The Solution

For those of you who have forgotten, The Solution.

“Freedom cannot and will not be stopped. Those who believe that freedom and democracy can be extinguished are the flat earthers of our time.”

Last week, The Anchoress wrote Re-assessing Iraq, Just Wars, etc, in which she reflects:

… I got email from some people asking me why I’m such an idiot, how I can reconcile Christianity with war, how I could reconcile the present engagement with the “Just War” musings of Aquinas, etc.

The day after the speech, I had a friend urge me to perform an exercise of “reassessment” regarding my views…

No sane person likes war. But war sometimes comes. And the “Just War” theology is very clear that war may be Just when it is waged to ultimately spare more lives than it takes, to stop an inexorable advancement of evil…

Do you folks urging me to “reassess” things really think I haven’t thought about it… Of course I’ve rethought my take on the war – many times. I can see where the damn mistakes have been made…

…It is an unconventional enemy, and unconventional war, and we have absolutely nothing to offer within a diplomatic solution. This is an enemy that will take your diplomatic solution and use it against you, because it is not fighting out of loyalty to a king who may be appeased…they’re fighting and using terrorism as a means of movement, to advance an idea the bottom line of which is “Die. Or, you know, convert. But mostly die.”

Europe won’t fight this enemy – can’t fight it and doesn’t wish to. She is already defeated demographically and I remember the quote from the Dutch fellow who said, “I have never learned to fight for my freedom. I was only good at enjoying it.”

Few words, much to reflect upon.

Most importantly of all, The Anchoress is addressing the new realities of our time. In a different post, Lamb And Dragon: Counter Terrorism With Love, she examines the motivations of some:

Clearly, I have been thinking not just materially but spiritually. I take Nate’s point, and “love, love, love” is certainly the perfect solution to any problem, but it is never an expedient one; we’re living in a reality that involves nuclear weapons, so expediency (at least in clearing away the underbrush of incessant Jihad so we can get to that “love” part) has some value, here.

In the past, the predicates for war was clear. The acquisition of territory, the expansion of empire and finally, a particular ideology (The Greeks and Romans, for example). Now, most wars are predicated on ideologies. That is not to say those at the top are not interested in wealth and power, but in fact, it is the ideology that serves as the engine for conflict.

Hitler’s racialism (the Aryan ‘ubermensch‘ and the Jewish ‘untermensch‘) and subsequent communist ideologies were be the foundational blueprints of the new era. In the Arab world, this was the shortest distance between two points. As the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century unfolded, the Arabs world was already on the defensive. The Industrial Revolution had passed them by and they had long acquiesced to lived under tyrannical rule. The Arab world was more than ready to believe that somehow, like the German volk, they were oppressed and in fact, were really superior to everyone else. The Arab world, like the volk, was ready and willing to blame their cousins for all that befell them. The Jews came to represent the success and achievement the Arab world so desperately wanted to claim as their own, as a sign of parity with the rest of the world.

Similar behavior is seen everyday in the poorest of neighborhoods. It is the trappings and symbols of wealth and achievement that become objects of obsession- the cars, clothes, electronics, etc. The values of work, study and dedication that are necessary to achieve real wealth are not given the status they deserve, because those attributes require a change in awareness and the perception of reality. In order to effect change, they must acknowledge the deficiencies of the community in which they live. They must change their reality. It is in how a person, community or culture goes about changing their respective realities that will determine how successful they will be.

For a healthy well adjusted person , the way to change a reality is quite clear. If a lawyer wants to be come a physician, it is understood that more schooling and commitment are necessary. There are no shortcuts. The same applied to the inmate released from prison. If he wants to change his reality and become a contributing member of society, he commit to living a law abiding life and make the effort to actually contribute.

There are no shortcuts for the lawyer who wants to be a physician and there are no shortcuts for the ex convict who wants to renounce a life of crime. For each of them, it is their actions and not their words or desires that will make the difference.

Our adversaries, as The Anchoress notes, are ‘unconventional’ in more than one way. They want to change reality by denying reality. They want to reshape reality by reshaping perceptions rather than by reshaping their behavior.

They want us to believe that much of their dysfunctional behavior is acceptable behavior. They want us to accept racism, bigotry and hate as acceptable behavior. They want us to accept some kinds of violence as acceptable behavior. This idea is not speculative. Arab world ambivalence to ‘honor killings’ violence toward women is common.

If we allow those expressions of intolerance and violence that have come to define much of the Arab world to become acceptable (in the hope of appeasing or placating them), they have no reason to change their behavior.

They want to change reality by denying reality. There is a blatant attempt to reshape reality by changing our perception of reality, not by changing behavior.

Fausta, in Report: Afif Safieh At Princeton University, reports first hand at how some are attempting to reshape reality by changing perceptions. The speaker attends to his craft of deceit and deception

…while repeatedly asserting, “I am a victim of the Israelis”, and that the reason the peace process has failed is “not the Arabs’ rejection of Israel, but Israel’s rejection of the Arab acceptance of Israel”.

