Charles Krauthammer died some years ago. It was a loss. During the troubled times of the Aughts, he evaluated reality and concluded that Iraqi PM Maliki’s plan to grant amnesty to insurgents was a good idea. That's what wisdom is. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Well, at the time there was also that now-forgotton problem with illegals in the USA. You know, a horde of lawless invaders.
Or am I being all MAGA and white and shite. Bush did seem to go for amnesty. ah.
So the idea, nearly 20 years ago, was that terrorists and invaders get a free pass. At the time, the copperheads -- you know, typical democrats -- ejaculated that this migration plan was not, NOT Amnestia. And, yes, technically, the copperheads were not in that case stinking traitorous scum liars. “Amnesty” after all means no consequences, and there would be a consequence they enthused, a nominal fine, by which the scofflaw invaders would buy themselves to the front of the line and through the door.
No, it’s not "amnesty". It was NOT. The word is "bargain".
But the Iraqi amnesty plan was just that – amnesty, no consequences for past bad acts. Amnesty and amnesia are practically the same word. We cannot expect consistency. The democrats loved the idea of more and more illegals -- same as now, only now moreso. But, weirdly and obviously, then, at that time, so long ago in history, in the aughts, the pol hack dems in the senate -- but I repeat myself-- they were against, yes, AGAINST amnesty for the iraqi insurgent or terrorist or prochoice (of kiling civilians et al).
The democrats, I say, fetishized the invaders, but absolutely DEMANDED, that the exemplary Iraqi judicial system deal with the terrorists. The democrat hacks posed themselves in posture like fat reality show stars, heroic, arms crossed, staring down at the camera -- like a super empowered woman of color on the poster of her own comic book movie.
Any terrorist who has been involved in the deaths of Americans must be punished. Such was the sentiment mouthed by certain Dem senators, a generation ago. But wait, but wait, here it comes.
NOW, with Hamas, child-murdering rapist monster Hamas -- THEY are the heroes!!! LOL. Laugh Out Loud. Blow up americans THEN, bad. Blow up Jews Now, good. What has changed in the past nearly 20 years? Progressives are more religious, now, believing as they do that female spirits can possess male bodies. Demons are a religious belief, right?
If only we lived in a world where iniquity was punished with swift wrath. But wisdom concerns itself with future peace, rather than past atrocities. Should we trouble ourselves with inconsistencies?
The left called that war a quagmire , unwinnable. Completely different, I have to guess, that, oh, say, Ukraine. Oh. But, uh, if Iraq was unwinnable, how could the terrorists ever be punished?
My practical solution is that we can do business with some Hitlers. Not very ethical of me, is it. But we have to compromise, in the real world, on everything up to the very most vital principles, whatever those may be for each of us. We cannot hope to convert all adversaries to our way of thinking. We can hope to find some common ground of shared power. I speak, of course, from a historical perspective.
Hack politicians fight not for principle, but for power. Our thirst for justice is strong, but we have more of the camel in us than might be suspected. Thirsty, but we can wait.
Consider Chile, where the crimes of the former authoritarian regime were overlooked, that wounds might be bound and the nation move forward. For the most part, this practical benevolence was a blessing to their society. The same sort of thing in South Africa, with its Truth and Reconciliation Commission. And, most telling for me was the policy of Abraham Lincoln, who wanted the Confederacy to rejoin the Union under the most lenient of conditions. The South had brutally enslaved a race, and started a horrifically bloody Civil War.
What does justice demand, for these crimes? But Lincoln would have received them back as wayward brothers -- had he lived. With just an assurance of future loyalty.
Hamas. The bad-faith of the Palestinians -- in Latin -- or Philistines, in Greek -- their bad faith is not the only model from which we draw our expectations of Middle Eastern leaders. Not every leader is an Arafat, steeped in corruption and functional insanity.
I do not, of course, speak of the ideological Islamist monsters -- they should receive a Russian
But relative stability brings prosperity. And by now, we stupid, stupid stupid americans must finally begin the first glimmerings of observation, and see that culture and customs need not agree, to coexist. Like rule of law, as back in pre biden days, and respect for the privileges and duties of liberty. Such institutions and conventions, are benefits. The proudest traditions of our fading Christian culture teach that there is a way to find mercy even where justice has a claim.
The only repentance we have any business caring about, is about behavior. Illegals need to start, start to respect our laws. Hamas, well, since hamas is about killing jews, it needs to stop being Hamas.
We live in a world were tomorrow is not promised. All creation groans under the suffocating burden of injustice. No imprecatory prayers against unjust judges may be relied on to bring relief. But in the entirely secular world, I know of no finer words than these, that might apply to this question, of how to deal with the incorrigible, and the repentant: "With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in.”
Lincoln humbles me. It's just that I admire wisdom. He continued the fight, unrelenting, and was gracious in victory.
We have unwon battles. In fact, we're losing. Man up. Rule of law. Because first comes at least an understanding of justice. Then, maybe, mercy. Hard, then soft.
J
