It’s important to remember that I support military action, including first-strikes, in certain limited ways and in certain limited circumstances. I’m not a fan of war, but it is sometimes quite necessary. This article is not about my views, but about the hypocrisy of the left with regard to military action.
Who’d of thunk it? A ‘progressive’ President starting wars. Can’t be, right? Wrong. It’s quite a tradition. In fact, in the 20th Century, major world wars and major US involvement in regional was, without question, generally a province of Democrats. Don’t believe it? Aren’t Democrats the ‘anti-war’ party? Aren’t progressives opposed to war? Some are, but certainly not when they get into power. To wit:
- World War I—After promising not to do so (“He Kept us out of War”) Wilson involved the US in WWI, joining on the side of France and England.
- World War II—Before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt was wholly involved in England’s war with Germany (Bases for Destroyers and the Atlantic Charter). Add to that the embargo on Japan, and it’s clear where Roosevelt stood. By the way, this can probably be laid nicely at the feet of Wilson as well. Not to mention that Truman, a Democrat, is the only leader ever in history to use nuclear weapons.
- Korea—Although under the guise of the United Nations (which the Soviet Union was conveniently boycotting and Taiwan was recognized as the official Chinese government-the reason for the Soviet boycott), this was a US-led action. One could argue that it was the continuation of WWII (I do), but it was clearly Truman who led the world into war over Korea.
- Viet Nam—Although a few military advisors had ben sent to liaise with the South Vietnamese government under Eisenhower, it was John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson (who promised not to do so)—both Democrats—that introduced combat troops and escalated to full-scale war. At one point, Johnson called the corrupt leader of South Vietnam, Ngo Dinh Diem, ‘The Winston Churchill of Asia”. The war ultimately spread to Cambodia and Laos.
The one major action in the 20th century that did not fit the above was the First Iraq War, begun by George HW Bush (not to be confused with his son, George H Bush). The various interventions in Central America are fairly balanced between the parties, and none of them were full-scale wars.
Of course, if we expand this to military interventions, then the picture looks a bit different, of course. That said, the Democratic Left proclaims at the top of their lungs that the right are ‘war mongers’ and ‘interventionists’ when the claim can just as well be laid at their feet.
Since Obama took office, he has wound-down Iraq and is starting to wind-down Afghanistan. But, he has attacked Libya and Yemen and is now sending combat troops as ‘advisors‘ to Uganda, in order to fight an insurgency. That’s how Viet Nam started. It’s really no surprise, since Obama threatened an attack on Pakistan during his presidential campaign.
Bottom line-if you hate war, you are no better off with Democrats than you are with Republicans, and insisting that you are is a bald-face lie, intentional ignorance or duplicity. The evidence is there for anyone willing to look at it. Hypocrisy, duplicity or ignorance, what a choice.