Fantasyland, of course. The Palestinian speaker at Princeton believes that if our perceptions of reality change, the perceptions of their behaviors change. As we noted yesterday,

Does anyone seriously believe that the pious and noble words, spoken with such reasonableness in European languages by the Palestinians, can disguise their continued refusal to accept Israel’s existence? Does anyone really believe that the promises to destroy that nation and her inhabitants, made with the regularity of the muezzin’s call to prayer, are not relevant?

Real dysfunctionality is never hard to recognize- unless of course, that dysfunctionality is mirrored by others equally as dysfunctional.

American foreign policy in the Middle East has been consistent.

• Cessation of hostilities and terror
• Secure borders.
• Diplomatic recognition of Israel.

What exactly is one sided and unfair? What possible reason could the Palestinians have for not going along with the plan? In doing so, the floodgates of foreign aid, investment and all kinds of benefits would open.

That obfuscation of reality can be seen in Iraq. An agendized media wants a ‘civil war’ in Iraq, so the media produces a ‘civil war.’ The media wants to portray images of Iraq ‘insurgents,’ fig so the media produces those images, never once noting that the truth that the so called ‘insurgents’ are neither political or military adversaries. We wrote,

Terrorists do not regard their political ideologies as primary considerations. For them, it is about power and nothing else. In Iraq and other parts of the Middle East, the power grab by terrorists might be draped in religious garb, but in fact, there is no pretense of political respectability. There are no ‘insurgent representatives’ at the UN claiming to represent the people of Iraq. There are no examples of the terrorists in Iraq that declare national unity as an ideal and there is no pretense of offers to help anyone via social services or programs.

The terrorists are not rallying people to their cause or orchestrating mass demonstrations to bring attention to their cause, as would a political ‘insurgent.’ There are no dramatic and sympathetic leaders paraded in front of willing cameras and their are no legions of ’spin doctors’ appearing on FNC or CNN. There are no discernible liberation movements- only movements that openly proclaim their love of Islam and their love for death (most often directed at other Muslims).

The violence in Iraq is not widespread. Only Bagdad and a few other small regions face daily violence. Many, if not most of the terrorists are not Iraqis, but rather, from outside the country- hardly the foundations of a ‘civil war.’

The terrorists are blowing up Iraqis by the hundreds. They are not, for the most part, targeting American, British or coalition troops. There is an orgy of death, as suicide bombers make no distinction between American or coalition forces, Iraq police or the elderly and children. Houses of worship are attacked regularly (with worshipper inside) and market places, filled with women and children, are favored by suicide bombers, plying their evil.

Wars are not pretty and they are always messy. The minute the first innocent is killed in a war is the moment that war becomes immoral. Of course, all wars are immoral. That said, not all wars are unjust.

We have noted that the Bush administration policy of wanting to bring democracy to the Middle East is a good one. There is no rational argument against that policy, period. To base criticism of the President on his belief that peoples living under tyrannies would not be better off in the long run, under free governments, is absurd. Those who espouse such views are essentially irrelevant to any discussion.

It is also clear that we may need to revisit the plans of this administration’s implementation of policies that would free those under the boot of oppression. That reexamination in no way negates the validity of the policies or doctrines that hold freedom and liberty in higher regard than tyranny and oppression.

The media and those in opposition want us to leave Iraq now, because they understand that in the end, the Bush administration’s policies of wanting to bring freedom to the region will be seen as a worthwhile effort and one to be emulated. The media and virulent objectors to this administration’s policies know they will be held to account for their perfidy.

For now, it is the American and coalition forces that are rebuilding Iraq and providing that country with many of the essential infrastructures it needs to survive and thrive in the future. The media and administration critics also know that if there is no political stability achieved before the kaffirs leave, the Iraqis will be at the mercy of those who could care less about them and their country- the terrorists and others that are using Iraq for their own ends. In their hands, Iraq will come to resemble Afghanistan under the Taliban, only with bigger buildings.

Democratic societies are not birthed fully formed. They are grown and nurtured slowly. Just as it is plainly clear that the vast majority of Iraqis are delighted to be rid of Saddam, it is just a plain to see that the Iraqis have not yet learned the real value of democracy. While they turned out by the millions to cast ballots in a free and fair election, it is also plainly clear that their commitment to democracy is less in evidence. Voting is one thing- actually building and maintaining the institutions that are the pillars of democratic societies, is quiet another. The Iraqis are sitting on the fence, waiting for the outcome of the war between the terrorists and Coalition forces. Therein lies the problem. The Iraqis do not yet understand that democracy is an idea and not dependent of a personality. The face of democracy is in the mirror and not on huge billboards with the words ‘Great Leader’ beneath an image.

In the end however, all we can do is offer the Iraqis an opportunity to author their own destiny.

The so called insurgents cannot and will not ‘defeat’ America. We will remain a free and democratic society, irrespective of what happens in Iraq. Our way of life and values are deeply rooted and will not be dislodged by threats made by the revolutionary du jour…

We are giving the Iraqis a final chance to take control of their lives. If they choose to remain immobilized or only half committed, we can go home with a clear conscience. We offered them a Marshall Plan and long term commitment of partnership and opportunity. We offered them a future…

A ‘win’ by the Iraqi insurgents (criminals, really) is no more than the ‘win’ claimed by Hizbollah in their war with the Israelis that left southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut in a cloud of concrete dust.

