Google

Saturday, April 16, 2005

The Team Europe Cheerleader

Yesterday Jeff Feffer decided it was somebody else's turn to drive the bus. It's amazing how delusional people can get when they forget that we had two World Wars the last time Europe decided to drive. Here are some of the jucier bits of lunacy for you....

What "job" was she talking about? We most definitely were not getting the job done in Iraq, I pointed out. In recent years, it's Europe not the United States that's been on the right side of the major foreign policy issues of our time, be it Europe's objections to the Iraq War or its diplomatic approach toward resolving the conflicts with Iran and North Korea -- an approach that is far more likely to succeed than American military oomph.


Do people actually believe this over there? You think diplomacy with someone who kills millions of his own people is suddenly going to roll over and stop his aggression just because other nations ask him too? That's amazing. Especially taking into consideration the progress the UN made during the 11 years after the Persian Gulf war. Brilliant work there on the part of diplomacy.

"As for taking care of their own people, the social system in Europe -- the kind that ensured the job security, high-quality education, crime-free streets, and comparative lack of poverty that friend so clearly admired in Switzerland -- was clearly superior to anything the average American could hope for."



Thought I'd take the opportunity here, to point out that Switzerland's government is more pro-gun than even the U.S. And from what I understand they are even less socialist in ideals than we are. They require every household to have a well-maintained machine gun over there.

"While the resentment of U.S. power and domination was the same as ever, according to Gordon, the students were no longer willing to give the United States its usual pass for its excesses. What's more, they were only too happy to contemplate the alternatives that Gordon offered. "And they would say, yeah, we'd take China. Germany? Yeah, Germany is fine. France? Yeah, that would be good," he said. "They were looking at me like, well, of course, we'd rather have those countries more powerful than the United States."



I laughed at this. We'll start with France. When was the last time France ever successfully defended herself, let alone actually did anything abroad worth mentioning--unless they were tagging along on one of our expeditions. Fact of the matter is, France has no muscle to flex, and like it or not, you have to be able to back up what you say with force when needed.

Germany is the only one out of the three mentioned that actually has any potential to be a global source of rational leadership. We've all seen what can happen when Germany focuses it's resources toward a war machine too. Their mechanical capabilities are one of best in the world. But as of late, they seem to have little ambition toward anything outside the EU. There's something to be said for that as well, don't get me wrong.

China. China is the "sleeping dragon." Anyone in the U.S. who actually knows anything about what's really going on, fears China more than any other nation in the world. They have the resources, the technology, the manpower, and the capital to rival the U.S. militarily, if they chose to. And that's a scary proposition, considering the differences in ideologies that exist between the two countries. If China ever decides to stir from its slumber (some say it's a "when" not an "if") we're all in trouble. And if you think it's a bad idea to have America's ideals of democracy behind the wheel of the bus, you'll be wishing you never had such thoughts if China is driving.

"The most astonishing fact revealed by the new poll is that 34 percent of Americans agree that Europe should be running the show. Let me repeat this: one-third of Americans want Brussels, not Washington, to be calling the shots on the global arena."


and then....

"While the current American leadership certainly has a martial disposition, it seems that virtually everyone else -- the majority of Americans included -- is weary of Washington playing globo-cop..."


At this point, I'm fairly sure this guy is on crack. When did 34% become a majority?
And just to counter that point anyway, I'd be willing to bet that most of that 34% couldn't tell you the difference between socialism and capitalism, and quite possibly couldn't tell you what country Brussels is in.

"It is conceivable that, in another four years, Hillary Clinton or some other vaguely palatable Democrat will paint the White House blue and put the French back into French fries. But it will take a long time to undo the damage the neo-cons have done to the United States' standing in the world -- and the damage America has done to the world. By all means hang in there for Hillary. As for me, I'm with the 34 percent of Americans rooting for Team Europe. "


*shiver* That just gives me the willies. Anyway, let's all take a minute to remember what got us into this predicament to begin with. The Persian Gulf War ended in the early 90's and the U.N. started in with their mandates and weapons inspectors in Iraq. We decided then that we could get by alright with trying to keep Saddam Hussein on a leash. During the 11 years after the end of the Gulf War, Hussein showed a blatant disregard of the U.N. and their meaningless mandates. I say meaningless because after seeing mandate after mandate after mandate being tossed aside, the U.N. continually wanted more and more talking, and absolutely no consequences for Iraq. All the while Hussein continued the mass-murder of people groups who were at odds with his Baath Party. We appealed to the U.N. time and again to actually DO something instead of huddle together and talk about more talking. Time and again that request was denied. We here in the United States generally hold to the principle that if you want something done, do it yourself.

