Is the US fascist? Or just Republicans?

Jacko writes:
“Bearing in mind that I do not feel the US is a fascist state as of yet, I do find it amazing how accurate the above is in defining the political actions, aspirations and machinations of a certain president and his cohorts in all things neoconservative. In fact, every single aspect listed above is incorporated into our nation’s past 6 years, and so much of it at the orchestration of the neocons.”

http://www.madison.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=251668&highlight=#251668

We all have a world-view and rational paradigm from which we approach any issue, and while attempting to cast himself as a reasonable and “non-partisan” moderate, Jacko nevertheless clearly reveals his own particular sharp leanings.

While one may certainly make a valid argument that certain characteristics of fascism are frequently incorporated into the American body politic, it is ludicrous to imply that such aspects are only characteristic of actions and positions taken by those of a political and social perspective that is generally defined as either Republican or conservative – neo or otherwise – or that such interpretations of fascism are limited to either the past 6 years, or to any previous period of a Republican presidency, or for that matter, a Republican political majority.

To turn a phrase, what motivation would a political liberal or Democrat have in portraying either Republicans or conservative views as inherently “fascist”?

Post-war reconstruction: Iraq and Japan

Hindsight is always 20/20 or better, especially in war, or in any difficult endeavor.

In retrospect, it may indeed have proven a wiser and more effective course to retain as much as possible of the old Iraqi military, police, and civil bureacracy, as was done in Japan after WWII.

Unlike Japan, however, those institutions in Iraq did not so much “cement” the population, with the notable exception of course of the Sunni Baathist minority.

For the vast majority, of Shia and Kurds, the existing structures “held things together” mostly through oppressive force, brutality, and intimidation.

In the aftermath, the daunting task of “vetting” existing officials, in order to weed out the ones who retained loyalties to the old regime and the old ideologies, led to the decision to simply “fire everyone”, and start over by taking applications.

It would have been like keeping the Nazis in charge of the concentration camps after taking Berlin, on the basis that “they” at least knew how to run the camps, and would keep the prisoners from running amuck.

Islamo-fascism: No apologies – calling a spade a spade ….

Mike writes:
“What is an ‘Islamo-fascist’? Which Islamic fascist state are you referring to when you use this term?” –MikeCannon; WDH Forum

Mike asks an excellent question and, presuming for the time being that he is actually interested in a serious answer, and didn’t just write the words rhetorically in a petty effort to trivialize and demagogue a serious issue, I’ll address it.

In response first to the second part of his question, regarding the presumed necessary existence of a fascist “state”, this once again reflects a degree of “WWII thinking”, and it’s nature as a formal “conventional war” against an established, nationalistic state, with a more or less homogeous citizenry, a formal centralized government, and clearly defined geographical borders.

In contrast, the present conflict is characterized by it’s “asymmetric” nature, in which the formal military and political structures of one or more distinct nation-states are pitted against a more loosely-organized, militarily inferior, trans-national guerilla-style force, that is organized around and draws it’s identity from an ideology or cause, rather than on the basis of a geographical identity.

Iraq – on appeasement, surrender, and avoiding entanglements

Web Guy writes:
“Save our military for real threats. And if some nut blows up a skyscraper in a metropolis on one of the coasts, the lives lost will be much less than the numbers lost from annual traffic deaths. If Bush were really concerned about “democracy”, why does he let Israel attack neighboring democracies in Palestine and Lebanon?” — WebGuy; WDH Forum

An interesting perspective that is perhaps quite telling.

It would appear that Web Guy counts himself as among that group that does not view Islamist jihadism (aka Islamist terrorism) as a legitimate “threat”.

Presumably then, he is one in agreement with John Edward’s assertion that the “War on Terror is nothing more than a bumper sticker”.

If global Islamo-fascist jihad is “not a threat” worthy of the efforts of our military to combat, then just exactly WHAT does Web Guy legitimately consider to be a threat that calls for a military?

Appeasing the Islamist alligator …

Dino writes:
“The Agerians did not follow the French home, they were Muslims. The French left there, and they made it home okay.”  — Dino; WDH Forum

Mike writes:
“vilifying people is the oldest trick in the book. Now that the godless commies are gone, now we have the radical jihadists islomo fascists Muslims.” — Mike Cannon; WDH Forum

With due respect to Dino’s understanding of what’s going on in the world, France today is one of the most heavily Muslimized countries in Europe, followed closely by Britain – a legacy of their “open borders” and liberal immigration policies. Muslims came for the “opportunities” of a nominally free and democratic society, and many now seek to re-impose the type of oppressive society and culture that they originally fled.

Sort of like what is increasingly happening here.

The levels of violence perpetrated by radicalized Muslims living in France is a significant ongoing problem there, and the sheer numbers of Muslims who have refused to adopt and to become a part of the culture of their new country, is a significant political problem that in many ways has immobilized French politicians from taking necessary steps to protect the country from the Islamist’s who have indeed, “followed them home”.

