American Imperialism???


The big hit against the president's policy these days is couched within the framework of the term American Imperialism. It's the fad of the current crop of naysayers to attempt to paint the USA as some sort of colonizing power running rampant throughout the world in a quest of conquest, much as the old-Europe nations did throughout the world through a number of centuries right on through the twentieth. Perhaps the most high-profile of these folks is Pat Buchanan, one of the darlings of the John McLaughlin Friday-evening TV clambake, who was vociferously against the Gulf War, in which Kuwait was freed, and the current war, in which Iraq is being given its freedom.

Someone mentioned to me recently that I should check on some of the overseas newspapers to see how intense is the loss of this nation's "goodwill of much of the rest of the world;" however, I can read as much hatred for this country as they spew over there just by reading the mainstream press in the USA. I couldn't care less about the goodwill of much of the world, or any of the world, for that matter. What I DO care about is the safety of this country. As for American Imperialism, just tally up all the lands in the world captured and now governed by the USA as the result of its victories for the last 100 years, during which it has been the difference between freedom and slavery for entire populations. I'm a lot more interested in the history of those 100 years than in what any foreign newspaper has to say about anything, or any other rag for that matter, like the New York Times or the Washington Post.

Europe realized freedom in 1917-18 ONLY because of the USA (117,000 dead Americans); ditto for Europe and Asia 1941-45 (405,000 dead Americans); South Korea 1950-53 (37,000 dead Americans). How much of any of the countries involved in these conflicts does the USA own/govern today? After freeing it in 1991, how much of Kuwait and all of its oil belongs to the USA, or has ever belonged to the USA, this terrible imperialistic power so named by people like Buchanan or perhaps the (gasp) foreign, sophisticated press? The USA did the dirty work regarding Serbia-Kosovo in the 90s, so how much of those countries does the USA own/govern today? All of eastern Europe was freed in 1989-90 from the Soviet Union ONLY because of the USA, and how much of that huge expanse does the USA own/govern today?

The USA also freed Cuba and the Philippines from Spain just over 100 years ago and maintained a presence in the latter, helping against Japan in WWII, and removing itself militarily, as requested, just a few years ago. Now, Muslim thugs are taking over that country. The USA could have made Cuba into a state, but it didn't, and now look at the mess there. To even mention imperialism in connection with anything this country has done militarily is to not only be patently wrongheaded, but also to be scurrilous to the point of malice. Kerry wants to go hat-in-hand to the French and Germans, two of the most wicked imperialistic nations that ever existed. Look to Europe for centuries of imperialism - England, France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Italy, and look at all the benighted nations they held in subjugation. Check out Africa, South America, Southeast Asia, for instance. Who drew the lines in the Middle East after WWI and WWII and contributed greatly to the terrible problems there?

Old Europe, especially France and Germany, are impotent. Only England has enough resolve (and it should, because of its miserable record) to try to set things straight. Even now, the USA is handing the Iraqis their country on a platter when it could just as easily execute the necessary bad actors and take over the place and all of its oil…if it were an imperialistic country, and nobody could do a thing about it. Because of the USA, girls can go to school in Afghanistan, and women, among the nine million who have registered, can even vote now. No, nothing is perfect anywhere, but the improvements are incalculable, and that part of the Arab world that is literate understands completely that the least imperialistic nation in the world today is the USA, notwithstanding the rant and propaganda put out by Bush-haters and USA-haters (especially those in this country), though one should expect people like the erudite Buchanan and his ilk to have a better sense of history than to honestly be a part of that mishmash of misleading misanthropy. American Imperialism? Such tripe is disgusting to the point of inducing vomit, and these folks do have a better sense of history than that, so their mongering is patently an exercise in blatant dishonesty in an attempt to "get Bush." All's fair in love and campaigning may sound great, but when the centerpiece of dissent is utter dishonesty, a line has been crossed.

Perhaps Kerry's most egregious exercise in dishonesty is his constant rant that the administration has been virtually inactive in the last three years, presumably in its response to the events of 9/11. In this, he must think he can pander to voters who are as dumb as a gourd. Practically within days of 9/11, the Taliban was virtually destroyed and Afghanistan neutralized as Osama bin Laden's little playground of terror; within two years a complete fighting establishment had traveled halfway around the world and rousted Saddam, the world's most dangerous terrorist, from his rat-hole. As November draws nearer, voters will consider security as their major concern, and Teresa's "French guy," who apparently wants to talk the world into setting up some sort of utopia in Iraq, will not likely be seen as the proper steward of it.