We Have Met the Enemy and it's Us

We just lost one of the best military commanders of our day, General Stanley McChrystal, the last commander in Afghanistan.  Those of us who love history and learn from it, know that no military, no matter how large or competent, can win without a brilliant military commander.  A good military commander is crucial to winning.  There are many examples:  General David Patreaus in Iraq.  As soon as General Patreaus was appointed to lead the Iraq war, he turned it around and we were successful.  General Norman Schwarzkopf the brilliant commander of the 1991 Gulf War.  It was in no small measure the ability of General Schwarzkopf that the US and coalition forces had such blitzkrieg success.

In World War II, it was the brilliance of Generals Eisenhower, Patton (check out this youTube video on Patton) and the British General Bernard Montgomery that the US and its allies won the war decisively.  On the German side, it was the brilliance of Generals such as General Erwin Rommel that they had the success that they had.  If you study the war in North Africa, you can see the military brilliance of this, one of the greatest military mind of all time.  Another brilliant German commander was General Friedrich Paulus, the commander of the German Sixth Army at Stalingrad in the Eastern Front.  Although the Germans lost this battle, it was not because of the leadership of General Paulus, but the insanity of Adolf Hitler who, basically condemned those who perished there to an avoidable death.  Hitler refused all advice by the commanders on the ground that they could not succeed given the weather, lack of equipment, food, proper winter clothing, and the obstacles that they faced.  Hitler refused to have his forces withdraw and condemned them to death.  The battle of Leningrad is, perhaps the saddest story in military history. Man's inhumanity to man screams out at you when you watch a documentary of this battle.  About two million soldiers and civilians died in 900 days of the siege.  Many starved to death or died of the freezing weather. Among the dead were soldiers from Russia, Germany, Italy, Hungary, Romania and other European countries.

In Roman days, the Battle of Cannae in 216 BC stands out.  A better equipped,  trained and numerically superior Roman Army was defeated by a lesser army commanded by one of the most brilliant military commanders of all time - Hannibal, the famous Carthaginian General and son of another famous Carthaginian General, Hasdrubal.  The Romans lost most of their 50,000 troops who engaged Hannibal at this site, the worst military defeat the Romans had ever had.  Again,  Hannibal won by his military brilliance over his Roman counterpart, the Roman Consul Varro.  When the battle was over, there were an estimated 60,000 dead bodies on the battlefield.  In comparison, the United States lost 59,000 dead in 10 years of the Vietnam war.  The battle of Cannae was so significant for military strategy that the US Military studies it to this day in the War College.

Back to General McChrystal.  As you are aware, the General was forced to retire after an unflattering article by the leftist magazine, Rolling Stone, called "The Runaway General."  Rolling Stone and their supporters are anti-war and  set out to sabotage the US military.  They caused our best general to leave the field.  As the saying goes:  with friends such as these who needs enemies.  The left is an enemy of the United States.  They only care for their ideology, not for the welfare of the United States - they are the enemy as much as the Taliban.

Mosque at Ground Zero & No Church in Saudi Arabia

In my last post I argued why it is a very bad idea to build a Mosque at Ground Zero in New York City. The mind boggling contradictions are never ending and stupefying as to why no one notices them. For one, in Muslim countries, Christians are not only persecuted but it is illegal to bring a Bible into one. In Saudi Arabia, as in all other Muslim countries you cannot build a Christian church anywhere. Can you imagine if we in the West had this rule? Can you imagine how the Muslims would be rampaging everywhere? Yet in Christian lands this discrimination goes unnoticed. We approved a Mosque on the site where the Muslims committed the worst atrocity in U.S. history, but no one complains about Christian persecution in Muslim lands.

The United States provides billions of dollars in aid to Muslim countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and so on yet we allow them to persecute our Christian brothers and sisters. Since 1979, for instance, the United States has provided Egypt with over one billion dollars in military aid. Just this past January, Egyptian Muslims killed six Christians as they were leaving their church. No one complains. Why does no one raise one finger against this?

