A Good Progressive War


Pages: 1 2

Finally after ten years of bitter debates over when the United States is allowed to go to war, what a legitimate war is and how much intelligence, indignation and international approval is required before we go to war, the Obama administration has hand delivered the progressive definition of what a good liberal war is. If we can just analyze and break down the elements of what a good liberal war is, then we can be sure to have the support of the left in any future military campaign.

Bad War: A bad war is fought in response to an attack on the United States, the mass murder of American civilians, an attempted assassination of an American president and attacks on American aircraft.

Good War: A good war is fought on behalf of Islamic interests to the detriment of American interests.

Bad War: A bad war is initiated by the United States which gathers a coalition in support of its course of action.

Good War: A good war is initiated by France which eventually convinces the United States to go along because there’s an election coming up and it’s a chance for its failed leader to look tough.

Bad War: A bad war is a unilateral action fought by a coalition of 48 countries without United Nations approval.

Good War: A good war is a multilateral action fought by 16 countries under a fraudulent United Nations mandate that called for a cease fire and a no-fly zone, not the overthrow of a regime.

Bad War: A bad war is fought with bipartisan congressional support (at least until new elections approach).

Good War: A good war is fought while ignoring Congress and daring it to do anything to stop the invasion.

Bad War: A bad war is announced and explained to the American people in a presidential address before it happens.

Good War: A good war is announced and explained to the American people in a presidential address nine days after it has begun… that dares them to do anything to stop it.

Bad War: A bad war is fought with the support of 62 percent of the American people.

Good War: A good war is fought with the support of 26 percent of the American people.

Bad War: A bad war is fought against a murderous tyrant who failed to comply with UN disarmament resolutions.

Good War: A good war is fought against a less murderous tyrant who voluntarily disarmed and gave up his weapon stockpiles.

Bad War: A bad war is fought against a tyrant who was responsible for murdering close to a quarter of a million people in brutal campaigns of ethnic cleansing and with the use of chemical weapons.

Good War: A good war is fought against a tyrant who might have killed some civilians if we hadn’t intervened.

Bad War: “Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States” (George Walker Bush, Oct 2002).

Good War: “In this particular country -– Libya  — at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale…  A massacre would have driven thousands of additional refugees across Libya’s borders, putting enormous strains on the peaceful –- yet fragile -– transitions in Egypt and Tunisia” (Barack Hussein Obama, Mar 2011).

Pages: 1 2

  • Amused

    Do you get paid for this stuff Greenfield ? Thank goodness Goebbels didn't have an internet .
    Tell me , what else do "progressives think " ? , you seem to be a master of the second guess .
    lol…a character trait of most of the "journalists" posting their Opinions here . Of course they have not put their spin or bias' ahead of facts or the truth ….Oh Yea !

    Good Wars /Bad Wars ? ….very good Greenfield .

  • http://www.contextflexed.com Flipside

    This is like Max Boot on lithium.

    • Herman Caintonette

      Boot has been off lithium? You learn something every day….

  • PatriotX

    I don’t totally agree with everything he said however I would have to agree that progressives have a really twisted way of deciding what is bad and good, what to cheer and denounce, what to label “intolerant” and “tolerant”…etc.

    I can’t say that I understand our reasoning for invading Iraq but I will say that pratically handing it to Iran is certainly not the option that’s best for U.S. interests. Pulling all of our remaining troops out of Iraq is doing just that.

    The Obama fans has cheered him with this whole Libya campaign and has cheered on Arab Spring as something that will bring prosperity and peace to the Mid-East. There are however pros and cons

    Pros

    We helped overthrow a dictator and it didn’t cost 1 American life (officially).

    Muammar Al Qadaffi will never again be a threat to innocent lives or us for that matter

    Justice is served for the victims of Pan Am flight 103 and the lives of Americans taken from other terrorist events he sponsored

    With Arab Spring, dictators that unjustly and ruthlessly oppressed the people of Arab nations are now being overthrown.

    Cons

    History has a way of repeating it’s self (especially with those who suffer from short term amnesia) how often have we helped rebels only to have them turn on us later, 9-11 ring a bell.

    Many of these rebels in Arab Spring have ties to Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood

    They are already imposing shariah law in these nations that are affected by Arab Spring.

    The Libyan rebels have expressed their disrespect for the hand that helped them by basically telling us to take a hike when we requested that they hand over the lockerbie bomber.

    We still haven’t located that stockpile of munitions and weapons that were in the possession of the rebels, which I’m sure will be used against us in due time.

