Blog 4 History

Welcome to Francis Rose and the Civil War Network website it looks like it is off to a good start and features a nice interview with James M. McPherson. Congrats.

The following is from The Objective Standard, a magazine that I have not read a lot of, but am starting to read more. The author of this article is Dr. John David Lewis, who is a Senior Research Scholar in History and Classics at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center, Bowling Green State University, in Ohio. He holds a Ph.D. in classics from the University of Cambridge, has taught at the University of London, and is a fellow of the Anthem Foundation for Objectivist Scholarship. His background allows him to approach, I think, his subject from a point of view both intellectually and politically armed to write with authority and objectivity.

His article, which I partially quote, deals with the political and social variables that led to and “allowed” Hitler and his war machine to devastate Europe, and murder millions of Jews. There are never any easy answers and sticking to murky “greyish” areas and not being able to see the black and white nature of an issue, can lead to catastrophic events.

“The Balm for a Guilty Conscience”: Moral Paralysis, Appeasement, and the Causes of World War II
John David Lewis

Author’s note: This is the second of three articles for The Objective Standard dealing with military history and its (in this case implicit) lessons for the modern day. The third article will consider the lessons of the American victory over Japan in World War II. These articles draw from my forthcoming book, Nothing Less than Victory: Military Offense and the Lessons of History from the Greco-Persian Wars to World War II (Princeton University Press).

Imagine that an asteroid is heading toward the earth at thousands of miles per hour. While it is still far away, a small force can change its direction a few degrees and avert a catastrophic collision. But as it moves closer to the earth, the force needed to divert it multiplies exponentially, until only a massive explosion can prevent disaster. It would be one thing if men did not know of the asteroid, or saw it coming and were impotent to act. But suppose they had the bombs and the rockets needed to deflect it—but refused to do so because of “international opinion,” a desire to spend the money on “social programs,” or a claim that we must not interfere in the comet’s own “natural” movements? This describes, in essence, Europe’s drift into World War II.

During the 1930s, men stood at a cusp in time, a point of momentous decision, watching the growing power of Germany under its screaming, malevolent leader. Their failure to confront Germany—and the devastating consequences of that failure—demonstrate the power of ideas, both to motivate aggressors and to undercut defenders from taking the actions needed to protect freedom.

On September 1, 1939, twenty years and nine months after the armistice of November 11, 1918, that had ended World War I, millions of Germans obeyed their Leader’s call for a war of national aggrandizement and launched a new slaughter across Europe. The attack on Poland was the climax of five years of military buildup by Germany, which had followed fifteen years of feverish international diplomacy, economic transfers, and political agreements. Most European leaders had worked fervently to avoid a new carnage. They fell prostrate before Hitler’s “Lightning War.” The deepest reasons why so many Germans joined the armies of the Nazis, hailed their leader, followed their orders, and drank to their war cannot be found in reasons as shallow as economic stagnation, political dissatisfaction, or bad feelings about the last war. These factors were present in many nations that did not attack. In essence, the Germans were in the grip of a philosophic pathology, a set of ideas that told them it was morally good to sacrifice themselves and others to the all-powerful State, the Race, and the Leader. The power of these ideas in German culture was expressed in the mass support that the Nazis enjoyed among “Hitler’s Willing Executioners.”1

But another force, outside of Germany, also pushed the world toward blitzkrieg and Auschwitz. This force too was a set of ideas—ideas in the minds of Germany’s opponents—which prevented England and France from confronting Hitler when they could. In the mid-1930s, British politicians in particular were restrained from action, not by an incapacity to act, but by a lack of will. Certain moral ideals—which rose to the cultural forefront after the horrendous experience of World War I—conditioned British politicians and their constituents to become virtual allies of Germany in its drive to regain its status as a powerful nation. The result was a paralysis in the western European nations, which disarmed them as surely as any bomb and allowed Hitler to build up his forces to the point where his ability to fight exceeded that of his enemies.

Read more…

O.K. I live in Colorado and Illegal Immigration is a hot topic. First, I am not anti-immigration. We are a country of immigrants. However, we are first and foremost a country of laws. They have broken the law, and our lack of intervention has created this situation. Second, I am not a supporter of the right- wing redneck “lets kick ‘em all out.” Not really an option. But the new immigration legislation is a slap in the face to all intelligent U.S. Citizens. You should watch this video, educate yourself on the new bill, and then contact your senator if you so desire and I hope you do!

Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan . . . The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost . . . Always we will remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory . . Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces — with the unbounding determination of our people — we will gain the inevitable triumph — so help us God..

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Dec. 8, 1941

Today should be a day of reflection. For, as we know, Pearl Harbor is no longer the worst attack on American soil… But you would not know it when speaking/listening to some…

It is no longer a time when the bad guys wear the black hats and the good guys wear the white hats. The enemy is elusive and uses our weaknesses against us. That is, of course, unless one does not beleive we face an enemy other than ourselves. I wonder if today we have the fortitude to be the “American people [who] in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory…”

It’s important to understand that there is not just a single fraudulent Reuters photograph, nor even only one kind of fraudulent photograph. There are in fact dozens of photographs whose authenticity has been questioned, and they fall into four distinct categories.

Read more:
http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/ – This excellent link came from Mark Grimsley’s blog.

I’m sure everyone has heard about or read Washington Post Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks’ report, suggesting Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of its rockets in order to win the PR War. At first I thought to suggest such a thing was pure lunacy. But the more I considered it… well, desperate times… desperate measures. Afterall, there is no denying that Hezbollah is purposely placing its civilians in harm’s way. Israel had to do something to counteract the shots it’s taking in the PR War.

It seems the role of the non-combatant has indeed changed because of the emerging PR War that has to be won.

Does the media realize it is the instigator in all this? Probably not.

Here’s the main part of the transcript:

HOWARD KURTZ: Hold on, you’re suggesting that Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of it’s fire power, essentially for PR purposes, because having Israeli civilians killed helps them in the public relations war here?

RICKS: Yes, that’s what military analysts have told me.

KURTZ: That’s an extraordinary testament to the notion that having people on your own side killed actually works to your benefit in that nobody wants to see your own citizens killed but it works to your benefit in terms of the battle of perceptions here.

RICKS: Exactly. It helps you with the moral high ground problem, because you know your operations in Lebanon are going to be killing civilians as well.

For more:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/06/rs.01.html

More useful reading:
http://www.gulfnews.com/opinion/columns/region/10058387.html
http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson080406.html
http://lebanesebloggers.blogspot.com/
http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/28864.html

Joyce Appleby and Gary Hart have written an interesting article posted on the History News Network this week. In it they argue that we face a constitutional crisis never seen before. In the piece they state that, “Bush has insisted that there can be no limits to the power of the commander-in-chief in time of war.”   Their position, it seems, really is the result of one party holding the House and the Senate, which the Republicans do, as well as the presidency.  Therefore these checks and balances really are negated, but legally and by the vote of the American people. This is more a case of political dominance than some kind of overriding of the constitution. They also say during their argument that “the ‘war on terror’ is more a metaphor than a fact. Terrorism is a method, not an ideology; terrorists are criminals, not warriors.”  Terrorism is indeed a method, but its very existence depends on fanatical ideologies to sustain it. Also, if those who employ those methods do so in a time of war, than they are indeed soldiers and are committing acts of war.  The real issue is whether you believe we are really at war with Islamic fundamentalists or not. You decide.