The Tao of Warmongering

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


Pages: 1 2

These days the Dems love intervening in what they call “humanitarian crises”, which is usually code for intervening on one side of a civil war where both sides are dubious. They don’t tend to intervene in genuinely one-sided conflicts. Sudan and Rwanda never saw bombers overhead. Actual genocide doesn’t interest them except when bemoaning the general fallen state of man without international law. Fake genocide, whether it’s in Yugoslavia or Libya draws them like flies to a D.C. banquet in summer.

These wars are usually billed as “interventions” to stop the killing. And that part doesn’t work too well. There’s still killing going on in Yugoslavia, it just doesn’t make the evening news. Libya has more killing than ever now that we liberated it. We can probably count on the Syrians for the same. But while the killing doesn’t stop, that was never really the point. If the Dems wanted to save lives, there would have jets over Sudan and peacekeeping forces gunning down Janjaweed rape squads like mad dogs.

What these peaceful wars are really about is glorying in the majesty of international law and sending soldiers off to die so that people in other countries will live the way you want them to. The Arab Spring isn’t about overthrowing dictators, it’s about putting the right kind of dictators in power.

No wonder then that the “international community” in all its majesty sneers at the kind of limited existential conflict that Israel would like to fight. There’s no mention of a democratic Iran and the stuff about international law is just unserious. Stopping madmen from getting their hands on nuclear weapons is fine for the plot of a Tom Cruise movie, but serious diplomats can’t be expected to take it seriously as a basis for intervention. Why if they intervened every time some lunatic got his hands on nuclear weapons, they would have to go into North Korea and Pakistan. And why do that when it’s much more fun to lay out the plans of what kind of government Syria should have after its liberation from Shiite totalitarian rule to Sunni totalitarian rule, as if they  won’t handle that themselves.

Warmongering is what selfish states do when they stand to benefit in some way from a conflict. But the United States no longer fights wars with any hope of benefiting from them. Increasingly it fights wars for some abstract principle. Even when there’s a perfectly good reason to go into a country, such as its rulers harboring terrorists who murdered thousands of Americans, our leaders won’t stop until they’ve eliminated any such selfish elements through a program of nation building.

In times past we sacrificed soldiers to win wars, in our days we sacrifice them to lose wars. The more soldiers die unnecessarily to protect and take care of the vital infrastructure of the local democratic junta when they could have been saved with an air strike or two, the more we show how unselfish we are, how humanitarian and altruistic our foreign policy is.

Some countries pride themselves on having a foreign policy that serves their interests. We pride ourselves on having a foreign policy that doesn’t serve our interests at all. The more our foreign policy doesn’t serve our interests, the nobler we know that we are. Take the Arab Spring. We would have been well served to protect ourselves by keeping allied governments in place. Instead we sacrificed those governments and turned the place over to the Muslim Brotherhood, thereby showing how unselfish we truly are.

American leaders live in constant fear of having a foreign policy that someone might mistake for being unilateral or self-interested. The instant this happens we will alienate the world and that will make it impossible for us to get anything done, which it is already impossible, because we never do anything that serves our own interests anyway.

The rest of the world naturally thinks that we are always throwing our weight around, no matter what we do. But the peacemongers live in the blissful knowledge that nothing they do serves our own interests. And being certain of having a truly selfless foreign policy, they feel entitled to bomb anyone they want since no one can accuse them of bombing out of self-interest.

The altruistic warmonger becomes a peacemonger through his altruism achieving the satori of selflessness.. By submitting to the tin god of international law as a Muslim submits to Allah, he gains freedom from conscience and the perceived right to do anything he pleases for the humanitarian cause. Warmongering becomes peacemongering. Invasions become interventions. Bombings become acts of friendship. And as in 1984, war becomes peace.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • maturin20

    "Limited existential conflicts", Daniel? Following the national interest? A better, purer sort of war? You're pretty solid on newspeak yourself. "We have always been at war with the Muslim world." Israel can be Desertbase One.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

      So many words, so few ideas.

      You are consistent.
      Obama knows that showing weakness emboldens muslim militants. And he continues to do so.
      His muslim heritage shows more every day, and his lack of loyalty to us more obvious with each slip.

      • maturin20

        Gads, they're bold, those militants. They're so bold, they must have the whitest tees around. What is with our C-in-C, doesn't he want to scrub the world clean?

        • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

          The little voices in your head.

          Do you ever serve them tea and crumpets?

          • maturin20

            I used to, until UK installed video cameras inside of every tea and every crumpet. Now the voices come from light posts and they speak cockney.

  • Ken

    At least he is consistent, Roger. One good quality among all bile!!

    • maturin20

      Don't forget the choler.

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

        Do the the little voices in your head just chatter in your down time?

        • maturin20

          It worked for Joan of Arc.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Did she need tampons?

          • maturin20

            The French invented tampons.

          • kentatwater

            maturin20 (retired) posting as "iseeyou" sez:

            kentatwater…before they wipe this, I want you to know that having me banned in order to get out of having to answer for yourself is the height of cowardice. You're a hypocrite…and you know it.

            Have a blessed day you cultic douchebag.

            How appropriate that your penultimate post to this forum,
            was one about another feminine hygiene product. Heh.

            It's a fitting epitaph, I think. You will always be remembered thus.