Soldiers in Iraq serve the cause of freedom, deserve support …

In a recent WDH Forum post Pat writes:
“My husband was in Iraq, he was away from home for eighteen months. You civilians have all these idea’s why we should not be there. I think you should ask the Soldiers instead. You know only what you hear and see on the news, not the good things. And what kind of support are you showing with all the crap going on. Pulling out of Iraq now would be a serious mistake.  We need to finish the job now and get it overwith not argue about what you civilians think is right. Bush was for the Military , still is and has done a good job. At least he has the guts to face the real problem.” — Pat; WDH Forum

Standby responds:
“One of the big differences between the opposition to the Vietnam War during that era and the opposition to the Iraq War today has been the ability of people to correctly assign accountability for the policy where it belongs. In a representative democracy, leaders must always consider “what you civilians think is right” because that is the way the system is designed to work.”  — Standby4321; WDH Forum

In spite of considering their “successful” opposition and undermining of the military efforts in Vietnam to be the defining moment and political model for over two generations of post-modern liberal activism, the liberal left did learn at least one important PR lesson: it is counter-productive among large numbers of the more main-stream population to be perceived as spitting on and denigrating the troops, and calling them “baby killers”.

Iraq – Progress starts … and continues … with security gains

While pessimistic and partisan critics of efforts currently underway in Iraq continually assert that there can be “no military solution” to the problems that Iraqi’s face, other observers and experts point out that necessary political, economic, and diplomatic gains will not be possible except in an environment of relative stability and security.

Critics of the current Iraq “surge” strategy point to the early lack of significant political progress to date by the Iraqi national parliament, as reason enough to cut off any further support for the surge strategy and the Iraqi government itself, even though many reluctantly acknowledge some early progress in the areas of security and stability, which are the first mission of the troops presently in-theater.

While national politicians in both Washington and Iraq continue to posture and jockey for political advantage and power, not factored into the “benchmarks” yardstick has been the surprizing surge of grass-roots and local reconciliation and development efforts in Iraq, often made possible and encouraged by the increased troop levels of both US and Iraqi forces, and by aggressive sustained counter-insurgency operations, both part of the new Iraq strategy for success.

Free-market healthcare: Looking again at medical savings accounts …

One of the most positive “solutions” that legislators might call upon themselves to make, would be to fully implement the concept of tax-exempt “medical savings accounts” that are owned, and controlled, by individuals themselves.

The hitch (for legislators) of course is the concept of “tax-exempt”, and the idea that individuals would control their own health care accounts, and thus their own health care.

Of course, it’s really not your money. It’s the government’s money. Politicians just let you hold it for awhile.

The real “cost” of health insurance comes from the insistence of “first dollar” medical plans, that pay for all medical care, either from “dollar one”, or for very low deductibles.

If something doesn’t cost you, you are not likely to fuss too much over the price. Most people today don’t question their doctors over the cost of the treatments or tests that are being recommended – why bother? Someone else is paying.

Iraq – Democrat’s paradigm of failure

According to congressional Democrats, a few re-election-sensitive and RINO Republicans, and the most radical leftist fringes of the political spectrum, “nothing good” is coming out of Iraq, we can’t win, we gotta get out, and in fact, we’ve “already lost”.

So why do Democrats in Congress continue to stubbornly insist that “we’re losing”, and yet are unwilling to consider or advance any positive alternative strategum for success – continuing instead to myopically insist that all difficulties are “all Bush’s fault”, and that “surrender and withdrawal” is the only acceptable path?

They don’t say “surrender and withdrawal”, of course. They use terms like “change of course”, “change of strategy”, or “redeployment”, strategic or otherwise.

Democrats of today like to emphatically say that they “support the troops”, and that they somehow “hope the surge works” – but their veracity is seriously in doubt.

Senator Levin of Michigan recently rejected the analogy that the Democrat’s view of the recent interim report on Iraq was a “glass half empty” interpretation, saying “As a matter of fact, this is a cup or a glass with a big hole in the bottom.”

Iraq – “Clear and Hold” strategy leads to progress …

The Fadhl neighborhood area in Baghdad is one of the oldest and poorest neighborhoods in Iraq’s capital, with 300-year-old buildings still in use today, and narrow, twisting roads that are ideal lookout points for insurgents to spot approaching vehicles, according to a recent article by Major Sean Ryan, presently serving Iraq with the 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team.

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/jul2007/a071007ej1.html

Only a few months ago, according to Ryan, the Fadhl area in Baghdad was a breeding ground for snipers and extremist militia activity.

Just this past spring however, in April, soldiers from the US 1st “Red Devil” Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment out of Fort Bragg, SC, together with combat teams from the Iraqi Security forces, started clearing operations in the area, designed at disrupting insurgent networks and capturing insurgent leaders responsible for attacks on US and Iraqi troops.

According to Major Ryan, the operation turned into a bloody firefight that lasted five hours, and resulted in 14 wounded troops, and dozens of insurgent enemy dead and wounded.

Now, just a few months afterward, the situation has changed remarkably.