Are Statist Leftists Allies of Radical Islam?


Winston Churchill when the survival of Great Briton was threatened by Nazi Germany: “We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender.”

Ronald Reagan speaking before the British Parliament in June 1982: “The march of freedom and democracy will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people.”

Barack Obama commenting on America’s response to 9-11 in his recent foreign policy speech: “Imagine, for a moment, what we could have done in those days, and months, and years after 9/11. We could have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in alternative sources of energy to grow our economy, save our planet, and end the tyranny of oil. We could have rebuilt our roads and bridges, laid down new rail and broadband and electricity systems, and made college affordable for every American to strengthen our ability to compete. We could have done that.”



By: Dr. Charles Ormsby – June-2013

In 1945, America exited World War II with an unprecedented strategic edge over our enemies. That edge would have been even greater had President Roosevelt not ceded control of Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union prior to the war’s end and had U.S. post-war policy toward the spread of communism not been so feckless, leading to the takeover of China by the “Peoples Liberation” Army.

From 1945 to 1989, those in the U.S. that were ideologically sympathetic to statism constantly gave aid and comfort to the Soviet and Chinese communists who were engaged in a concerted effort to spread their totalitarian philosophy and defeat the western democracies. As a result of these misguided policies, the U.S. and the survival of human liberties were put in substantial jeopardy for several decades.

In 1989, Reagan’s successful two-pronged strategy to defeat the Soviet Union succeeded. He insisted on condemning and delegitimizing the Soviet regime by honestly and publicly describing the Soviet Union as an evil empire. Simultaneously, he moved to bankrupt that empire by pursuing an aggressive, technology-based military build-up that the Soviets could not match. The result of our victory was a strategic advantage that made us more secure than at any time since the beginning of the twentieth century.

Now the cycle repeats as America’s security erodes.

As outlined in last month’s column, America’s leftists (blinded by their statist ideology, their distaste for Western civilization, and coupled with a virulent case of naiveté) refuse to recognize or denounce the forces that threaten America. Obama is the penultimate example of this perspective and, as our president, he is positioned to severely damage our national security.

Where is Ronald Reagan when we so desperately need him?

He is no longer with us but his memory and his example live on.

Wouldn’t Reagan openly condemn the brutal totalitarian regime in North Korea? Wouldn’t he go to the demilitarized zone and demand that “Mr. Un tear down this wall” and free the Korean people to pursue their individual dreams – which now probably amount to being able to grow enough food to avoid starvation.

Wouldn’t we all sleep better knowing that the decision to strike – or not strike – Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear assets was in Reagan’s hands and not in the hands of a president swayed by an aversion to Western values and unable to appreciate American exceptionalism?

How would Reagan articulate the moral superiority of our society when contrasted with brutish seventh century theocracies that deny the holocaust, threaten Israel with annihilation, enslave women, persecute non-Muslims, and commit stonings and beheadings to enforce their religious edicts?

Is the regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad evil? How about the Islamic terrorist organization Hezbollah that was founded by and funded by Muslim clerics in Iran? What about the Muslim Brotherhood that founded Hamas and supported terrorist suicide bombings in Israel?

Obama avoids moral condemnation of these threats at all costs and, when condemnation is unavoidable, he frames it as narrowly and meekly as possible and then finds occasion to find fault with America in the same breath.

Reagan was personally committed to our founding values and could clearly identify the ideologies that were inimical to our interests. When he confronted our foes, which he did often, he was not reluctant to identify them as evil and to commit America to hasten their demise.

Obama cannot lead America in our clash with radical Islam because he is blinded by his ideology. He cannot articulate the moral dimensions of the challenges we face because he is not committed to America’s values. Instead, he harbors sympathy for the very forces that threaten us.

If Obama can’t recognize our enemy and if he is unwilling to articulate why they are a threat to our values, he can’t lead us to victory.

Unilaterally declaring that the war against Muslim terrorism (the war he is unable to even mention) is over is sure to be met with derision in Pyongyang, Teheran, Waziristan, Tripoli, Beirut, Damascus, the Gaza Strip, and in Al Qaeda’s inner circles … not to mention in Moscow and Beijing.

President Carter’s weak foreign policy in the late seventies made America a paper tiger in the eyes of our enemies. By 1988 Reagan had restored America’s strength and re-established our self-confidence. Our enemies respected our new-found strength and our determination to protect American values. The result was a safer America and a safer world.

Unfortunately, Obama has returned America to the weak and vulnerable status we inherited from Carter.

Unless we reverse course soon, we will pay a terrible price for Obama’s naïve and anti-American ideology.

If we won’t acknowledge and fight our enemies, we can’t and, therefore, we will not win.

If we don’t win, eventually, we will lose.