RSS Output
French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Gab@StFerdinandIII -

Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands.  Cults everywhere:  Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...

Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death 

Back     Printer Friendly Version  

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 15, 2005

A High Price for Soft Power and Hypocrisy

In Iraq 40 dead from kidnappings – most from ‘Soft Powers’; Appeasement does not mean your citizens are safe

by StFerdIII

Unlike Liberals and socialists, Conservatives usually focus on responsibilities. Citizens, governments, businesses, investors, workers, fathers and mothers, and children all have responsibilities. Liberals however, believe in rights and entitlements. For example Conservatives would maintain that Canadian and EU governments have a responsibility to protect their foreign assets, interests, and citizens from harm, attack or theft. Liberals would state that governments have no such responsibilities since internationalism and international rights supersede national obligations. So when soft power countries are confronted by terror they naturally appease and seek to hide behind international groups. When their citizens are kidnapped and beheaded, usually on video in graphic detail, they do nothing but complain while grudgingly asserting the ‘rights’ of the terrorists to display their violence. They assert terrorist rights to barbarity precisely because they do nothing to stop it. They are in effect accessories to the murder of their own citizens. A fundamental responsibility of government is to protect its citizens. Yet the EU and Canada have forfeited this responsibility and are viewed not as peaceful, ‘righteous’ nations, by militant Islam, but weak, effeminate states that are easy targets for Islamic terrorists.

Hundred’s of kidnappings across the world occur each month and most are not reported. In Iraq only a few of the 250 odd kidnappings are described by the media. One thing is for certain. If for whatever reason I was kidnapped in Iraq, thanks to my dual citizenship I would demand help from the British embassy not the Canadian. At least with the Brits I know that there is a fair chance they will actually do something. With the Canadians, as a long list of kidnapped and usually beaten or murdered innocent’s shows, there is a very good chance they will do nothing except moan about injustice, write long letters, complain to the UN and stomp their collective feet and huff. For my money I bet on hard power every time over weak, feminine soft power. The culture of feminization which is changing Canadian-European domestic culture for the worse has no place in the real world of international relations, power and war.

So let’s look at Iraq. According to open source statistics there have been well over 250 kidnappings in 2004 and 2005 with 40 odd dead []. Of the 250 kidnapped and 40 dead, according to my calculations more than 2/3 come from soft power countries or countries with no direct involvement in the Iraqi war and very limited involvement with active duties in the general war on terror. One would think that the kidnapped and murdered would be wholly Anglo-Saxon, Jewish, or contracted agents for the Anglo-Saxons from various coalition countries. Why are 2/3 non Anglo-Saxon or coalition country based?

Well one reason is that citizens from real powers usually take care of themselves in war zones. It is hard to understand the mentality of aid workers [or anyone else] who would go to Iraq without carrying weapons, and without contracting security protection. You are just asking for trouble. This arrogance is sadly paid in body bags. A second reason is that soft power countries are easy targets. If you take a US or UK citizen hostage, then you know that American and Brit special forces will be coming after you. You are a marked and probably soon to be dead terrorist. If you kidnap a Canadian you will have to endure angry UN stamped letters, outrage from powerless Canadian politicians writing moronic letters about peace and love, and the odd threat about doing something like slapping your wrist or telling your mommy about your bad deeds. Predictably most murderers are not swayed by ‘soft power’. However if they are smart, they are somewhat leery of having a US special forces unit targeting them for destruction.

So what is ‘soft power’ really about? Soft power is just another socialist fantasy – another way to escape responsibility and do nothing and free ride off of other more adult nations. A fundamental obligation of a national government is to protect citizens – this is part of the Lockean contract between the governing and governed. If a government cannot protect its citizens it has simply given up its legitimacy. Free riding off UK and US military power and outsourcing military and civilization security is indeed ‘soft’ – soft-headed and softly corrupt. But it is precisely the sort of governance that Canada and the EU prefer – effeminate socialist fantasy overriding reality. Soft power is another program of doing nothing and avoiding hard choices and harder responsibilities. Ultimately of course ‘soft power’ is just the expression of domestic weakness and incompetence, transposed onto international relations. It is just another sad example of liberal-socialist immorality.

Article Comments:

Related Articles:

Cult of no military

11/11/2011:  Remembering courage, vitality and intelligence

11/11/2009:  Remembering what is already Forgotten. McCrae's insight.

4/6/2007:  Modern Canada has no right to celebrate Vimy Ridge

9/4/2006:  In defence of military intelligence

12/15/2005:  A High Price for Soft Power and Hypocrisy

4/25/2005:  Canada is weak on Terror – The Military

4/20/2005:  Canada is weak on Terror – Domestic Concerns

11/16/2004:  Canada and its weak military policy