  • Matt

    Assad will be safe for 30 years just like his old man, one corpse is one year of the regime his old man killed 30,000 stability for 30 years. I question the rationality to call for the Iranians to go back onto the streets, especially after they got the treatment in 2009/10 and have seen how bad it can get in Syria. The opposition is there in Iran, so Barry wants to send them out to be slaughter by Iran like in 2009 or worst case the Syrian model. In which case there will be no one left and the regime will be safer for another 30 years. Even if sanctions bought down the regime (unlikely) if Barry slaughters the opposition we will end up with another form of clerical rule or other hardliners because the moderates will all be dead. Peres I put it down to being desperate, Dagan I don't know what he thinks anymore, Barry why do you want the Iranian opposition slaughtered? Because he has no intention of helping them like he left the Syrians to be slaughtered.

  • Matt

    I got a list for all those that do not airbrush history
    1. Iraq handed to Iran
    2. No military intervention in relation to the Iranian bomb, (no more covert stuff) Iran gets the bomb.
    3. Hizbullah will have 100,000 rockets point at Israel by the end of his second term.
    4. The Afghan debate in 2009, putting restrictions on the military in relation to the planning, Afghanistan will be a safe haven for al-Qaida again. In fact he stayed a year longer and gave the military less they wanted, just more dead US soldiers for no reason. We were not give what we need to win, we all agree on that.
    5. Egypt makes Mubarak go hands the country to the radicals, peace treaty.
    6. He will force a deal in his second term West Bank will turn into Gaza.
    7. As Rumfeld said Libya was a side show compared to Syria, failed revolution allowed a key ally in the axis of evil to survive and crushed any change for another 30 years.
    8. After be told repeatedly not to enter Tripoli, they go in and open up all the caches of the crack units proliferation of weapons mainly into the hands of the resistance.
    9. A softer stance against Hamas and the Gaza blockade after the Turkey stunt, having to so "restraint" to the rocket fire. End result as with the north the arsenal in Gaza Strip is of a larger size than prior to Cast Lead and of better capability due to Tripoli.
    10. Failed revolution in 2009 in Iran and he wants to send what is left of the opposition out to be sluaghtered, so if sanction did bring down the regime (unlikely) there will be no moderates left and Iran as will Syria has secured another 30 years of rule.
    I could go on that is just the Mid East and Western Asia.

  • Spinoneone

    Add to that the fact that he is preparing another power grab, this one to be based on a new declaration of "national defense emergency." Of course, no one defines what that would entail or what the trigger(s) would be. If you don't believe me, just take a look at this Executive Order, issued 3/16/2012, which may appear to be innocuous, but most definitely is not. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/0

  • Dispozadaburka

    Speaking of the Tao of War…
    On March 26th, Obama is organizing prayer vigils for Obamacare (according to the NY TIMES) summoning organizations to "build support for the law seen as Obama's signature legislative achievement"
    (Dhimmi Tax)
    The organizers plan a prayer vigil. press conferences, and other events outside the Court when Justices hear arguments for three days beginning March 26th. Their goal…."to shape public opinion."

    On March 26th the nine Justices of the Supreme Court will hear oral argument on the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Law" cases. Their deliberations will include many of the key components of Liberty Counsel's lawsuit against Obamacare. The Courts ruling in June will impact every business, healthcare facility, health insurer, and most importantly every individual in American.
    For more information look at <alert@grassrootsactionalert.com>

  • mrbean

    The first day he was in the Oval Office, Obama removed a bust of a war hero Winston Churchill (the only foreigner to hold an official honorary American citizenship and sent it back to England. Obama is a gutless coward and a narcisstic egomaniac who thinks he can charm talk his way out of anything. To paraphrase Churchill: ""If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of victory. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, and only a small chance of survival." Muslims have no respect for we infidels or our western culture. Fine, then they should be made to greatly fear us.

    • tagalog

      Regarding Islam, history tells us two things: (1) Islam, in its mainstream expression, preaches hatred and conquest of all non-Muslims; and (2) Muslims, whether Arabs or otherwise, understand the application of successful violence against them and will submit to it once they are thoroughly beaten.

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

        It's what they have to do, if they want to be good muslims.

        9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

  • tagalog

    Obama says the international community has "mobilized against Assad." How exactly have they mobilized? When are their mobilized forces going to cross the Syrian border? Oh wait, maybe it's the blockade and sanctions imposed against Syria — oh wait, there aren't any. So what mobilization is Obama talking about? The one in his imagination?

    So, unlike Vietnam and like Libya, the civil war being fought entirely within the state borders of Syria are an event that calls for U.S. intervention? So how does the Syrian situation impact on U.S. security?

    We still have troops in Kosovo? They were deployed over there at some point during the Clinton administration, 1995 or so, wasn't it? They were going to be there for a year, as I recall Bill Clinton saying. And what's the status now, seventeen years later? Still there, boss…

  • steven L

    “The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim,” said Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit on Nile TV.

    • trickyblain

      Except no person has come forth with the video. Or any evidence, for that matter. And the one person ( a bloggers wife) who claims to have heard the statement while watching Egyptian TV (for some reason) does not speak a word of Arabic.

  • BLJ

    I am going to start referring to the Dear Leader as: Hussein Obama. The shortened name fits him like a glove.

  • Choi

    Actually TODAY's WARS are in large part courtesy of JIMMY-BOY CARTER who was MIDWIFE of THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN.

  • Flowerknife_us

    The Press never lets OUR side kill enough of the enemy to bring the conflict to any resolution. "peace keeping" between 2 sides still in conflict just drags the inevitable to a later date.

  • Schlomotion

    it is a weird lie of omission to say "Only Carter was the odd man out, though he did begin supplying the Afghan Mujahideen with weapons which helped bring us into the current conflict."

    That is an oddly hollow way to describe the way in which the Cold War was ended. Does the author feel as though the world would be a much better place if the Soviets had not gotten bogged down in Afghanistan at the US's pleasure?