Posted by
Ogbunwezeh on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 6:25:07 AM
When
someone murders logic to achieve insular ideological ends, it is siesta time
for rationality. Many conservatives praising Sowell’s neotonic mutilations of
logic and ad hominems in his article titled “ Disaster in the Making, of
Tuesday, July 28, 2009, http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/07/28/disaster_in_the_making
are akin to the ones who have never left the confines of the United States to gauge
the feelings of the rest of the world.
These guys
should be in the know that the world has changed radically since September 11th,
2001. And not to realise that is a historical crime, because those with such a
mindset are primed and condemned to repeat history.
They want Obama to bomb Iran into submission, forgetting that the
republicans tied the US
military down in Iraq and Afghanistan,
in a historical gaffe that history will forever condemn.
Obama is
being a wise president. History has shown that only a stupid Commander-in-chief
would fight wars on three theatres.
Hitler, with his blitzkrieg tactics and the
strongest army in the Europe of his time, never
succeeded in doing that, even though he had the whole armada of German
efficiency conscripted to his service. Invading Russia
in winter, fighting the British and allied forces in the Mediterranean theatre,
and keeping occupied Europe in his leash, was
the three-pronged recipe for the fall of his evil empire.
At the
moment, America is tied down
in Afghanistan.
Iraq is not a finished job. The CIA
and FBI are tied down sifting terrorist online chatter. And these war vultures
want Obama to open another theatre of war in Iran. These people are really smart
in deceiving themselves.
Attacking Iran at this time will be the
beginning of the end for the American civilization. Ancient Rome did the same; stretching her highly
mobile legion so thin, that defending the Empire itself became a mission
impossible. It was only a matter of time before the vandals came knocking at
the gates. And the empire expired.
The only
guys that would gain in a war with Iran
are the war-profiteers of every land and clime, as well as the United States military-industrial
complex. That is all. At such an event, ordinary Americans would be once more
compelled to yield their sons to spill their blood in furtherance of the
consolidated stupidities of war hawks; that armed with historical amnesia, intellectual
laziness, and conservative blindness, are so very adept in overestimating what
military might, could achieve in the world of today.
Moreso, I wonder
when dialogue became elevated to a cardinal sin. It seems that in his bid to
advertise his disagreements with Obama’s policies, he is so very fluid in
jettisoning cardinal virtues that have mapped human beings out as civilized. In
the world of today, anyone who pursues dialogue is a sensible and wise head. The
biblical Solomon tried it out. It worked until his war-monger of a son got on
the throne to whip the Israelites with scorpions. It then became “to thy tents,
oh Israel”.
The kingdom was broken to pieces. This may have informed Christ promising the beatific vision to those who make peace: "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called sons of God".
Making peace is like bringing heaven upon the earth. In the theologies of some greats like Augustine of Hippo, the very first character of heaven is peace. That explains the angels after intoning the first lines of the "Gloria"(Glory to God in the highest) on that cold winter dawn as the Christ was born, directed the second verse of "peace" to all men of goodwill.
Dialogue ensures peace. We should never be so
very fluid to bomb those who disagree with us. Such a mindset has left our world so very insecure as it would ordinarily have been. Obama’s pursuance of dialogue with
Iran
should be encouraged by all, and not be allowed to be vilified by those who stand to profit from
fighting wars.
In wars, there are no winners. Only losers!
The hawks
should give peace a chance! Wars should never be the first option on the table.
It should be the last resort, when all other avenues for peace have failed. It
has not shown itself to be the case in the case of Iran, as Mr. Sowell would have
readers believe. Opining that is a miscarriage of facts.
As a further basis for his critique of Obama's policies, Sowell was
being simplistic and smart by half, in opining that group identity politics is
the factor, which underwrote political problems in places like Fiji, Nigeria,
India, Rwanda, etc.
I would sincerely urge
Sowell to go read his history well. Reducing the socio-political problems
attending complex societies like the ones listed above, and the trajectories of
their social evolution to “group politics” is simply an embezzlement of the
facts. Most of these societies where societies embroiled in an unreconciled dynamic consequent on their encounter with the onslaughts of foreign powers, colonialism or colonial resettlements. Many of the cultures in those societies were ripped asunder by these encounters, to the extent that these experiences dog their reaction formations to many western oriented political blueprints.
Take Africa for instance, where the exploitative impress of colonialism in one swoop converted fellow citizens of one ethnic nationality into strange bedfellows and citizens of different countries. To that end, every broken relationship at that level seeks union with its parts. And when this brews together in a political embrace, which includes significant other nationalities, one naturally oscillates to firmer territories nearest to his primal acquaintance, which many colonial powers encouraged to be the tribal base, as was the case in Rwanda.
Moreover, politics when not encouraging group identities, serve equally
to create them. Political parties consist of individuals who identify
themselves with the aspirations and identities of a group. Hoisting this kind
of circular argument as a scaffold to criticize Obama’s administration policies
is so very wooden. Mr. Sowell should find better basis for his critiques, as the
ones submitted in this piece, reeks of unvarnished affront to logic.