Right to Opine

Good news! Obama has announced his administration’s national security strategy. We’re in for a rough ride.

The Obama administration has unveiled a new national security strategy, saying armed conflict should be a last resort when diplomacy is exhausted.

Newsflash: this isn’t a new policy. America’s policy has always been “diplomacy first, war last.” The Democrats’ favorite whipping boy didn’t just decide one day to roll over Iraq. Saddam Hussein spent the decade after the end of the first Gulf War violating the very conditions that ended the war and refusing to comply with U.N. WMD inspections. I probably shouldn’t bother mentioning the latter, as the U.N. is a uselessly corrupt entity, but it only added to the justification of war prompted by the former. Years of diplomacy by the U.S. and other nations had zero effect. War was, in fact, the last and necessary resort.

The document also advocates innovation, economic stability and prosperity as essential to America’s wider security aims.

The left always comes back to economics as the cause of all evil. There is a massive failure to recognize that the leaders and planners—as well as most of the terrorists themselves—of the 9/11 were the product of Saudi Arabian wealth, not poverty. Osama Bin Laden himself is from a very wealthy royal family—the son of privilege, not hardship. The threat of radical Islamic terrorism, which the administration has a wee bit of a problem acknowledging, has nothing whatsoever to do with poverty. “Economic stability and prosperity” are not going to make al Qaeda go away.

“To succeed, we must face the world as it is,” says the document, in what is seen as a formal break from the go-it-alone Bush era.

“The world as it is” is endangered by violent, radical Islam, against which only America and a few of her closest and bravest allies have stood tall. Please face it.

As for “go-it-alone,” the left appears to forget the many nations which joined America in both the Afghan and Iraqi wars, among them some of the best friends and staunchest allies any country could be honored to have. A president who has consistently insulted and mistreated our friends while cozying up to our critics would do well to remember that.

The Obama administration’s new doctrine also reiterates the Obama’s determination to try to engage with countries like Iran and North Korea, but warns that they face deepening isolation if they do not respond to international pressure to come clean on their controversial nuclear programmes.

Translation: he’s going to do a lot of talking and precious little else, while Iran—the world’s largest exporter and supporter of terrorism—forges ahead with its nuclear program. Diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy…BOOM!

Other key initiatives outlined in Mr Obama’s strategy include the dismantling of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Not new.

The document describes the security of Israel and peaceful Israeli and Palestinian states living side by side as among the main interests of the US.

Not new, though largely contradicted by his shameful treatment of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

“We are shifting from mostly direct exercise and application of power to a more sophisticated and difficult mix of indirect power and influence,” America’s top diplomat [Secretary of State Hillary Clinton] said.

Translation: he’s going to do a lot of talking and precious little else, while Iran—the world’s largest exporter and supporter of terrorism—forges ahead with its nuclear program. Diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy…BOOM!

In her speech, Mrs Clinton also reiterated that democracy, human rights and development remained central to American foreign policy.

Yes, while we continue to prop up the U.N. with billions of our hard-earned tax dollars while they elect terrorist states and egregious human rights violators to the Human Rights Council.

Earlier, John Brennan, Mr Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser, said the new strategy also explicitly recognised the threat posed by “individuals radicalised here at home”.

“We’ve seen individuals, including US citizens, armed with their US passport, travel easily to terrorist safe havens and return to America, their deadly plans disrupted by co-ordinated intelligence and law enforcement,” Mr Brennan added.

First, anyone who travels to a “terrorist safe haven” for training and indoctrination is not “radicalised here at home.” This is not home-grown terrorism, but evil imported from the radical Islamic world. But you can’t acknowledge that, can you?

Second, the thwarted plans of the most recent terrorists was not “disrupted by co-ordinated intelligence and law enforcement” in any way, shape, or form. Fort Hood? Successful attack by a radical Muslim. The Fruit-of-Kaboom bomber? Couldn’t get his panties to light. Times Square? A fortunate case of incompetence.

Bill Clinton did not mention the domestic terrorism issue in his 1998 strategy, despite the Oklahoma City bombing three years earlier, while George W Bush made only passing reference to the issue in his 2006 document.

That would be because the bombing of the A.P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City was the act of a lone nutjob. It was a completely isolated event rather than an ongoing existential threat.

In May this year, New York City police defused a car bomb parked in Times Square, one of the city’s busiest tourist areas.

Yes, but only because Shahzad screwed up and bought the wrong ingredients for his bomb.

The truth is that over the past year we’ve been very, very lucky. Hope that luck holds, because Obama’s new strategy is a recipe for disaster.

Armed thug invades home. Armed 80-year-old homeowner shoots and kills said thug. The perp probably thought he’d have an easier time of it, not just because of the occupants’ ages, but because…this happened in Chicago, where the homeowner wasn’t supposed to possess the handgun that saved his and his wife’s lives.

