The fall of America

Posted on by

My apologies to Nero for the comparison, but it begs to be made: Nero fiddled while Rome burned; Obama golfed while embassies burned.

The Roman Empire took about four centuries to fully disintegrate: the second sack of Rome occurred in AD 455 and Nero fiddled in AD 64.

I don’t think we have that long to wait before America falls: it is spending and aborting itself to death far too enthusiastically to totter on for another 400 years.

What both Rome and the USA have in common at the beginning of their disintegration is leaders who were callously indifferent to their citizens. Obama and his admirers go one step further: they blame the values of their own country – free speech in this case – for the vile deeds of their country’s enemies.

How long before the barbarian hordes are sacking North American cities? No-one knows, of course, but it can’t be too long: Islamists are strenuously testing the resolve of America – and they are finding that there isn’t any.

From here:

Last week, after issuing a statement at the White House about the murder of the American ambassador in Libya, President Barack Obama hopped aboard Air Force One and headed for Vegas. At a campaign rally to cap off his day, he spoke about the murdered ambassador and went on to say, “We are the one indispensable power in the world. And if we are going to see peace and security for our children and our grandchildren, then that means that this generation of Americans has to lead.”

As embassy after embassy is attacked, the United States does not look like an indispensable power. And it does not look like it because it has largely dispensed with its leadership in the Middle East.

[…]

The ability of protesters to attack with impunity American embassies, and for it to be taken in campaign stride by America’s leaders, is a sign of a new day in the Middle East. At the end of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France extended their influence as custodians of the region. After the Second World War and the creation of the State of Israel, the United States took over as the protector — of Israel, and later of Egypt, of Kuwait, of Turkey and even of Afghanistan against the Soviets. That period is over, and a new era is being born. At the moment it is only a post-American order. Will it become an era dominated by militant Islam?

A new day begins with the dawn’s early light. It is already past dawn, but what the day will bring is unknown, and fearfully so.

25 thoughts on “The fall of America”

  1. What-ever happened to “walk softly and carry a big stick”?

    It used to be that the USA was quite happy to simply go about doing business, which not only included making money but also created jobs and other benefits for local economies, and to basically live and let live. That is unless someone tries to upset the apple cart at which time the US would be very willing to restor order. Most of the world came to know that as long as we all played nice together things would be good, or at least ok. Sure there were bumps along the way, such as the Korean War, but for the most part things were pretty good.

    But does it not seem ironic that lately when there is a democrat as the President things seem to go wrong. It was during the Democratic Kennedy/Johnson Presidencies that the US got in over it’s head in Vietnam, and it took Republican President Nixon to get the US out of Vietnam. It during the time of Democratic President Carter that the embassy in Iran was sacked and embassy staff taken prisoner. It took Replican President Reagan to solve that problem. And now we have Democratic President Obama, and again US embassies are being sacked and embassy staff murdered. Anyone else see a trend?

    The enemies of freedom do not understand diplomacy, they only understand force. It is simply not enough to have force at your disposal, you must have the willingness to use it. Only then will the enemies of freedom back down.

    Reply ↓

  2. Amp

    I’m more concerned with the enemies of freedom that we have in our midst: those that hate the economic system that made our society possible, those that lie about our politics and our religion.
    We are being murdered incrementally from the inside.

    Reply ↓

    • I fully agree that the enemy is not just “at the gates” but is in fact already among us.

      Presently I am reading the book “One Book Stands Alone, The Key to Believing the Bible” by Dr. Doug Stauffer. ISBN 9780967701646. It is a real eye opener, and shows just how much the forces of evil have corrupted the bible. Although I am only six chapters into it I would highly recommend it.

      Reply ↓

    • The hostages were released literally the day before he took office, because everyone new that one of the first things Reagan was going to do was send in the military. So the Iranians kept the American hostages for as long as they could possibly get away with it, right up until they were going to be attacked.

      So my point stands. Carter, who would not use the military, completely failed at getting the situation resolved. But once it became obvious that the military was going to be sent in, that the use of force was now not just an option but was actually going to happen, the situation was resolved.

      Reply ↓

      • I don’t see the point of using the military in a hostage situation, – if – the idea is to keep the hostages alive. [And Carter did try using the special forces for a covert rescue.] The Persians meant to humiliate Carter in retaliation for his aid to the Shah. That doesn’t mean they gave any thought whatsoever to Reagan.

        Reagan did manage to get some Marines killed a little later in Lebanon. Likewise, the latest attack on the consulate in Benghazi appears to have been in retaliation for the use of force, in this case for a drone strike in Pakistan.

        http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/revealed-inside-story-of-us-envoys-assassination-8135797.html

        Reply ↓

        • From Zero Hedge today:

          “And when a war does break out, the only question is what China, Russia and India will do. Iran’s stance is clear: ‘If they (Israel) start something, they will be destroyed and it will be the end of the story for them,’ Jafari said, according to ISNA.

          One thing is guarranteed: in one-two weeks US naval presence in the 5th Fleet will be unprecedented, consisting of at least 3 US aircraft carriers, and 2 amphibious warfare groups, excluding any other naval support the rest of the developed world will throw in.”

          http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-22/head-irans-revolutionary-guards-war-israel-will-occur

          Reply ↓

          • I’m sure Iran has that intention, but I doubt it can match Israel’s military capability.

            Even if Iran has nuclear capability, using it will likely kill more Arabs than Jews. It may well be game over, but perhaps not for Israel.

            Reply ↓

          • Iran has a population of 75,000,000 people, which makes it about the size of Germany. And it has one of the world’s oldest civilizations: the first dynasty in Iran formed during the Elamite kingdom in 2800 BC.