    Egypt and Tunisia are now implementing, shariah, an oppressive form of Islamic law that recognizes none of the individual rights granted in a true democracy, which by the way, I thought was one of the main reasons for Arab Spring.

    Jews and Christians in these nations have been under constant threat from the Islamist (funny how that doesn’t seem to be a big issue to the Obama administration) imposing these laws and enforcing them through violence and terror.

    Israel, let’s not kid ourselves, our only ally, is being backed in a corner from all of this. One of Islams goals is the destruction of Israel and this Arab Spring gives it a strategic advantage to accomplish that goal.

    This is exactly what I have a problem with as far as the whole progressive mentality goes. They look at the surface and the immediate effects instead of reading the fine print and between the lines. There’s no long term insight into the potential dangers. It’s like dealing with a bunch of teenagers that want what they want, when they want it, right then and there and how they want it.

  • Herman Caintonette

    This article is the functional equivalent of "Jews are Bloodthirsty Parasites" by Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. After all, the dinner-jacket guy knows more about the Jews than Jews do themselves, right?

    Horowitz must be desperate for material…

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It's nice that you don't bother reading articles before you troll them anymore.

      • Herman Caintonette

        I read it and conclude that, after enduring your screed, there must be a severe shortage of straw in your locale. Most liberals embrace variants of the Catholic "just war" theory, and have a hard time supporting the endless procession of Smedley Butler wars. General Butler famously explained:

        "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."

        See, http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket….

        Gulf War II was a resource war; though the transcript of Dick Cheney's secret energy summit is and was a secret, it is quite likely that the participants had already carved up the oil concessions. That war was about oil, Israel, and the 2012 elections, and cannot qualify as a "just war."

        Gulf War I was a gambit by Bush #41 to derail Saddam's nuclear ambitions. It was brilliant in a Machiavellian way, but like so many government claims, there was no evidence that Iraqi soldiers were removing children from incubators. In hindsight, Bush #41 played Lucy to Saddam's Charlie Brown.

        Vietnam was precipitated by the fraudulent claim that the Communists attacked our ships in the Gulf of Tonkin. Again, the primary benefit was to Eisenhower's "military-industrial complex," and 58,000 Americans paid the ultimate price for their profits.

        World War II was an obvious example of a "just war." World War I was a more difficult call, as was Korea — at least, as it applied to the U.S. The Cold War, of course, changed the equation somewhat.

        Libya can arguably be defended under the modern law of war, as genocide is a crime against humanity. The key antecedent was the Holocaust; we could make the case that the international community has a collective obligation to respond to genocide or threats of same. At the cost of $1 bn, it was an incredible bargain, as wars go.

        Either you are an insufferable idiot, or the proverbial progeny of Goebbels.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          General Butler, eh?

          Someone has an all-Oliver Stone DVD shelf at home.

          • Herman Caintonette

            He's the only reason you are alive. If not for Butler, we would have been an Axis power, and Martin Luther's dream of a Jew-free world would have been achieved.

      • trickyblain

        You call this mushy pile of nonsensical, stream-of-conciseness rambling an "article"?

        • Herman Caintonette

          Mr. GreenJeans is practicing al-Taqqiya.

    • Adam

      You would probably give that article an emphatic thumbs up, wouldn't you? Admit it, you love Jihadists like Ahmedinejad and the new leaders of Libya. Any enemy of Bush is a friend of the Liberal Left after all.

      • Herman Caintonette

        Bush is a war criminal, as was everyone in PNAC. As for me, I supported the Green Revolution, and expect that Islamic countries will eventually join the modern world. Zionazis strengthen the hand of Islamic hard-liners.

        • Adam

          Herman- A little friendly advice, stick to trolling, you apparently have no legal knowledge, and International Law is a whole level above General Law. And remember, as soon as the Hard-Lined Islamists finnish their Jihad, people on your side will be among the first they line up for extermination. And we Zionists may not come to your rescue with all your insults and what not.

  • Fray222

    A good war costs 0 American lives
    A bad war casts 5,000

    • Adam

      Really?? So Libyan lives are not as important? It's ok for US war planes to bomb civilians in Libya, then to have heroes risk it all for what is right?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      We'll finish counting up the cost when Al-Qaeda is running an oil nation.

  • Bubbe

    Good insight, Mr. Greenfield.

