Ross: Derangement, ignorance or treason?
The reactions to the killing of the Iranian terrorist mastermind Gen. Soleimani were disappointingly predictable.
The Trump haters who dominate the Democrat Party, and the press, which supports them, were unanimous in their irrational criticisms of the president for authorizing this surgical removal of a very evil man.
All of the leading candidates for president went into some kind of panic mode and ranted that WW III was about to begin, millions would surely die, and it would be all the U.S.'s fault. This reaction alone should disqualify all of them being considered to lead our nation in these troublesome times.
The killing of Gen. Soleimani was not a random act undertaken on a whim to liven up an otherwise routine news cycle. The Iranian anthem since 1979 has been an unrelenting chorus of "Death to America, Death to Israel, Death to the Great Satan."
Their entire national energy has been devoted for 40 years to achieving these goals. Soleimani was not the head of the official Iranian military forces. He was the head of a separate "independent" organization whose job it is to spread the Iranian revolution all over the Middle East by attacking any state that either supports Israel or merely tolerates their existence.
Any friend of the U.S. is considered evil and must be punished, say the Iranians. Ignoring 40 years of anti-American actions on the part of Iran could only be the result of Trump derangement syndrome, not the workings of a calm mind that is capable of seeing a real danger when it appears.
The deranged anti-Trumpers and their "sky is falling" minions appear to be ignorant of the events of the past 10 or 20 years that have led up to the present situation. One reason that the Constitution requires the president to be at least 35 years old is so that their adult memories will encompass at least most of the events that have shaped the world in their generation.
The key to the Middle East situation lies in the workings of the power vacuum that apply without exception to all international situations. Nature abhors vacuums, which is why straws let us drink soda or tea from a glass. When any area does not have a powerful nation present that keeps stability, some nation will move in to fill the power vacuum.
The vacuum today in the areas around Syria and Iraq is mostly the result of President Obama's misguided approach to world problems. Briefly, when Iraq was perceived to be a threat to stability in the area, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II removed the dictator in power and set up a system in which the U.S. became the power that supervised the peace. Obama changed this by inciting the Arab Spring movement that resulted in less democracy in the area than before. Then he removed too many American troops from Iraq, which allowed an anti-American government to form.
The final weakening of U.S. influence occurred when Obama drew a "Red Line in the Sand" in Syria and then did not enforce it. Very quickly Turkey, Russia and Iran formed some kind of devil's bargain to fill the power vacuum.and exclude any U.S. influence in the region.
President Trump's policies of patiently waiting for economic sanctions to weaken Russia and Iran while maintaining enough of a military presence to prevent the Russian led coalition from moving out of their Syrian base has been successful.
This has required an occasional, measured, show of force to keep our enemies from expanding further. The U.S. is now trying to get back to the level of influence that Obama gave away.
Our Constitution defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to our enemies. Where this becomes an issue for the resist Trump at all costs people who dominate the Democrat Party is obvious. At what point does the endless attempt to overturn the election of 2016 become giving aid and comfort to our enemies?
At what point does endlessly carping about every single move the president makes, regardless of its' outcome, become giving aid and comfort to our enemies? At what point do the endless attempts to undermine the President's stature become giving aid and comfort to our enemies?
Trump is in the position of quarterbacking a Super Bowl game vs. Russia, Iran, China and North Korea. The footballs in this game are nuclear. He knows what the game is, and has a plan to succeed, but almost half of his players want him to lose.
At what point does this become giving aid and comfort to our enemies?
Weiland Ross writes a regular column for the Journal.
TALK TO US
If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.