And that's exactly what we did. Like it or not, you Europeans were given the chance to help out and take a turn at the driver's seat. You chose to fall asleep at the wheel. We in turn, simply decided to take another bus.

I make no mention here of any supposed connection to Al-Queda or the existence or non-existence of WMDs. The facts are so muddled now with those angles that I will not even venture to decipher what's fact from fiction anymore. The simple facts are, the United Nations did nothing to enforce the resolutions they imposed in the first place on Iraq.

Were there other reasons that played into this mess for going to war? You bet. But the enforcement of the resolutions should have been enough, let alone the genocide that was happening on a daily basis there.

And if you want to talk about trying to be in the driver's seat, why don't we ask France, Germany and Russia the REAL reason they wanted to keep Hussein's dictatorship in Iraq in power. They just might reveal themselves to be a bit more capitalistic than they claim to be.

4 comments:

Mad Mike said...

Your comments about Switzerland's gun laws are a little misleading.

Myth: Switzerland proves that high gun-ownership doesn't increase murder.

Fact: Switzerland also has strict gun control laws.

Summary

Switzerland has compulsory gun ownership for military age males, yet it has a far lower murder rate than the U.S. But Switzerland also has far stricter gun control laws. Even so, Switzerland has the second highest rate of handgun ownership and handgun murders in the industrialized world, after the U.S.

Argument

Switzerland is frequently cited as an example of a country with high gun ownership and a low murder rate. However, Switzerland also has a high degree of gun control, and actually makes a better argument for gun regulation than gun liberalization.

Switzerland keeps only a small standing army, and relies much more heavily on its militia system for national defense. This means that most able-bodied civilian men of military age keep weapons at home in case of a national emergency. These weapons are fully automatic, military assault rifles, and by law they must be kept locked up. Their issue of 72 rounds of ammunition must be sealed, and it is strictly accounted for. This complicates their use for criminal purposes, in that they are difficult to conceal, and their use will be eventually discovered by the authorities.

As for civilian weapons, the cantons (states) issue licenses for handgun purchases on a "must issue" basis. Most, but not all, cantons require handgun registration. Any ammunition bought on the private market is also registered. Ammunition can be bought unregistered at government subsidized shooting ranges, but, by law, one must use all the ammunition at the range. (Unfortunately, this law is not really enforced, and gives Swiss gun owners a way to collect unregistered ammunition.) Because so many people own rifles, there is no regulation on carrying them, but 15 of the 26 cantons have regulations on carrying handguns.

Despite these regulations, Switzerland has the second highest handgun ownership and handgun murder rate in the industrialized world.

Publius II said...

Actually, I think your counter-argument is more misleading than my original statement. I could be wrong, but the firearms themselves are not required to be locked up - only the ammunition. And as you said, ammunition is readily available, but not just at ranges. Ammo is sold at local gun shops as well. The Swiss people, in fact, are encouraged to regularly train on their own with their firearms.

Your statement that they have the second highest handgun ownership and second highest handgun murder rate is only a statement of common sense, not any sort of proving argument for anything.

If I told you that India has the highest population of Bengal Tigers and they also have highest death by tiger rate in the world, what would you say? You would say, "well that makes sense, it's a logical conclusion."

So I beg you to compare Switzerland's overall violent crime rate to the rest of the world, or even the industrialized world if you wish.

Mad Mike said...

OK here you go hope this pastes ok.

Percent of households with a handgun, 1991 (1)

United States 29%
Switzerland 14
Finland 7
Germany 7
Belgium 6
France 6
Canada 5
Norway 4
Europe 4
Australia 2
Netherlands 2
United Kingdom 1

Handgun murders (1992) (2)

Handgun 1992 Handgun Murder
Country Murders Population Rate (per 100,000)
-----------------------------------------------------------
United States 13,429 254,521,000 5.28
Switzerland 97 6,828,023 1.42
Canada 128 27,351,509 0.47
Sweden 36 8,602,157 0.42
Australia 13 17,576,354 0.07
United Kingdom 33 57,797,514 0.06
Japan 60 124,460,481 0.05

Mad Mike said...

Sorry missed the bit that said about the ovall violent crime rate, I saw only mention about guns in relation to the swiss nothing about overall violent crime.