  • Adam

    Jeez, never knew there were so many Libtard trolls on this site. Was sa matta Libtards? Mother Jones High Tech Lynching of Cain boring you today or were you sick of Huffpo stories about Kim Kardashians tragic divorce?

    Great article Mr. Greenfield, Libtards can't deal with simple facts, it gets in the way of their Dogma. They would much rather attack the messanger instead of the message. They are just too ashamed to admit that they love Jihadists because like Jihadists, they just want the death of all Jews.

    • Herman Caintonette

      The real scandal — felony violation of election law — is being assiduously ignored. When a sex scandal pops up, all else takes a back-seat in what passes for our Fourth Estate.

      Whenever a confidentiality agreement is struck, there is invariably something out there that someone doesn't want you to know. He is presumed guilty, on that basis alone.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It's mostly the same troll and he has a lot of time on his hands. It's his version of Occupy Wall Street.

      The left doesn't like facts, it likes firing squads for people who insist on facts.

      • Herman Caintonette

        You routinely cherry-pick your facts, ignoring the dispositive ones. It is the Zionist form of al-Taqiyya,

        • Adam

          “Zionist form of al-Taqiyya,”

          That’s funny, it would almost be like saying it is the Beef form of airplanes.

          al-Taqiyya is a religious act laid out in the Koran and the personal writings of Muhammed. Zionism isn’t religious perse, it is a political position similar to Capitalist or Liberalism. All Zionism is, is a simple belief in a right to a Jewish state and the continued support there of. Did your puppet master convince you Zionism is some weird religious thingy??? Turn off MSDNC and stop reading Politico.

  • Ben

    Great article,Mr. Greenfeld! You hit the aim, all leftist scum and Jew-haters squeal about "resource wars" and Jewish conspiracy.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Sure. You can see how much of a sore spot it hits by how many furious comments they leave.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Adam, this site proves that Zionists "can't deal with simple facts, it gets in the way of their Dogma. They would much rather attack the messanger instead of the message." I've had far more than my share of knives thrown my way.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Goebbels: "A bad war is fought in response to an attack on the United States, the mass murder of American civilians, an attempted assassination of an American president and attacks on American aircraft."

    Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, no matter how hard traitorous Zionists tried to tie the two together.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Goebbels: "“Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States” (George Walker Bush​, Oct 2002)."

    Shrub was a sociopath. According to the CIA, Halabja was the Iranians' doing:

    "A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians. Further, the Scott inquiry on the role of the British government has gathered evidence that following the massacre the United States in fact armed Saddam Hussein to counter the Iranians chemicals for chemicals. "
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6

    And of course, you forgot the fact that US Ambassador April Glaspie gave Saddam the diplomatic equivalent of an engraved invitation to invade Kuwait. After Gulf War I, Iraq posed no threat to its neighbors, according to both Condi and Colin Powell. (They had to change their tune when the Bush cartel ordered it, of course.) And before Gulf War I, he was one of ours, put into power in a CIA covert operation.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I bet the Iranians were responsible for everything Saddam did, unless the debate turns to Iran, and then it will all really be Saddam's fault… and America's.

      "After Gulf War I, Iraq posed no threat to its neighbors"

      So at that point Kuwait had a larger army than Iraq did, right?

      • Herman Caintonette

        When you count ours? Of course, not! If Saddam even blinked….

  • Herman Caintonette

    Goebbels: "A bad war is fought against a murderous tyrant who failed to comply with UN disarmament resolutions."

    You mean, like Israel? She is the #1 violator of UN resolutions. The bombing of Tel Aviv starts when?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I know you don't read the articles you're replying to, but do do you read the words you're quoting?

      You should start. Might be educational.

      • Herman Caintonette

        David Goebbels: "You can see how much of a sore spot it hits by how many furious comments they leave."

        I'm obviously hitting a raw nerve with you — you have to resort to al-Taqqiya. Just like your Muslim cousins.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Goebbels: "A bad war is a unilateral action fought by a coalition of 48 countries without United Nations approval."

    The Coalition of the Bribed. Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau and the Solomon Islands didn't even have standing armies. Ethiopia? Iceland? Mongolia? Afghanistan? They were all on the list, providing no support to speak of. Quite a coalition….

    • trickyblain

      Don't forget those global megapowers – Costa Rica and Tonga.

      • Herman Caintonette

        Costa Rica had the good sense to demand removal from the list. But Tonga did send a lovely pair of coconuts…. :)

  • Herman Caintonette

    Goebbels: "A bad war is when the United States makes an effort to keep the people responsible for the actions of the previous regime out of power with a De-ba’athification program."

