← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Hilaire Belloc

Pax Romana, Chaos Americana: The Tale of Two Empires

Thread ID: 11846 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2004-01-11

Wayback Archive

Hilaire Belloc [OP]

2004-01-11 20:30 | User Profile

[url]http://www.serbianna.com/columns/weber/009.shtml[/url]

Pax Romana, Chaos Americana: The Tale of Two Empires

By T.V. Weber Unlike the United States, Canada still has a relatively free press. Here in Imperial America, we would never see a headline like Isabel Vincent’s Crime, terror flourish in “liberated” Kosovo: Ethnic cleansing smuggling rampant under UN’s aegis, which ran December 10, 2003 in the National Post.

Vincent’s article paints an ugly picture of a Kosovo ruled by an Albanian “mafia” with close ties to al-Qaeda. This Kosovo is rife with drug smuggling and trafficking in women and young girls for prostitution. The remaining Serbs, Jews and Roma (a/k/a Gypsies) are constantly being terrorized by the Albanians. The Albanians not only kill, wound and kidnap Serbs; they vandalize Serbian cemeteries and destroy Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries, so as to obliterate all traces of Serbian presence in Kosovo.

Of course, those of you who are familiar with our work know that Alida and I have been writing about this since “Evil Bill” Clinton dispatched his KFOR forces to occupy Kosovo. (In fact, we had been writing about the Kosovo War from the start.) Unlike us, Isabel Vincent is no Serbophile. She is naïve enough to continue believing the original Clinton Administration lies that made the Kosovo War possible. She does not seem to understand that the people she refers to as “Albanians” are Islamic extremists, just like the ones who flew airplanes into American buildings back in September of 2001. Even so, the article reveals the truth about the abysmal chaos that prevails under the NATO/KFOR occupation of Kosovo.

The World with One Superpower, Past and Present

For only a few brief intervals of time in the history of mankind has there existed only one “superpower,” as we call it in contemporary English. Normally, a second or third strong power keeps everything in check, at least to some degree.

Before the Cold War slowly ground to a halt in the late 1980s, there were two superpowers; the U.S. vied for power with the U.S.S.R. Prior to World War II, there were several world powers. A rapidly recovering Germany, a still powerful Great Britain, a rapidly mechanizing Japan, a Soviet Union experimenting with Communism, and the United States, each held a significant share of the world’s power. Several other countries were considered to be relatively strong powers as well. Similarly, in the decades leading to World War I, Great Britain ruled the sea, as it had for centuries; Germany had become an industrial power to be reckoned with; the Austro-Hungarian Empire, backed by the Vatican, ruled much of central and eastern Europe; France still had a significant influence in the world; the Russian Empire held a good portion of eastern Europe and much of Asia; and the Ottoman Turks held the Middle East, as well as a good share of the Balkans. The great powers had been competing with one another ever since the early explorers claimed their fortunes in the New World.

Perhaps the last time that a great power had no significant rivals was during the age of Imperial Rome. (Any comparable power, such as China, was too far away to present any challenge to the Romans.) Although Rome was founded as a republic, it fell into a de facto dictatorship under the Caesars. Once all serious rivals had been conquered and domestic order established, the concept of “Pax Romana” or “Roman peace” came into being.

And the Two Republics

The United States was founded as a republic as well, but it has become a republic in name only, as was the case in ancient Rome. In fact, not only is the United States supposed to be a republic, but all States are required to have a “Republican form of government,” as guaranteed by Article IV, § 4 of the United States Constitution. Conservative scholars often refer to the United States as “a republic of republics.”

The term “republic” is rarely used any more, as the street English for the American form of government is “democracy.” In this so-called “democracy,” we find one and only one “elected leader” to be of much concern. To many people, the U.S. Presidents have become more significant than the powerful Caesars had been during Roman times. Congress is hiding in the background. Their State and local governments scarcely show up on their radar screens. Go figure!

