Friday, January 30, 2009

Why are we apologizing?

In an outstanding article, Charles Krauthammer takes President Obama to task for his near apologies to the Muslim world for imagined U.S. transgressions! Krauthammer writes:
Astonishing. In these most recent 20 years -- the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world -- America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them. It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved -- and resulted in -- the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq.

The two Balkan interventions -- as well as the failed 1992-93 Somali intervention to feed starving African Muslims (43 Americans were killed) -- were humanitarian exercises of the highest order, there being no significant U.S. strategic interest at stake. In these 20 years, this nation has done more for suffering and oppressed Muslims than any nation, Muslim or non-Muslim, anywhere on earth. Why are we apologizing?

Why indeed? It seems like trying to help Muslims is a case of "no good deed goes unpunished."

Krauthammer goes on to discuss how the "U.S.-Muslim rupture" began with Iran's 14 month takeover of our embassy! And then there was the Arab oil embargo and the execution of our ambassador in Sudan. Then there was the massacre of Marines in Lebanon and the killing of other Americans around the world in terrorist attacks.

Krauthammer points out that in the seven years since 9/11, thousands of Muslims around the world have rioted "to avenge a bunch of cartoons" but there has "not been a single-anti-Muslim riot in the United state to avenge the greatest massacre in U.S. History. In fact, "we elected our first Muslim member of Congress and our first president of Muslim parentage."

Quite frankly, I am offended that our President would carry on as if America, and not Muslim radicals, is at fault here.

Please read Krauthammer's entire article. My summary does not do it justice. (Hat tip: John W.)

2 comments:

Jason said...

I think it all comes back to your point of view.

Obama and the liberals all see the War in Iraq as not a good war, but a very, very bad war (because most of them don't think any war is "good") and since they believe that Bush made America look like a "war-monger", Obama believes he has to take the "dove" approach and make near apologies to recover our image.

For conservatives, liberating Iraq, even if it wasn't our initial intention is a good outcome for going into Iraq and thus we brush off the mistake of our original intention being faulty (i.e. WMD's). However, liberals do not care of the good outcome, they believe that since we went in on faulty information that the entire operation is tainted and thus makes us look bad.

It is just too different points of view, and two different philosophies.

I'm not necessarily happy by his dove approach, but I'm not going to whine about it either. It's what I expected when he entered into office. Expect a lot more Muslim pandering to come.

Dennis said...

Jason,

I understand your point when it comes to Iraq, but Iraq is only one piece of this mess. What about all the rest of it? It was a Democrat (Bill Clinton) who helped Muslims in Bosnia! Our efforts to help in Sudan were purely humanitarian! And can any sane American honestly say 9/11 was justified?

And if we're going to apologize, which Muslims do we apologize to? Muslims were undoubtedly happy to see us in Bosnia! There were Muslims who cheered us in Iraq and Kuwait! I wouldn't think we would need to apologize to any of them.

I guess it must be the terrorist monsters like those who support Saddam, Obama, and Imanutjob to whom we are apologizing!

Grovelling in the dirt before these murderers will only strengthen their cause and weaken ours!