In 1991, the United States went to war to liberate Kuwait, a Muslim country. Later in 1994 the United States went to rescue Muslims in Yugoslavia. In both campaigns many American soldiers were killed and the U.S. spent billions of dollars yet, we allow our Christian brothers and sisters to be persecuted in these same lands. In 2003, the United States went to war in Iraq to liberated the people from a murderous despot, yet no one notices all the atrocities against our Christian brothers.

Check out this short video on how Muslims like to build Mosques on sites they've conquered.

Condemned to Repeat it Again

Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it as the noted philosopher George Santayana famously stated. We have a perfect example of this today. As you may have heard, American Muslims are trying to build a Mosque on the Ground Zero site in New York City. City fathers, including the current Mayor Bloomberg have approved the project. How can such an abomination go without notice, you may have asked? It boggles the mind to think that these city fathers are totally blind, deaf and dumb to history. I may have the answer to this blindness. I believe this is because the political left does not think critically, but emotionally. According to the left, if we are just nice to our enemies they will become our friends. President Obama is a big believer in this. His idea of dealing with Iran, for example, is to speak nice to them and negotiate ad nauseam. "Stupid is as stupid does" said that other philosopher, Forrest Gump. This tactic has never worked - it is known as appeasement. History has shown that this is a bankrupt policy; just ask Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister in 1939.

Let's start with a little history. Muhammad charged his followers to conquer and kill the infidel according to Surah 9:5 in the Koran. When the Muslims first conquered what is now the area of Israel, they built their most important Mosque, the Dome of the Rock, on top of the Jewish Temple, the holiest site in Judaism. They did this for two major reasons: To show the world that they had replaced Judaism and Christianity as the only true religion and to show the world that they now rule - it was an "in your face" show of force and raw arrogance. Such humiliation of Judaism and Christianity later led to the Crusades.

To put this act in modern day terms, this Muslim act would be like having a Muslim army conqueror Rome, demolish the Vatican and build a Mosque right on top of it. Can you understand the arrogance of it?

Fast forward to what we talked about at the beginning of this piece. The scene is New York City. In the year 2001 AD Muslims hijack numerous American commercial jets full of travelers and crash them into the World Trade Center, a site very much representing American economic success and power. This murderous act killed over 3,000 innocent Americans. Now, nearly 10 years later, they want to build a grand Mosque on the site their followers destroyed in their attempt to kill the infidel. The city fathers not only not object but approved the project. Stupid is as stupid does. There is no other description here.

The Bankruptcy of Socialism

Socialism is a bankrupt political and economic philosophy. This is not just an opinion but is borne out by history and facts. Let's look at a socialist country such as Italy. In Italy, for example, unemployment in the last seven years has been between 7.5% to 9.10%. What is most disturbing though, is the youth rate of unemployment which usually hovers around 30%. This is devastating to any economy.

Why is this the case? It is very simple. A socialist system such as in Italy, discourages employers from hiring. This is due to the fact that unions have a virtual stranglehold on the economy. You see, in Italy workers are practically guaranteed a job once they're employed. An employer cannot fire them unless there are unusual circumstances. It is not hard to figure out that no employer would hire a worker, knowing that he can never get rid of him/her, so employers do not hire. This in turn has the devastating consequences that follow. In the United States, we just had an example of what socialist policies can do. One of the biggest companies in the world, GM, had to be rescued from bankruptcy by the U.S. government. The main reason for this failure was that the unions strangled GM into bankruptcy. GM was paying nearly full salaries to workers that were laid off - a requirement of the union. What started out as a movement to aid the workers, has resulted in the workers getting shafted by unions. Unions only care about their own power, they care little for the common man.

Despite this glaring example, socialism is on the rise in South America and now in the United States with the Obama Administration. Socialism flies in the face of sound economics policy, yet we keep on going to it. This type of behavior is self-destructive. When will they learn? They never will because socialism is not about sound economic policy, it's about making people feel good, it's an emotion not a reasonable position. Socialists will never understand this. This is what we have coming to America.