The one major difference between America and Rome is that there has never been a “Pax Americana.” The term was bandied about from time to time during the Cold War, but it represented nothing more than a fantasy. During his first year in office, President George Bush I witnessed the disappearance of the Berlin Wall, symbolizing the end of the Cold War. Peace at last?

Post Cold War Conflicts

For decades, conservative pundits had speculated that the end of Communism would spell a new golden age of peace and prosperity. Even so, these have always been a few visionaries who recognized the potential threat from the Islamic world. But there was little sense of urgency, because that threat was perceived as being years into the future.

George I

By 1990, George Bush I had found a reason to rally the U.S. and many allied nations to prepare for war against Iraq. The following spring, those forces set forth to “liberate Kuwait.” Liberating Kuwait—conquering Gaul—it’s all the same. After that war, George I, like Julius Caesar, was riding high in public opinion. Unfortunately for George, he was not much of a student of history. While the leaders of the ancient world often used the spoils of conquest as a substitute for heavy taxation of their own citizenry, George I was stuck with an albatross, his “tax increase.” It doomed his reelection as much as Brutus’ blade doomed the reign of Julius Caesar.

George Bush I was the only Republican president to lead the United States to war during the twentieth century. Nevertheless, the baggage left over from Lincoln’s and McKinley’s major wars of the nineteenth century continued to burden the Republican Party throughout the twentieth century. So, the liberals who had come of age during the 1960s rejoiced in their peace president, Bill Clinton. As a former anti-war activist, he would certainly lead the world to peace.

“Evil Bill”

Clinton’s personal life would have been enough to make many of the heathen emperors of ancient Rome blush with shame. Whether it was a financial scandal or a sexual scandal or a scandal involving military secrets, Clinton made Caligula look like a boy scout standing innocently in his little boots. And then there was the body count of former friends, business associates, personal acquaintances, and others who had been in Clinton’s way and who had who died mysterious deaths. This death toll, dating back to his days as an Arkansas politician and continuing through his presidency, makes the ruthless climb to power of many of history’s infamous tyrants look tame.

Over the last quarter of a century, the march of Islamic terror has met little resistance. Even after September 11th, the worldwide extent of this Islamic terror has received little attention in the U.S. Perhaps it would come in handy to have that free press that the First Amendment seems to guarantee. But then, even the most egregious examples have failed to make any lasting impact on the American populace. In 1979, the Iranian hostage crisis grabbed the attention of both the news media and the American public and held it for a year. But after the hostages were released, the crisis quickly became “yesterday’s news.” Of course, most Americans were too enamored with the idea of concept of aiding and abetting al-Qaeda in its war against the Soviets in Afghanistan to notice that the Iranian Revolution had also been an Islamic jihad. Several other acts of Islamic terror actually victimized American citizens as well, but we looked the other way. When the Oklahoma Federal Building was bombed in 1994, the news media correctly reported that the chief suspects were Islamic terrorists. But the extreme left-wing Clinton administration shifted the blame to members of the “militia,” which is simply a constitutionally recognized citizen’s army, under local control and independent of any central government restraint. The militia is hated by the left, who are constantly seeking to discredit it. Meanwhile, the authorities have abandoned the dangerous business of identifying and apprehending those who actually planned and perpetrated the attack.

The so-called “breakup of Yugoslavia” was nothing more than the efforts of several nations, which were not once, but twice, artificially spliced together, to revert to their original status. While there may be some hope of cooperation among Orthodox Serbs and Roman Catholic Croats, at least for certain purposes, the idea of a Muslim/Christian country is absurd. Given the expansionist tenets that form an integral part of Islam, once the violence erupted, why would any reasonable person expect the Muslims to be the “victims?” Fourteen centuries of history demonstrate that any violence involving Muslims, starts with the Muslims. (See Serge Trifkovic Sword of the Prophet, Regina Orthodox Press, 2003). But the Clinton Administration acted as though the opposite were true. All of this leaves us with just one conclusion: that Bill Clinton and his administration sided with the Islamic terrorists, first in Bosnia, then in Kosovo.