    A major tactical mistake, destabilizing the country. Most Iraqis joined the Ba'athist Party out of self-preservation, and were as happy to see Saddam gone as the Shi'a.

    • trickyblain

      Once again enjoying your posts, Herman. One quibble. Stop comparing Greenfield to Goebbels, please. Goebbels deserved the worse hell could offer, but he was creative, intelligent, and successful in his time. Greenfield is nothing like him.

      • Herman Caintonette

        True. Greenfield has yet to impress.

  • Ghostwriter

    And you still love to attack Israel even though it is a genuine ally of ours and blame it and this country for all the problems the world faces. I've never seen Israel wish America to be wiped off the face of the earth unlike the people you side with that want to murder Israelis and Americans.

    • Herman Caintonette

      It is no ally of ours — our relationship is more analogous to that of a parasite (Israel) and its host. It provides nothing of discernible value (Zionist apologists' desperate whine to the contrary notwithstanding) to us, and costs us far more than it is worth.

      I don't care what happens to Israel, provided that we are not asked to subsidize it from our Treasury. I also think that if Israel were forced to reach a modus vivendi on its own, it would be able to do so. I further maintain the present state of affairs is a hindrance to peace, and that we as a society would benefit from net immigration from Israel.

      • Ghostwriter

        Admit it,Herman Caintonette. You hate Israel. You don't like Jewish people and want them dead. Your hatred for that country is there for all to see. I hate to break it to you,but Israel has a right to exist. It's a pro-American democracy in a sea of anti-American dictatorships. At least the Israelis don't want to slaughter Americans like much of the Middle East does.

  • Amused

    Gotta p[art vwaysd with you Herman on bthe subject of Israel and zionists .The US and Israel are indeed allies . The US pays lip service to the squeeling arab and muslim approvers , who just about anyone with half-a-brain knows , would only want to see Israel destroyed .If at this late date in time you have not realized that Herman , then you are truly ignorant , and an imposter . 80% of Americans favor Israel and just as many favor continued US support . Unfortunately , politicians have played this notion to their own advantage , and in the case of the Two Bush jr.Admins and the Bush Sr. Admin . the aid wasn't up to them , and the lip service was predominant . Neither Party can abandon Israel because the majority of Americans are in favor of Israel's continued existence .
    BTW -your use of the word "parasite " and the term "net immigration " is very telling . So much so that I sense your criticism of Greenfield is more based in a bias against jews and Israel than in the fact that his article is sophomoric and childishly presumptious .

    • Herman Caintonette

      It is purely clinical. A parasite saps life from its host.

      • Amused

        Bull Sheet Herman , try that crap out on someone else , your words and the choice thereof , gives you away for what you are …..go get a room with Flipside .
        Your explanation is all the more transparent , putting your intellect on the same level as Greenfield .

  • PatriotX

    “Good War” is definitely a play on words. I can tell you there’s no such thing.

    A better title would have been a Good Cause or Bad Cause would have been more on target. The cause is the only thing that I can remember that was worth fighting for in any conflict.

  • Amused

    The very notion that one second guesses those whom Greenfield calls 'progressives " and then opines on "wars they may like or dislike , is LUDICROUS . Every War CVonflict ,Police Action that we have been involved in since WW2 , have been embraced by both parties equally . Unfortunately , in the vein of Greenfields remarks , implied but not said outright is , :it all depends which party is in the White House , then the judgement is made on whether it's a good war or bad war .All in all it's simply a childish article which only accentuates Greenfield's self-imposed ignorance .The sad thing is , that he can legitimately foist up such drivel and actually recieve approval from the denizons of this blog , who simply diminish themselve by applauding .

  • Flowerknife_us

    It will not be much longer before the conditions that made Columbus sail the ocean blue . in 1492, will be upon us once again.

    Looking at the map along the major seaways shows an awful lot of Countrys suddenly due to be most unfriendly to the US.

    If Hugo stayes out of the Grave long enough to muck with Panama, then the closure will be just about complete.

    How many more Ships were they talking about MOTHBALLING again???

  • Michael Marapung

    Herman,

    I can understand if you just write a disagreeing comment, but you kept writing walls of texts after another and continued to attack and ridicule anyone agreeing with this article while comparing the author to a Nazi (maybe I should call you Fegelein, I would make just as much sense), If I didn't know any better I would've thought you're trolling.

    Get a life.