressed our sailors. We did not give in when Mexico tried to take Texas from us by force. We did not give in when the Germans began torpedoing our ships. We did not give in when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. We did not give in when South Korea was attacked. Sadly, we gave in after the Vietnam War (may God forgive us for doing so). We did NOT give in when Saddam Hussein attacked our ally, Kuwait. We did not give in to Osama bin Laden after 9/11. And we sure as hell had better not give in to Saddam Hussein now.

George Washington did not give in when the Whiskey Rebellion started, did he? He'd be with Churchill and Henry, not Buchanan and Paul. Of that, I am certain.

Then you're against George Washington. Listen, we haven't won a decidable war since WWII. I'm of the opinion that America should use a true-defensive approach only and stay out of foreign entanglements.

It's a lot smaller world than when George Washington lived. There weren't NBC weapons during Washington's time. There wasn't OIL during Washington's time. What do you think George Washington would think of a car? Should we abandon cars because he preferred horses?