The Other Name for Pre-emptive

Written by JB Williams


It seems to me that this word “pre-emptive” is what divides America on a host of issues today.

Liberals are fast to point out how they supported our military mission in Afghanistan, but not our mission in Iraq, all on the basis that one was a reactionary retaliatory strike, and the other was a “pre-emptive” strike.

Of course supporting the Afghanistan mission was a no brainer, since it was in response to losing over 3000 innocent US citizens and a whole lot more on September 11, 2001. Support for retaliating against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who provided safe haven in Afghanistan, required no vision, no soul searching, no thought and no guts. That’s why it was easy for liberals to support it…

However, a preventive mission like that in Iraq would require forethought, vision, determination, guts and soul searching, things rarely found in today’s liberals.

Like a badge of honor, liberals repeat their rant against “pre-emptive” (preventive) measures concerning matters of national security. Of course they are also the first to complain and point fingers when asking why we were unable to “prevent” the events of 9/11, which obviously would have required some form of “pre-emption”.

In contrast, conservatives by definition tend to believe strongly in “prevention” as a means of managing most things in life. They often use terms like “the best defense is a good offense”, and it applies to just about everything.

Want to “prevent” health problems that come with being over-weight? Easy, don’t live on a cheeseburger diet. Want to “prevent” unwanted pregnancy? Easy, don’t sleep around, or if you do, use proper protection. Want to “prevent” AIDS? Easy, don’t subscribe to the theory that it doesn’t matter who you sleep with. Want to “prevent” the next 9/11? Easy, remove terror as a means of political discourse in the world…

Want to “prevent” being broke? Easy, spend less than you make. Want to “prevent” total dependency on the Social Security System that was never intended to be your complete retirement plan? Easy, save a little of what you make for 30 or 40 years, make some intelligent sacrifices…

The simple truth is, all of these things are “pre-emptive” measures intended to “prevent” an unwanted consequence mostly caused by our own actions or inactions. They all require “sacrifice”, and the fact is, liberals don’t like any of these “pre-emptive” measures towards life, they find them all to be confining, overly simplistic, and inconvenient.

It has to do with personal responsibility, and the “enlightened ones” want no part of it…

So, they call upon their government to strip away an ever increasing amount of privately earned resources from those who behave responsibly, in order to provide a reactionary Band-Aid to the problems inherent with poor decisions.

Those now classified in America as “the rich”, (making more than $50,000 a year), find themselves living on roughly half of what they actually earn in order to fund a government that liberals have made responsible for all their self-inflicted ills.

So that liberals can be free to sleep with whoever they want, we have to pay for AIDS. We have to pay for people who spend more than they make, people who wouldn’t work for any amount of money, people who didn’t save, people who want two new cars and a big screen TV instead of health coverage or a retirement account, people who are more concerned with their career than raising their children, and people who need a third abortion because they simply refuse to act responsibly.

In return for our generosity, we are called “phobic,” “neocons,” “narrow minded” and “self righteous” “bigots”. All we really are is responsible people who understand that our actions and inaction have natural consequences…

Meanwhile, no matter how much money our government grabs from the private sector through a growing list of taxes, they can not balance the budget. Not liberals, not conservatives, nobody has been able to fully balance the national budget since our national debt began more than 60 years ago.

I have news for you, they never will either. The tail is officially wagging the dog my friends. We are past the point of no return.

The federal budget can not be balanced because there is not enough money in America to pay for everything someone’s constituent wants. Politicians need their constituents in order to remain in elected office, and the easiest way to keep them is to buy them with federally funded promises.

Just listen to the list of promises made in every national campaign season, fire up your calculator and see what it would cost to fund everything being promised, then add that to the deficit we are already running, and add all of that to a $6 Trillion dollar national debt. Last but not least, divide that figure by 300 million Americans and see how much each of us owes to pay that bill…

Then get out your checkbook and write a check, because sooner or later, that’s what we will have to do, unless we simply do what has become too common of practice in our nation already, file national bankruptcy.

All of this could have easily been “prevented”, by taking “pre-emptive” action in all area’s of our lives, never building the impending disaster to begin with.

How do you like the concept of “pre-emption” now?

Have you taken a good look at how many international terror attacks happened in the two years preceding the Iraq mission, verses how many have happened in the two years since? You should, because it makes a very strong case for “pre-emption”.

Want a clue into how liberals feel about “prevention”? Just listen as they try to convince the public the exact opposite of what they have been selling in every election campaign since Carter, “we have NO Social Security crisis”…. Yes we do, and as usual, liberals want to wait until the crash before they do anything about it….to do otherwise would be “pre-emptive”!

"Newspaper look" derived from work ©Seattle Sentinel