Comments on: Why The Left Supports Defeat http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/ Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: sedonaman http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/comment-page-1/#comment-55586 sedonaman Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:50:21 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/#comment-55586 The best article on this mindset was referenced here http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/01/enough-with-the-obfuscation-already-part-two on IC a few weeks ago, and it is a chapter out of a book, <i>Man in the Trap</i>. The chapter is “The True Liberal, The Modern Liberal, and the Environmental Liberal” available on-line here http://www.orgonomy.org/article_terrorism_trueliberal.html . It was written in 1965! I found it truly amazing because he describes to a “T” a liberal I know. The best article on this mindset was referenced here http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/01/enough-with-the-obfuscation-already-part-two on IC a few weeks ago, and it is a chapter out of a book, Man in the Trap. The chapter is “The True Liberal, The Modern Liberal, and the Environmental Liberal” available on-line here http://www.orgonomy.org/article_terrorism_trueliberal.html . It was written in 1965! I found it truly amazing because he describes to a “T” a liberal I know.

]]> By: William Woodford http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/comment-page-1/#comment-55335 William Woodford Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:03:44 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/#comment-55335 Honker, while the prospect of California or Vermont leaving the United States is certainly appealing, precedent has been set and should be adhered to. A recent article on Vermont secession quoted one of its advocates as saying that he hoped secession would be peaceful. So did the Confederacy, but Lincoln rejected its peace envoys (see William Marvel’s “Mr. Lincoln Goes to War”) and attempted to reinforce Fort Sumpter, which lead to South Carolina’s bombardment. In the absence of case law or a constitutional amendment allowing states to secede simple fairness demands that states which attempt to seceed be treated like Sherman treated Georgia. The thought of San Francisco being a 21st century Atlanta should warm the heart of anyone who hates socialism. Honker, while the prospect of California or Vermont leaving the United States is certainly appealing, precedent has been set and should be adhered to. A recent article on Vermont secession quoted one of its advocates as saying that he hoped secession would be peaceful. So did the Confederacy, but Lincoln rejected its peace envoys (see William Marvel’s “Mr. Lincoln Goes to War”) and attempted to reinforce Fort Sumpter, which lead to South Carolina’s bombardment. In the absence of case law or a constitutional amendment allowing states to secede simple fairness demands that states which attempt to seceed be treated like Sherman treated Georgia. The thought of San Francisco being a 21st century Atlanta should warm the heart of anyone who hates socialism.

]]> By: WolvenBear http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/comment-page-1/#comment-55128 WolvenBear Wed, 12 Sep 2007 06:57:56 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/#comment-55128 With all respect Honker, I have to disagree on one small point. The problem in this war is not in Bush's handling of it (though it isn't teh greatest), but in our enemy finding encouragement, in the leftists' statements, that all they have to do is just cause enough carnage and we'll flee. (Coincidentally, that was the Viet Cong's strategy too.) If we had a limp wristed, but united strategy, for Iraq-the war would've ended long ago. Similarly, the failure of Clinton was not in failing to respond, but in fleeing once the going got tough-further fueling this fantasy of teh jihadists. With all respect Honker, I have to disagree on one small point. The problem in this war is not in Bush’s handling of it (though it isn’t teh greatest), but in our enemy finding encouragement, in the leftists’ statements, that all they have to do is just cause enough carnage and we’ll flee. (Coincidentally, that was the Viet Cong’s strategy too.) If we had a limp wristed, but united strategy, for Iraq-the war would’ve ended long ago.

Similarly, the failure of Clinton was not in failing to respond, but in fleeing once the going got tough-further fueling this fantasy of teh jihadists.

