Freedom Is Not For Everyone:

Freedom Is Not For Everyone:

When are my Democratic friends going to realize that if they are really against war, if they wish to drastically increase the chances of world peace, freedom is the key? When are they going to admit to it?

Do we have to debate for 50 more years on what to do about tyranny? Do we have the time? Are those that have sworn to destroy us getting stronger? Do my Democratic friends even know the names of the groups that want to destroy us?

If we believe Ward Churchill, we were attacked because of our policies. I submit instead, and I’m getting this directly from the horse’s mouth, they want to kill us because we are infidels. The same people that want to kill us want to destroy another Democracy, Israel.

My Democratic friends believe that we are not at war; they believed that a dumb, unsophisticated, arrogant President and Big Oil have caused all of this. They are convinced that there is no real danger. We only have to talk to “them”.

That was tried before World War I and World War II. Diplomacy was tried with Iraq for 12 years. There are many societies in history that have been destroyed by the naïve belief that they could talk to people that wanted to destroy them.

My Democratic friends don’t believe that these Muslims really hate us. Similarly that is why America was so surprised that the Japanese attacked us.

Did our evil corporations and the United States government cause World War II because of it’s trade policies, or was it because Japan like Germany was a tyranny and would have attacked us anyway? Our policies might have changed when we were attacked, but I fail to find historical evidence to support the reasoning it was why we were attacked? Germany and Japan each had already attacked other countries before us. The tyrannical Arab Muslim countries have attacked almost every country prior to attacking us. They even attack each other.

How many years did it take for the people of Europe to realize that freedom trumps every argument? There were revolutions in England and France. We freed Germany and Japan.

I’ve yet to hear an example supported by history, that has ever shown freeing a people from tyranny has destabilized the relationship between that country and other free countries. On the other hand I’ve found a great deal of historical evidence that allowing tyranny eventually produces war.

How do my Democratic friends debate our right to insist on free societies? I’ve heard them say, “Maybe freedom isn’t for everyone, maybe they don’t want freedom.”

Historical writings leading up to our own Civil War show the same logic applied by many Americans towards slavery or 100 years later, their right to vote.

“The slaves don’t need freedom, they don’t know no better.”

If we look back in history we come to find that Lincoln, another Republican, was called arrogant for freeing the slaves.

What I find ironic is that the Democrats who prided themselves in bringing ‘enlightened’ government to this country with ‘progressive’ thinking now spend their time defending 100 year old ideas like this.

“Freedom is not for everyone”