The Turks Aim for Europe

The New York Times reports today that Turkey is nearly ready to join the European Union. I have no doubt that Turkey will be admitted sooner or later by the Europeans. What is a puzzle is that Turkey is still regarded as a legitimate country at all. Turkey was established by the conquest in 1453 of the Byzantine Empire, a Christian country. As you may remember, Constantinople was the center of Christianity for a thousand years. Today, Christians are persecuted in Turkey and can't even have a seminary. Christian churches, the very few that have not been demolished, cannot even ring a bell without permission, usually not approved.

The Muslims, remember, had their goal since Muhammad to conquer all non Muslim lands. From the seventh century on the Muslims pursued this goal with reckless abandon. When in 1453, the rest of Europe slept and refused to help their Christian brothers in Constantinople after numerous desperate pleading from the last Byzantine Emperor, Constantine XI, the Ottoman Turks took advantage of the weakness and conquered this sovereign Christian country. "War was not the answer" then too.

After conquering Byzantium, the Turks proceeded to commit genocide on all Christians and turn all Christian churches to Muslim Mosques. Today, the non-Muslim world is careful not to offend the Muslims. Funny, that the Muslims have never had this problem. They've left no opportunity to crush Christians at every opportunity. On the other hand, in the West, if someone speaks ill of anything Muslim they are targeted, yet when Muslims persecute and eliminate Christians no one even notices and no one says anything nor complains. What am I missing here?

When Will They Learn?

Have you noticed how socialism has experienced a strong resurgence in the world? If you look at Europe, socialism reins unabated. All European countries have socialized medicine. All of them, with few exceptions, have a political system that can only be described as hard left. Just look at Spain and Greece for instance. Both countries have socialist governments; both are nearly broke and waiting to be rescued by their sister Europeans. Let's move to South America. All South American countries are ruled by socialist regimes. All of them, with the exception of Chile, are nearly broke. The only reason Chile is not as bad as the others is because Chile has followed a more capitalist form of government and because it follows free market economics more than the others. How about Venezuela? Ruled by a self-proclaimed socialist and lover of Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez has succeeded in ruining this rich country.

Let's now look at our own back yard, the USA. With the administration of Barack Obama, a swing toward socialism has begun. Just look at all the spending that has happened in the last year. Are we better off today than when this spending started? NO.

Now, the important question. Can you name one socialist country that has been an economic success? NO. Then why have we not learned our lesson? This is a rhetorical question that I keep asking. I've found no answer. Socialist like Keynesian economics - the idea that government spending is what will cure economics problems. Question again: When has a country, and which one, has had any success with government spending? The answer is none. When will they learn?

Repeating Another Economics Mistake With Obamacare

Philosopher George Santayana stated a now famous proverb that "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." The best current example of this is what just happened in the United Sates with the huge government spending in rescuing the criminals of Wall Street who took us over the financial cliff by their irresponsible speculation, led by Wall St. big-wig, Bernie Madoff. Madoff was the only one to go to jail so far, the rest got bailed out by the taxpayers and the socialist policies of President Obama. If this was not enough, Obama has now passed health care reform, commonly referred to as"Obamacare;" increasing government spending like drunken sailors on a night out.

Historians have confirmed that the heavy government expenditure by the FDR administration during the depression of the 1930s did nothing to end the depression. In today's Wall Street Journal this point is well documented in an article titled "Did FDR End the Depression?" After all the spending made by the Roosevelt administration in its first eight years, the unemployment rate in 1939 was at the same rate as in 1932 - 20%. Obviously we've failed to learn from history so we have been condemned to repeat it. In Europe where they did not have such government spending the unemployment rate was 12% during the same period according to the article.

Another historical economics lesson we've failed to learn is minimum wage laws. In his popular book, "Basic Economics" economist Thomas Sowell states: "By the simplest and most basic economics, a price artificially raised tends to cause more to be supplied and less to be demanded than when prices are left to be determined by the free market." Economist in the US, Europe and Canada have long known that minimum wage laws have the opposite effect, increasing unemployment, yet we routinely keep passing these damaging laws. The main reason, for this is thought to be that this is popular for politicians and will gain them goodwill from the voters, even though it makes no economic sense.