            Apparently the Shah’s reputation [whom Carter thought to assist] is being rehabilitated, “with some Iranians looking back on his era as a time when Iran was more prosperous and the government less oppressive. Journalist Afshin Molavi reports even members of the uneducated poor – traditionally core supporters of the revolution that overthrew the Shah – making remarks such as ‘God bless the Shah’s soul, the economy was better then;’ and finds that “books about the former Shah (even censored ones) sell briskly,” while “books of the Rightly Guided Path sit idle.” (Wikipedia)

            Iranians are not Arabs or Semites [Arabs are also Semites] they are Indo-European. “The origin of the ethnic Iranian/Persian peoples are traced to the Ancient Iranian peoples, who were part of the ancient Indo-Iranians and themselves part of the greater Indo-European ethnic group.” (wiki)

            Iran is not Iraq. And that’s saying nothing about China and Russia, or India.

            Reply ↓

          • I am aware that Persians are not Arabs, but where would Iran attack?

            Jerusalem, for example, has substantially more Arab inhabitants than Jewish inhabitants. I wouldn’t like to say which country would come off worse in an Israel-Iran war, but any conflict in Israel would likely hurt Arabs more than Jews, who are far better protected.

            In any event, there is still the Diaspora, so Israel could rebuild from abroad.

            Reply ↓

  4. Kate,

    I still remember a joke circulating at the time of Reagan’s inauguration: Question- What’s flat black and glows in the dark? Answer- Iran after Reagan is sworn in.

    Reply ↓

  5. Lisa

    Reagan did NOT get marines killed in Beirut. The idiotic appeasers at the State department did.
    The marine guards at the embassy (which also housed a marine barracks) were ordered to stand guard with unloaded weapons and no mags in their guns. When the suicide bombers drove through the front gate, there was no way to stop them.
    Gee, looks like the same mindset was at work in Benghazi: “bulletless security”.

    Reply ↓

    • Jim, it most certainly happened on Reagan’s watch. I don’t think the Commander-in-Chief takes orders from the State Department.

      The parallel with Benghazi I see is that the US did support the Shah of Iran, its ally, and had hostages taken. Who were subsequently released. And later the US did not support Gaddafi, its ally – who made peace with the US and never did anything to abrogate that peace -, and did support the rebels against Gaddafi. And later had its embassy fired on with rocket launchers and its ambassador tortured and killed.

      Reply ↓

  6. Lisa,

    There’s a huge difference between your smug condemnation of Reagan (Reagan did manage to get some Marines killed a little later in Lebanon.) and actual responsibility. The Obama doctrine explicitly projects US weakness to the Muslim world and the State Department policy is consistent with that doctrine -right down to its Cairo embassy apology and the Pakistan apology ads.
    Carter couldn’t get his hostages released. He was a one term lame duck president. It was the prospect of Reagan’s ascendancy to Commander in Chief that turned the trick. Reagan won the Cold War for freedom by projecting “peace through strength”.
    Obama has emboldened Jihad by condoning their attacks on the west by his grovelling, bowing and scraping to the worst elements of Islam. His State Department actions flow from this policy.
    The security contract that the State Department negotiated for Libya through the GAO explicitly excludes marines and is based on the premise of “bulletless security”. Its fairytale world view sent Mr. Rogers to meet Attila the Hun.

    Reply ↓

    • Jim,

      “Smug” …? That’s not very nice.

      Reagan ‘won’ the Cold War by running the budget deficit into the stratosphere – although he campaigned on a balanced budget plank – , and having Gorbachev – instead of Brezhnev as Carter did – , on the other end of the dialogue.

      The USSR discombobulated because it went bankrupt, which is where the US is now … bankrupt. And in large measure it’s to protect oil backing of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, vis-a-vis petrodollars, and thus what little remains of $US viability, – which otherwise is on the precipice of collapse thanks to all that aforementioned debt – that underpins the US position in MENA.

      Here’s an interesting development, with things heating up between China and Japan that Premier Zhou takes time out of his busy schedule – now – to visit Afghanistan, which he’s not done in 46 years. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/top-chinese-official-visits-afghanistan-in-a-rare-visit/1006664/

      Reply ↓

  7. Lisa

    Lisa
    If you would be prepared to rephrase your statement, I’d be happy to recharacterize it.

    Gee, so now you’re criticizing Reagan for wielding economic power against the USSR and not military? I would have thought you’d approve of that.
    Stratosphere? Obama, in 3 years, has run the defecit up to beyond what ALL previous presidents in US history have spent. US prestige is still in freefall and the economy is growing at 1%.
    Reagan’s economy grew at 7 to 8% and what the US wanted in the UN, it got.

    Reply ↓

  11. Kate,

    One thing I can say about negotiations for sure -the public only hears what the parties want them to hear. Without having spoken to any of the principles in the air traffic controller fiasco, I wouldn’t be prepared to make comment.

    Reply ↓

  12. In the book that I am currently reading
    One Book Stands Alone: The Key to Believing the Bible
    ISBN 0967701643
    the chapter regarding morals talks a bit about this topic. The author notes that as we have accepted so called “bibles” that have been based upon the corrupt Alexandria Text or the equally corrupt Critical Text that our society has degraded. He points out how these new “bibles” have moral standards considerably lower than those of the King James Version Holy Bible, and does so using direct passage to passage quotations and comparison. It really is quite shocking just how much these new “bibles” have changed things, and in a very bad way.

    Reply ↓

  13. Does he read koine Greek? If he doesn’t he is simply talking through his hat, because he can’t possibly evaluate a translation properly unless he also knows the original language.

    Reply ↓

Leave a Reply