The Easiest Concept to understand on Earth

Not all of our current problems are simple to understand or deal with, but some things really are. Now I know that nuance is a sacrament to the liberal elite, but sometimes things are simple human nature, and are time tested truths. You know things like when people constantly put others down, its to try to overcome for their low self esteem? Well, here is one such truth that we all need to understand: the thugs-in-chief, despotic, sociopathic, tyrants (that unfortunately for mankind are recycled and reincarnated into new bodies through the centuries) only understand strength vs weakness. They seek to dominate others, and their ambition for this domination is only bound by the fear that someone else is stronger than them and will call their bluff. In the past we understood this because we lived in a world of greater moral clarity. We taught children to "never start a fight but always end it". We taught kids that if bullies punched you, you punch them back harder, lest they become a perpetual victim to them. Now we'd rather try to understand the bully and teach the kids that violence is never the answer. Except that sometimes it just is...or at least the threat of it. It is simple human nature that for some people, the only way to deter their bad behavior is with fear of a severe consequence. (If this were not true, why would we need laws and prisons?) You would think that secularists who embrace Darwin's "survival of the fittest" would understand this. Instead, for some reason, many of them think the world has changed drastically over the last 50 years into a place were a global peace utopia is actually possible.

I see signs that the world is going to be a more dangerous place, because the bullies of the world think, honestly, that President Obama is weak on Foreign policy. Normally, this would not impact us directly or immediately. At most, we would end up getting involved in defending an ally that someone decided to invade or attack ..but in today's world of terrorism on our soil, we may see exactly how much respect our enemies give to the diplomacy of supplication. I hope I am wrong, but I fear I'm right.

For all the disagreements I had with Bush on Domestic Policy, I stand behind his war on terror. (or case in point, should I say "overseas contingency operation?") And I do know that Obama has not greatly changed Bush's policy, but perception is reality. Much to the delight of many on the left, Obama has spoken to the world in platitudes of humility and peace, and a new type of American Diplomacy...and what decent person wouldn't prefer that? But what about his more nefarious audience? Remember, those afore mentioned thugs of the world that hear only "strength" or "weakness"? What do they hear between the lines of these speeches? In my opinion, It would actually be better if Obama spoke in the tough language of Bush, and quietly changed some of his policies, than it is to speak in appeasing and weak language, and quietly keep alot of Bush's policies. Forget comparisons to Bush. There are several great strong leaders that were well liked that could serve as his model for foreign policy...FDR, Kennedy, Reagan, Churchill, etc. Its not as though he's boxed in with either being "like Bush" or "the opposite of Bush"...talk about a simplistic false paradigm! The leader of the free world should be feared, not by his own people, or peace loving people of the world...but by the Ahmadinejads, and the Castros, and the Gadaffis of the world. That fear should be great enough to deter their ambitions without action, and that is how the world remains a safer place. The international community who so hated Bush's "cowboy diplomacy", may soon pine for the stability of a stronger hand of leadership. For example, The Australianran this article a couple days ago: Lots of People Love Obama, but Does Anyone in the World Really Fear Him?

Without doubt, Bush was not loved by the world...maybe we cant have both love and fear, but if we cant, I would prefer to have a Leader that the right people fear over someone the Europeans adore. This reminds me of this quote

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Winston Churchill

The great irony is, while the despots of Today have more in common with the universally shunned/hated dictators of the past than they do with modern western society, we give them the podium of legitimacy at UN; a body which that was established for the sole purpose of preventing the atrocities committed by their "brothers in evil" of the past. In today's moral relativism, I really think Adolph Hitler would have a place at the UN General Assembly. Even worse, some group somewhere would no doubt justify and defend him, and of course, point to America as the real root of all evil. In the modern upside down world we live in, it would be said: if only America were different and better, Hitler would not be so evil..i mean bad...i mean, not good...i mean different from us.