Michael Moore

(19 March)
Immediately prior to Mr. O’s speech to the West Point graduating class, the press had reported that he was going to announce an increase in the US troops deployed in Afghanistan (which he did). Hollyweird legend and renown world problem solver Michael Moore immediately issued an “open letter to the president”. In that letter he said in part: “Do you really want to be the new "war president"? If you go to West Point tomorrow night and announce that you are increasing, rather than withdrawing, the troops in Afghanistan, you are the new war president, pure and simple.”

I’ve never really liked the term “War President” being used to indicate someone who prolonged a war, as it’s somewhat unfair to whoever happens to be sitting in the oval office when the shooting starts. After all, wars are generally something that takes quite awhile, often years, to get started, and a long time to end as well. The great pacifist Woodrow Wilson gave us WW I, but that can’t be blamed on him, even though his pacifist policies did help haul us into what was a purely European war.) The great socialist FDR gave us WW II, and that one can’t be entirely blamed on the President either, but his foreign policies finally made it inevitable. “Give ‘em Hell” Harry Truman gave us the war in Korea through a few foreign policy errors, and some erroneous high hopes on the part of the opposition. The “Cold War” can only be blamed on Joe Stalin’s intrangencies, even though several US Presidents bore the brunt of it, and they could rightly be called “War Presidents”. Vietnam exploded in our faces because of a good many blunders on the part of LBJ, yet another great socialist. George Bush the Elder tried to maintain the faltering status quo in the mid-east and gave us Desert Storm, along with Saddam’s “Mother of all Wars” fizzle. Smarting under that perceived “Insult to Islam” (we won the war); bin Laden gave us 9-11 and a lesson in international terrorism. Somewhat upset over that turn of events, George the younger kicked over the traces and sent our military romping and stomping all over Afghanistan and Iraq. Barry got lucky in that he just happened to inherit an ongoing conflict instead of having to start his own.

After raging on about the war a bit longer, Michael came up with this gem: “We the people still love you. We the people still have a sliver of hope. But we the people can't take it anymore. We can't take your caving in, over and over, when we elected you by a big, wide margin of millions to get in there and get the job done. What part of "landslide victory" don't you understand?” Just what has Mr. Moore been smoking!? “We love him”!? The name “Barrack Obama” is just about as popular at a TEA party meeting as is that of Sarah Palin at a White House staff meeting! As to a landslide victory, Mr. O wasn’t that far ahead at the count, so apparently the definition has changed considerably over the last year or so. Besides, I understand that the Olympic committee is going to take the gold medal away from Lindsey Vonn, and give it to Mr. Obama instead, as he’s about the only one who can go downhill faster than she does! I realize that Michael lives in the make-believe world of Hollywood, but he really should take a look at the real world before he starts giving advice to Washington.

Michael’s letter went on with; “And with that you will do the worst possible thing you could do -- destroy the hopes and dreams so many millions have placed in you. With just one speech tomorrow night you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics. You will teach them what they've always heard is true -- that all politicians are alike.” My comment to that is “Sorry guy, it’s all about power after all, and yes, politicians are all the same anywhere in the world, despite the platitudes.” The only difference is in how they go about accumulating their power, and what they later do with it.

Michael (along with most of the loony left) makes the mistake of assuming that wars can be turned on and off like a light switch. He also assumes that we’re fighting this war to win something. Rather, we’re presently fighting to prevent an Islamic war from spreading all over the globe, and threatening our very existence. What he does not mention, or more likely doesn’t understand, is that if NATO withdrew from Afghanistan right now, we’d leave behind a messy situation that would make the end of the Vietnam War look like child’s play! It’s not for us to walk away, but rather Islam itself has to clarify its position and solve the problem. Does it represent a religious ideology, or is it a socio-political ideology that demands the blood of non-believers? All of the above? Their aims and ambitions are somewhat confusing to the rest of us, and must be made clear to the world society. If they want peace, Islam has the responsibility of alleviating the fears of our global society, which is rightly feeling threatened.

And no, war is not the solution to any problem, it’s but a reflection of that problem. Wars begin when the politicians fail. The solution comes about when the war ends, and the politicians finally decide how to move forward. The men with guns can do nothing more than expend their young lives in buying time for the politicians and diplomats to decide how they’re going to handle things. Your mistake Michael, is to believe that having one of the participants walk away automatically settles the issue, and everyone can then live happily ever after in some pipe-dream utopian world.