|
I am not a European.
Lee Harris argued, “The world changed on Sunday,” March 14, with the Spanish elections, but the real problem is that Europe failed to change.
If Europe cannot rouse itself to fight back, after it has been attacked on
its own soil, we may conclude that the cowardice we saw after 9-11 was not
merely the expression of anti-Americanism and opportunism, but of a deeper
paralysis, which is now in its terminal stage. And so, I weep for Europe.
Europe’s paralysis is best expressed in the combination of two seemingly contradictory statements, one by David Brooks and the other by Edward Luttwak.
“Now all European politicians will know that if they side
with America on controversial security threats, and terrorists strike their
nation, they might be blamed by their own voters.” (Brooks)
“Any [European] politician who invokes Madrid to demand a withdrawal from
Iraq will be inviting terrorist attacks to prove his point.” (Luttwak)
Both statements may co-exist in the same universe of discourse, the universe
of weakness, the universe of defeat. The vicious circle of weakness dominating
European thought is countered by the virtuous circle of strength that George
W. Bush has expressed: America takes the battle to al Qaeda & Co. We
kill some of their members, and capture others, from whom we get the intelligence
necessary to kill and capture other terrorists, and so on. That may seem
simplistic, but in fact, a nation will either gain the advantage or steadily
decline, in the war on terror; a stalemate is not an option.
(The “circles” are metaphors, rather than discrete, logical units. For we
are talking about people and nations, not logic or geometry. In the real
world, a strong man or even a strong people can be brought low through the
collective cowardice or thuggery of others. And so it is, that al Qaeda seeks
to beat America through chasing off her allies. And so, we can expect attacks
on the United Kingdom, and on or just before our own November 2 presidential
election.)
Western European nations increasingly embrace appeasement, while permitting
themselves to be overwhelmed by hordes of their Muslim enemies, enemies who
hold everything European in contempt, and who increasingly include violent
gangs, whose idea of fun is to brutalize Jews and gang-rape Christian girls.
From 1945-1990, Western Europe lived under the shadow of the Soviet “Empire
of Evil” (Ronald Reagan), and yet it was safe from being overrun, because
we protected it. And so, while America spent billions on Europe’s defense,
Europe could spend billions on decadent welfare programs which further sapped
its moral strength. The result was the same as it always is, with those who
get used to getting a free ride. Rather than gratitude, Europeans felt resentful
and superior towards us.
A classic case of a spoiled character feeling resentful and superior towards
his betters is the Tom Cruise character (Lt. Daniel Kaffee) in the 1989 play
and 1992 movie, A Few Good Men. Defense attorney Kaffee cross examines his nemesis, Lt. Col. Nathan Jessep (Jack Nicholson).
Jessep: You want answers?!
Kaffee: I want the truth!
Jessep:
You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those
walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? [To Kaffee’s
co-counsel.] You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than
you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines.
You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that
Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while
grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth
because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me
on that wall -- you need me on that wall.
The exchange could just as well have been between Europe and America over the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
(Unfortunately,
politically correct writer Aaron Sorkin and director Rob Reiner presented
Nicholson as the heavy, and Cruise as the hero, but it is a tribute to Sorkin’s
writing skills, that his speech has become a credo for many members of the
LAPD and the American military.)
The
problem with most of Western Europe, is that it wants to be safe, but still
won’t guard itself, yet no longer wants America on “that wall.” That means
that Western Europe will be defeated by Islamism.
New York-based freelancer Nicholas Stix has written for Toogood Reports, Middle American News, the New York Post, Daily News, American Enterprise, Insight, Chronicles, Newsday and many other publications. His recent work is collected at The Critical Critic.
Email Nicholas Stix
Send
this Article to a Friend
|
