Not a Suicide Pact
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
I recall when I was a school kid learning about our nation’s founding that many stories about our Revolution battles poked a little fun at our British opponents’ war-fighting savvy. The British wore bright red uniforms making them easy targets. They stood in tight formation taking fire from our militia, which was spread out and hiding behind trees and rocks. What fools, right?
My late father fought in Italy in World War II and complained of the British forces observance of tea-time. He indicated his annoyance or contempt that operations, such as an artillery bombardment, might be temporarily curtailed for tea-time.
Contrast the British tea-time observance with George Washington’s Christmas-night crossing of the Delaware to defeat the Hessians in Trenton. I take great pride in the concept portrayed in the humorous poster that has the classic Delaware-crossing portrait with these words printed at the bottom, “America – We will kill you in your sleep on Christmas.”
One source of our nation’s greatness is our willingness to deal with the present without being shackled by sentiment or tradition.
I’m writing this the morning after the Muslim-perpetrated slaughter in Paris. As I write, I learn that this morning Muslim-Syrian “refugees” are landing in New Orleans. I can hear pundits on the TV in the next room discussing the Paris attacks saying: “We gotta get ‘em.” Get who?
What will historians write of this time period 50 or 100 years in the future? That is assuming there will still exists such a profession as historian; and those historians will be able to write facts without being beheaded. Will they poke fun at our refusal to address our realities while clinging to outdated traditions and practices just as we poke fun at the British red coats? Here is what they might be writing if trends continue:
“The Western people of the early 21st century declared themselves enlightened. They followed their traditions when responding to Muslim murder, terror and subsequent oppression while eschewing pragmatic proposals to address the growing decline.
“Just as George Washington’s leader, General Edward Braddock, lined up his red coats in the exposed meadows to fire volleys into the woods while the Indians and French fired from the cover of the trees, so the Western governments bombed mud huts in the Middle East celebrating the death of this or that mid-level terrorist, ignoring the fact that the vacancies were filled immediately. As the domestic Islamic violence grew and people were forced through fear to submit to sharia law, these states continued to bomb insignificant Middle East targets while welcoming a continuous stream of ‘refugees’ and immigrants from the very countries that bred the hateful ideology that was the source of the west’s oppression and ultimate downfall.
“The western leaders followed a formula which, in hindsight, accelerated their demise. The leaders saved political face by continuing limited bombing and assassination campaigns in the Middle East. They also appeased their base by welcoming legal and illegal immigrants from the Muslim nations. The ineffective foreign bombing campaigns sustained resentment and hate in the Muslims, especially in the Muslim immigrants’ children who were ignorant of the horrors their parents fled. Open borders and other liberal policies such as generous welfare and student loan benefits maintained a large supply of domestic enemies with plenty of idle time to resent, hate, and plan the next atrocity. Only a small percentage of the domestic Muslim communities actively participated in the atrocities, yet they provided very effective sanctuary, aid, and comfort to the enemy. Western countries fell in different ways, some succumbed to terror, other divided countries fell to political pluralities, a few fell to straight up majority rule.”
These times not only try men’s souls. They try our traditions, our morals, and our form of government. Allowing the growth of domestic terrorism by declaring: “We are a nation of immigrants” is irresponsible and ignorant. Try naming a founding father who was an immigrant. The only big name I know of was Alexander Hamilton who was born in the Caribbean. There are several others but I bet you never heard of them. “We are a nation of immigrants” is misleading, over stated, and no matter how true, not an excuse to allow the ongoing state-endorsed invasion of our nation.
It is becoming painfully apparent that Islam is not a religion, at least not a religion we should feel any obligation to recognize. It is a political ideology, an ideology at severe odds with Western ideals.
Our country keeps “poking the bear” and then letting said “poked bears” into our living room. It is time to consider the full range of options we have at our disposal. If our current government can’t address the threat, then perhaps another needs to be instituted before it is too late.
Author’s Note: There are historical cases of our Revolution’s troops fighting using cover but many, if not most, of our named engagements involved conventional European-style formations of lines of men giving and receiving fire. Many tactics and battlefield features were used to advantage such as walls, ridges, and even a fence stuffed with grass to look like a wall. My point is that the “shootin’ at the lobsters from behind the rocks n’ trees” is an oversimplification of our Revolutionary War engagements, albeit a useful analogy for our irresponsible and ineffective response to Islam’s attack on Western civilization.