• Print friendly
• E-mail a friend
• Contact Us
• Social Networks
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
  • 
• Stock Market
  • Weather
  • Gas Prices
  • Flight Info
  • Lottery
  • Recipes
  • Soccer

Ballistic Missile Defense, weaponization of space

Doublethinking defense

Nato's recent talk of creating a Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) program to protect Europe from a surprise attack by a "rogue nation" has renewed the debate over the so-called weaponization of space. Except this time many of the proponents of the idea were those who vehemently opposed it when the United States talked about creating a similar North American shield.

I'm sure there are many reasons why those opposed to a North American BMD program would be in favor of a European one. For starters, Iran presents a true threat to Europe. Everyone in the world knows Iran will soon have atomic weapons and no one expects them to be overly squeamish about incinerating a few million Crusader infidels. Yet North Korea, whose leader, Kim Jong Il is every bit as nutty as Iran's President Ahmed Ahmadinejad and whose nuclear weapons program is much farther advanced than that of Iran, presents a similar threat to North America.

Another reason why opponents of a North American BMD Shield might favor a European version of the shield is that the idea did not originate in the U.S. That's what George Orwell dubbed "doublethink" in his dystopian novel 1984. Doublethink is one of those intellectual calisthenics the left loves to practice, allowing them the luxury of neatly fitting opposing ideas into the same paradigm.

Orwell's own description of doublethink is set out as follows:

"The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. ... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies–all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

Orwell had intimate knowledge of doublethink in action, having fought on the socialists' side during the Spanish Civil War and learning first hand what leftists were all about.

I believe that a lot of leftists are going to embrace the idea of a BMD Shield for Europe, simply because the idea wasn't dreamed up by George W. Bush and his neo-cons. At the same time my sense is that they will continue to pooh-pooh a North American BDM Shield for the usual reasons: it's not necessary; no one hates us that much; no one has the technology to reach us; we want to ensure that we do not weaponize space; blah blah blah.

It would be refreshing, just once, to have a consistency of viewpoints from our colleagues on the left. But to expect that is like expecting the sun to rise in the west. How can you have a consistent point of view when the basis of your philosophy is based on feelings rather than thought? The only consistency of thought that emanates from the ‘blame America first' left today is if something is good for the U.S., then it's bad; and if something is bad for the U.S., then it's good.

This is doublethink in its purest form and it's alive and well right here.