No charges have been filed against the homeowner, but Chicago currently has a statute outlawing the possession of handguns. Its legality is currently being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

A high-profile Chicago attorney has already stepped forward offering to represent the man pro bono if he faces charges for possessing a weapon.

“Self-defense isn’t just a right, it’s a duty,” said attorney Joel Brodsky. “If this man is prosecuted for saving his own life it’s not just a travesty, it’s justice turned inside out.”

Chicago’s Mayor Daley—and the rest of his gun-grabbing ilk—would rather have two innocent, elderly victims dead than allow them the ability to defend themselves in their own home.

The UK must be so proud of its ban on private ownership of handguns. How is an 89-year-old woman supposed to defend herself from an attack by a 28-year-old home invader? She can’t. She simply gets raped.

Repeat the leftist mantra: “Handguns are bad. They kill people.” Yeah, whatever. Just be honest about it. You hoplophobes would rather have society suffer atrocities than allow people to protect themselves from animals like this.

The Greek government is broke. No big news there, as it’s been a top international headline for months. Now there are major strikes planned for this week to protest the massive budget cuts required in order to right the sinking Greek ship of state. Who’s striking?

Government employees.

Clue: Government does not create wealth. Government siphons wealth off of its productive citizens and channels that money to people who don’t produce anything tangible. Some provide valuable services, e.g., the military, police, firemen, and (some) teachers. But none of the government’s employees actually produces anything that generates revenue. So, when the government is broke, there are only two options: increase taxes on the citizens who are productive, or cut pay for those who are not. In the case of Greece, there aren’t enough of the former to support the latter. Here in America we are moving all to quickly toward the same situation. There’s a lesson here somewhere.

A woman stabbed four people at a Target store in LA before an off-duty sheriff’s deputy stopped her. I, for one, am sick and tired of reading stories about people being stabbed by knives. It’s high time we banned private ownership of knives. All knives. They kill people.

The stabbing set off a stampede among customers, authorities said.

Well, duh. California has made it impossible for its residents to legally carry virtually any kind of weapon for self-defense. What do you expect? Of course they’re going to run in panic. Here in AZ, there’d have been at least five people within the next two aisles who’d have stopped her with their concealed handguns before that deputy even showed up.

The man who purchased the SUV used in the attempted bombing in New York’s Times Square this weekend was arrested at JFK Airport as he prepared to board a flight to Dubai. He is a naturalized U.S. citizen. His name is:

1. William O’Henry
2. Juan Martinez
3. Cheng Zhu
4. Faisal Shahzad

If you guessed 1-3 you’re a freaking idiot. There’s a very good reason to use racial/ethnic/national profiling for certain types of law enforcement work and for exercising extra scrutiny when granting immigrant visas. Can’t wait to see all the details on this cretin.

…with liberty and justice for all.

So ends the American Pledge of Allegiance. The concept of justice is deeply ingrained within the American mindset. We have always been, or aspired to be, a nation of just and fair law. Our Constitution guarantees equal treatment under the law and we strive, though imperfectly at times, to live up to that ideal. So important is this principle that it is enshrined in the form of Lady Justice—blind to the individual—at countless courthouses throughout the nation, including the very Supreme Court itself.

We are also, however, a deeply religious people. While the principle of justice can certainly be found in our Judaeo-Christian heritage and philosophy, there are other important ideals to be found therein as well. One in particular is at odds with justice: compassion. Christians in particular often struggle with this apparent dichotomy. Christ embodied compassion—feeding the hungry, healing the sick, forgiving sins. His was an example we must emulate. Too often forgotten, or simply ignored, is the fact that He also personally meted out punishment—most famously when He violently drove swindlers out of the temple. How can we then, as a society, reconcile compassion and justice?

This debate rages fiercely today in the arena of illegal immigration. Many argue that the majority of illegal immigrants are simply desparately poor people who see no hope in their homelands and are attracted to America by the prospect of a better life—and are willing to work hard for it. Personally, I believe this to be true. Despite its flaws, America is still the greatest land of opportunity on the planet—a refuge from tyranny, persecution, poverty, and hopelessness. The argument concludes that, because of their plight, we should show compassion and allow them to stay. This, unfortunately, is a fallacious understanding of compassion.

Consider the bigger picture—the larger consequences of such “compassion.” In this instance, to show compassion—as it is depicted—is to necessarily introduce injustice and incompassion. The massive influx of illegal immigrants across our borders places an increasing and unfair burden on taxpayers—our law-abiding residents—in the form of social services, medical care, and educational expenses. At some point this burden becomes too great, and we see its effects most clearly in overloaded school systems and the growing number of county and municipal hospitals which are closing emergency rooms or declaring bankruptcy. More importantly, allowing illegals to stay creates injustice toward two very important groups: those who have immigrated legally, and those who are waiting—in increasingly long lines—their turn to do so. Why should illegal immigrants be granted the same, or even similar, priviliges as those who follow the law? This is inherently both unjust and incompassionate toward the latter.