]]> By: Honker http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/comment-page-1/#comment-55029 Honker Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:24:11 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/09/10/why-the-left-supports-defeat/#comment-55029 Revolutionary War- nearly half of the country did not want war with Britain. The wealthy and powerful lead to the birth of this nation (those rich white guys of which many were slave owners that liberals love to hate). These men relinquished power to the people; an unknown concept at the time and still the guiding principle of America. Civil War- Lincoln's approval numbers were dismal. Many northerners were sick of sending their young to die in defense of a Union that many thought would never be united regardless of the outcome. Can you imagine a war today to prevent California from leaving the Union? Actually no one would object would they? World War I- America held fast to isolationism until it was discovered that Germany was courting Mexico to join them in an invasion of the United States. World War II- As our Allies suffered we did nothing. Article after article from the New York Times (aka liberal Bible) can be found on how we must leave Europe defend itself. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, most liberals still held fast to the belief that Hitler was Europe's problem and we should only deal with Japan. Liberals still believe America commited the greatest sin of WWII when we nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They refuse to value the lives of Americans over the lives of the enemy. Cuban- Missile Crisis- Liberals first win as Kennedy allows an enemy 90 miles of our border with direct ties to our nations biggest threat. Kennedy is praised for his leadership here. I for one deem it as a large scale disaster of foreign policy. We allowed for the first time an enemy of the United States to dictate foreign policy. The seed had been sewn. Viet-Nam- Liberal win of focusing the public sentiment towards the horror of war and not the results of victory versus defeat. Gulf War- A quick victory where the constant concern over liberal backlash prevented George Bush from removing Saddam Hussein at this time. This was George Bush's greatest failure. Clinton Presidency; Only a true liberal could allow a bombing at the trade center, bombing of the USS Cole, and bombing of a US embassy go unpunished. He avoided conflict at all cost. Ultimately his avoidance of protecting our country lead to 911. Iraq War: George Bush 43 refuses to make the same mistake of his father and he is paying the political price. He has not led the war he should have; trying to wear kid gloves in war is impossible. History will be kind to GWB. Liberals feel he has pushed us to war without justification; conservatives believe he lead us to war without while not providing all the resources to win it. I believe he is too concerned with colletaral damage to win (aka Viet-Nam). His successor if a Democrat will prove the wisdom of this administration with the price of American Lives when he/she pulls out of the just war. We will be hit again. Revolutionary War- nearly half of the country did not want war with Britain. The wealthy and powerful lead to the birth of this nation (those rich white guys of which many were slave owners that liberals love to hate). These men relinquished power to the people; an unknown concept at the time and still the guiding principle of America.
Civil War- Lincoln’s approval numbers were dismal. Many northerners were sick of sending their young to die in defense of a Union that many thought would never be united regardless of the outcome. Can you imagine a war today to prevent California from leaving the Union? Actually no one would object would they?
World War I- America held fast to isolationism until it was discovered that Germany was courting Mexico to join them in an invasion of the United States. World War II- As our Allies suffered we did nothing. Article after article from the New York Times (aka liberal Bible) can be found on how we must leave Europe defend itself. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, most liberals still held fast to the belief that Hitler was Europe’s problem and we should only deal with Japan. Liberals still believe America commited the greatest sin of WWII when we nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They refuse to value the lives of Americans over the lives of the enemy.
Cuban- Missile Crisis- Liberals first win as Kennedy allows an enemy 90 miles of our border with direct ties to our nations biggest threat. Kennedy is praised for his leadership here. I for one deem it as a large scale disaster of foreign policy. We allowed for the first time an enemy of the United States to dictate foreign policy. The seed had been sewn.
Viet-Nam- Liberal win of focusing the public sentiment towards the horror of war and not the results of victory versus defeat.
Gulf War- A quick victory where the constant concern over liberal backlash prevented George Bush from removing Saddam Hussein at this time. This was George Bush’s greatest failure.
Clinton Presidency; Only a true liberal could allow a bombing at the trade center, bombing of the USS Cole, and bombing of a US embassy go unpunished. He avoided conflict at all cost. Ultimately his avoidance of protecting our country lead to 911.
Iraq War: George Bush 43 refuses to make the same mistake of his father and he is paying the political price. He has not led the war he should have; trying to wear kid gloves in war is impossible. History will be kind to GWB. Liberals feel he has pushed us to war without justification; conservatives believe he lead us to war without while not providing all the resources to win it. I believe he is too concerned with colletaral damage to win (aka Viet-Nam). His successor if a Democrat will prove the wisdom of this administration with the price of American Lives when he/she pulls out of the just war. We will be hit again.

]]>