John Lewis, in an article entitled "No Substitute for Victory," compares the US war against Japan from 1941-1945 to the US war against "Totalitarian Islam." He calls for the invasion and supression of Islam in Iran and every other totalitarian Islamic state (which would include at least Saudi Arabia and maybe Egypt, Pakistan, Southern Lebanon, Sudan and Indonesia).
Franklin Rosevelt is held up as a hero for calling for the unconditional surrender of Japan and setting in place a policy of the supression of Shintoism as a political force.
It strikes me that there are quite a few "disanalogies" between these two situations. First, Japan was a modern industrial country, unlike Iran. Second, Islam is an ideology that is spread over multiple countries. Attacking Iran will create a backlash in Moslem nations, likely radicalizing them, particularly if the US goes nuclear (which Lewis appears to want). Third, an attack on Iran will be seen by the world as an offensive, beligerent act.
How the US can occupy Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and other countries without a massive increase in taxes and imposing the draft isn't explained by Mr. Lewis.
But I find it most intersting that, as I point out below, Leonard Peikoff in 1982 opposed US involvement in World War II and even implied that FDR lied to get the US into war with Japan. He stated that US involvment in WWII was a factor in leading to increased control of the economy. The Ominous Parallels was, I gather, vetted by Rand.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
John Lewis:
>In the present situation... Al-Jazeera—the fountainhead of Muslim taqiyya, or deception—must be shut down.
Gee, the right to freedom of speech turns out to be contextual! Who knew?
Post a Comment