By their actions- or lack thereof- Iraqis will in the end, clearly define themselves and the kind of nation they want for themselves. If they will not act in their own best interests, we cannot force democracy where it is clearly not yet valued. If they are convinced by others that democracy is of little value to the Iraqis, we will need to leave. That will result in tragedy and great suffering, of course, but the blood of Americans and coalition forces cannot continue to be used to purchase democracy for Iraq.

Even if that were to happen, that is in no way an indictment of this administrations doctrine. Every patient has a choice. They can refuse the medical treatment that might save them. Refusing the treatment does mean the treatment is flawed.

The people of Eastern Europe did not need to be convinced of the merits of free societies over tyrannies. We must be prepared to face the reality that Iraq and much of the Arab world will remain backward for a very long time, incapable of understanding how free governments are always better than oppressive ones. While there is nothing we can do about that, we can hope that the next generation, or the one after that, will see more clearly.

The tragedy is that yet another generation of Arabs will be lost to dysfunction and neglect. The greater tragedy is that most of them don’t even know it. Hundreds of millions of children born in the Middle East will grow up never knowing freedom.

As a species, we distinguish ourselves by how we treat others- and how we demand others be treated. We build hospitals, not only because we want our loved ones to be tended to, but because we want our society to be tended to. America and western democracies , raise tens of billions of dollars every to fund research for cures of diseases most of us will never have to suffer. Notwithstanding the issue of how we pay for our medical care, that care is as close as the nearest public or private hospital.

Democracies do not dole out medical treatment in exchange for loyalty, as is often done by tyrannical regimes. In those regimes, the only values that are applied equally is the knock on the door in the middle of the night or the universal application of the ‘seven cent solution‘- the cost of a bullet to the back of the head.

There are those that argue America and western democracies cannot be the ‘world’s policemen.’ There are those that believe that we have no business demanding or forcing freedom and democracies on nations that are not predisposed to those ideas. In fact, the only acceptable reason not to defend oppressed people and stand uo for them is if by doing so, we put our own existence at risk.

Democratic nations must always be the beacon to which those living under the darkness of tyranny must turn. We cannot turn off the light that inspires the reformists and opposition figures that are so often imprisoned and subject to torture. There are those who depend on us and our values to support their efforts. To abandon them is to abandon the very ideas that founded this nation.

In the same way the French and others came to support this nation’s war for independence, we must be ready to do the same for other nations. We must be ready to liberate those under the heel of tyranny. To deny them help- or even the hope that we will support them, is the equivalent of denying medical care to those who need it most. It is a death sentence of a kind, for whole nations and hundreds of million of people.

What we do in Iraq has consequences that extend far beyond that nations borders.

The Anchoress, in her post, touches on that truth

But maybe, just maybe, if it works, if Iraq – in the center of the Middle East – can sustain its incipient democracy and flourish…then the whole world changes, for the better.

Her words are not trite or simple.

For some, democracy is a great teacher and author of laws.

For others, democracy reveals and annoints certain universal truths and is ever evolving and alive, responding to the defense of man and liberty in each generation.

For yet others, democracy is the cornerstone of society, the nourishment of the human endeavor.

Of course, democracy is all those things to all people in whatever balance and order they need to be in. Each idea is independent and interdependent of and on each other.

These ideals are timeless and universal and those ideals will survive the MSM and leftist onslaught. Democracy and the defense of democracy trumps leftist ideology, every place, every time.

Reality cannot be reshaped in the image of those who desperately need that to be done, do that their own false and dysfunctional agendas might be served and perpetuated. As Dr Sanity points out,

It is a most ingenious paradox of life that most civilized societies and cultures encourage and support the individual in the pursuit of his or her own life, happiness and psychological growth. These societies do not lay claim to an individual’s life for the glory of the state; and in turn all members of the societey benefit as the culture’s productivity, wealth and benevolence all increase.

In other words, paradoxically, those political, economic, cultural and religious factors that encourage what is best for individual growth and maturity, are exactly what encourage the positive evolution and maturation of societies and cultures.

…Mature psychological defenses enable a creative solution to conflicts in ways that are positive for both the individual and his or her society. This is exactly what the immature defenses–such as denial, projection, paranoia do not do. On the contrary, such defenses almost always in the long run cause not only damage to the individual’s developing self, but they also eventually destroy the fundamentals of civilized behavior that can hold a society together and give it a future.

No amount of furious foot stomping and denial can change the fact that reality cannot be wished away. In what is perhaps the greatest irony, it is clear that George Bush will be remembered as the president who stood fast in his desire and belief that democracy is a gift for all people and all nations. All of the left’s fury and hate directed towards him, and their knee jerk response that cannot be interpreted any other way than as a hypocritical defense of tyranny and dysfunctional regimes, will change that.

Freedom cannot and will not be stopped. Those who believe that freedom and democracy can be extinguished are the flat earthers of our time.

They have authored their legacy- they will be repudiated and forgotten.