Compassion certainly has a valuable place in our society, but it must not come at the expense of justice—of fairness. Our hearts cannot be blind to the individual, but the law must be or it has no meaning. Compassion should justly be shown to the law-abiding rather than the law-breaking.

National media have been in a complete tizzy regarding Arizona’s new illegal immigration law, formally known as SB1070. You can see more about the debate elsewhere. What’s truly relevant is what this law actually does and does not do. (Take the time to read it. Please!)

This law does *not* give state or local police any new legal authority. Local police are already authorized to enforce federal law. If that were not the case, our police forces would not be able to use RICO to go after organized crime. But that happens all the time and noone protests—except people whose last names end in Bonanno. (Yes, they eventually involve the FBI and federal prosecutors, but that’s often only after local actions have already been taken. Oddly, noone is complaining that state laws often overlap federal laws re mob activity, drug trafficking, child pornography, etc.) Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been exercising this authority for years, and keeps getting reelected and reelected and…by healthy margins.

This law *does* make enforcement of existing federal law mandatory for local LEOs, whereas until now it was optional. The requirement for foreign nationals to carry documentary identification on their persons is *federal* law. Already there. Gotta have it. When I lived in Germany it was no different. I had to carry ID that showed I was there legally. Those evil, racist Germans. Oh, wait. That might be a legitimate complaint. Never mind. But the left loves France. We had to carry ID to enter France. So there.

This law *does* establish state penalties for both illegal aliens and employers thereof. Why? Federal authorities aren’t enforcing the laws already on the books, and the results are frightening. (Google “Chandler Rapist.” He operated in my neighborhood, attacking girls aged 12-15, and raped three young girls from Andersen Junior High…less than a mile from my home. I have a 12-year-old daughter. Do the math.) If they were, these sections would not be necessary. The entire statute wouldn’t be necessary. It should be noted, however, that the law also provides clear defenses for entrapment in order to protect employers from cooked-up stings. Please read it, Sheriff Joe, and make sure you follow it.

The proof, as they say, will be in the pudding. Jan Brewer has tasked the AZ Peace Officers Standards and Training Board with drafting a training curriculum which will teach officers how to implement the law without violating civil rights. What they come up with in the next 90 days will tell us a lot about how serious we are about enforcing this law. Race is obviously out. But “Mexican” isn’t a race. In case you haven’t noticed, Mexicans come in all shades of color (due primarily to the uneven influx of Spanish, Austrian and French DNA; thank you, colonialism). But someone who, when stopped for speeding, can’t produce a driver’s license and has, say, a funny accent? That’s a choice based on nationality, not race, and would likely stand up in court if argued logically. It remains to be seen whether AZPOST will deliver.

Want to protest? How about protesting a federal government that is more interested in pandering to La Raza than in keeping its own citizens safe?

Two Democratic Representatives from Chicago have asked Illinois Governor Pat Quinn to send in the Illinois National Guard to help fight violent crime in the city. Yep. That handgun ban is working really well, ain’t it?

Disarm the populace then send in the troops. The left’s recipe for “freedom.”

A friend recently posed an interesting question. What would Jesus be considered most, by His life and teachings: a Capitalist or a Socialist? After pondering the issue a bit, I don’t think He’d have fallen into either camp entirely.

Capitalism is driven strictly by the profit motive. Christ spoke rather often about the problems brought about by the love of money. Not wealth itself—God consistently blessed people throughout the Bible with wealth—but the worship of it. Money cannot be our ultimate goal.

Socialism is driven by government control of economic behavior. Altruism becomes involuntary, as the productive are forced to help their neighbors through taxation. Jesus made it clear that God isn’t interested in enforced obedience, e.g., with His frequent criticism of the legalistic Pharisees. God is after the heart.

So neither system aligns well with Jesus’ teaching. More likely He would want us to embrace the best of each and reject the worst. Let’s briefly examine the good and bad in each system.

Capitalism: Consider the parable of the wicked servant. Given a sum of money, he does nothing with it for fear of losing it, and is condemned, while the servants who increase their money are praised. God wants us to make the most of our talents. That would include, for those with the ability, creation of wealth provided said wealth is not the end—as in capitalism—but is used for good purposes.

Socialism: The desire to help those in need is not only admirable but requisite per Jesus’ teaching. Parables such as the good Samaritan and the sheep and goats speak directly to the subject. Yet virtually every time Christ came in contact with the Pharisees, who were caught up in strict rule-following, He denounced them because though their actions may have appeared right, their motives were wrong. They exerted severe control over their fellow Jews through an intricate system of laws. Socialism regulates “generous” behavior through force of law, but Christ came to free us from the burden of law.

Embrace the good in each system; reject the bad. Be a productive member of society including, where possible, generating wealth. But don’t let wealth become your god. Use what you have—be it time, talents, or money—to help those around you who are less fortunate. Bless others with whatever it is with which God has blessed you, and do it with love and a spirit of generosity rather than out of obligation.