George II

When George Bush II came to office, it once again looked as though the world would have its chance for Pax Americana. Before the next major attack, George II had several months to straighten out Clinton’s mess, but he never even tried. As a “thought experiment,” let’s try to imagine what an effective George II administration might have done:

The new President Bush is sworn in. He calls a meeting of the top generals and admirals and asks them to report to him regarding the feasibility of honoring the agreement with Serbia to allow its troops back into Kosovo. He arranges for the transfer to occur by his second month in office. He travels to Kosovo to personally observe the transfer. He takes the occasion to chastise KFOR for its disgraceful handling of the peace-keeping efforts and he condemns the KLA (under their new monikers as well) for their egregiously criminal activities. Finally, he proposes the formation of a joint Serbian, Russian and American force to restore order to Kosovo.

Likewise, the new President Bush travels to the Middle East to meet with leaders of “friendly” Islamic nations. He makes it clear that the U.S. will put an end to the regime of any leader who in any way supports Islamic terror—starting with Saudi Arabia. During each visit, he makes it clear during each visit that one nuclear weapon can ruin a whole Jihad. After all, think of how few Japanese people wanted to follow their warlords, or to perpetrate any more suicide-bombing attacks, after the events of August 6 and August 8 of 1945.

But that was not the message that George II actually sent. When he took office, his message to the Islamic world was, “Do what you want; I am clueless.” The Islamic extremists got to keep their ill-gotten gains in Kosovo and Bosnia. They proceeded with their program of direct attacks on United States territory. Finally, they had a little too much success—or did they?

George II rushed to war with Afghanistan, hoping to find Osama bin Laden. Two years later and no luck! We do have troops stationed in Afghanistan, as did the Soviets a quarter of a century ago. The Taliban is no longer in control—for now anyway. When will the troops come home? Good question! After all, American soldiers were stationed in West Berlin long after defeat of the Third Reich. Many of those soldiers’ parents had not been born when the Germans officially surrendered on May 8, 1945.

Next stop for the real George II was Iraq. After a long-drawn-out process in which the U.S. and Iraq negotiation for the return of the “weapons inspectors,” George II sent his troops into Iraq. The official Iraqi military was quickly defeated, but the fighting still continues. Who are we fighting? Our founding fathers certainly knew the value of having a militia, but now the shoe is on the other foot. It is too bad that our liberal friends convinced us that the founders meant an “army reserve” or a “state police force.” It seems that a people with a militia, in the form of a well-armed citizenry, are hard to defeat. But don’t worry. The U.S. is in the process of outlawing private ownership of even the simplest of defensive weapons, namely hand-held pistols; so no one will have such trouble conquering us.

We seem to have captured Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. This leaves us with more problems than when he was at large. What do we do now? Should we stage a “show trial” and execute him? That conveys the message that might makes right. Should we just lock him up forever, as George I did to Manuel Noriega after invading Panama? Perhaps we could let the Iraqis try him. What if he is acquitted, or convicted and later released? Maybe the people of Iraq would put him back in office.

Have George II’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq ended the threat of domestic terror? You have got to be kidding! “Homeland security” is firmly entrenched at U.S. airports and other venues. Has it slowed down the advance of Islamic terror anywhere else? Hardly a week goes by without another Muslim fanatic in Israel blowing himself up along with as many innocent people as possible.

No Pax Americana, Only Chaos

How bad is Islamic rule? Take a look at Isabel Vincent’s article about Kosovo. Life under an Islamic government is hell on earth. With all due respect for those who have lived under a Communist government, there is nothing worse than living under Islamic rule. And what about the Nazis? Well . . . some of the Nazis were Muslims—including Izetbegovic, the late warlord of the Bosnian Muslims.

There is no Pax Americana, nor is it likely that there will be one. If foreign policy is any issue at all in the next election, the focus will be on whether or not we are steering the right course in wars overseas. Saddest of all, the voting public of the lone “superpower” does not even care for its conquered people in the Balkans as much as the ancient Romans cared for theirs.