A PRAYER FOR WAR (REDUX)

by Daniel Barge

It's often said that war brings out the best and worst in people. Now, as the Syrian crisis flares up on President Trump's Twitter and the media, there is tough talk aplenty. We may even see ships being moved into position, or hear the distant roar of aircraft being moved from base to base.

Inevitably there are those who say war never solved anything (not quite true) and that what is needed is a political solution. But, then, this is countered with the idea that talk is cheap and that there is only one language certain people [fill in blank] understand.

But while everyone seems to be divided, there is a consensus on one thing, that, necessary or not, war is a pretty bad thing. But is that really true? Is war really the worst option here?

What most of us on the dissident right want is the collapse of the present-day West – the globalist, materialist, usurious, atheistic, multiculturalist, anti-genderist, anti-Whitist West – and its replacement with something healthier. We definitely want it to collapse before it has a chance to infect every part of the globe with its vile bacillus.

So, let's look at the BIG PICTURE: The West is ascendant everywhere. Radical Islam has become its tool, while Islamic countries are swarmed by its porn and materialism – and very soon its other vices. China too is hardly immune to its lowest common denominator acid, and, with its heavily gendercided, male-slanted population of the future, it may well be an ideal candidate for the West's vile experiments in gender deconstruction.

The big picture.

The unimaginative think that Western and in particular American power – the black cancerous heart of the West – stems from Uncle Sam's mighty military machine, but the fact is that the mould and metastasising cancerousness of the West grows through soft power, by incremental creeping, the same way that rot works, the same way a frog is boiled.

Such corruption requires peace and the allaying of all heroic and spiritual values.

This is also the reason why, when you strip away the smoke and mirrors of the controlled narrative, the West is militarily weak. Sure, with enough money you can put on a nice fireworks display occasionally, as we did last April. Remember that? But with one cruise missile costing X million dollars, you might actually want to use professional firework artists to get more flash – if not bang – for your buck.

And let's actually look at the record.
TL;DR: The West is Mars's bitch.

Since 1945, America has been involved in the following five major conflagrations. It has not done very well:

• KOREA (1950 - 1953) – A tough draw
• VIETNAM (1961 -1972) – A clear defeat through loss of will
• GULF WAR (1990-91) – Victory against a weak opponent 
• IRAQ WAR (2003-2011) – Pyrrhic victory at great cost
• AFGHANISTAN (2001 – present) – Looming defeat

LOL, this loser is actually considered a hero in America.

At best, America has a 50% record in these major conflicts, and, given the ambiguity of the Iraq result, less than 50%. Clearly this is an abysmal record for a global hegemon. Other great empires at the height of their power tended to have win rates closer to 100%. And let's remember that none of these wars really involved top notch opponents – even in Korea the Chinese had just come out of their own debilitating civil war and occupation by the Japanese.

In addition to these "major" conflicts, the US has also been humiliatingly kicked out of places like the Lebanon (1983) and Somalia (1992) by rag-tag outfits.

So, if America knows what's good for it, it will avoid war like the plague. But, conversely, for those of us who wish to see the downfall of the American Empire, American involvement in war has its undoubted attractions.

Back in 2013 when it looked like America would attack Syria and Iran, I secretly hoped that it would, and in the process get bogged down in a real meat grinder with escalating costs and – yes – a rising death toll. Perhaps deterring the West from this move was Putin's great mistake.

Of course I abhor the costs of war, especially the sacrifice of the innocent and the bravest, but considering the state of our civilisation, we also have to abhor the costs of peace. The 18th-century churchman Beilby Porteus expressed much the same thoughts in "Death: a Poetical Essay":

"Yet say, should Tyrants learn at last to feel,
And the loud din of battle cease to bray;
Should dove-ey'd Peace o'er all the earth extend
Her olive branch, and give the world repose,
Would Death be foil'd? Would health, and strength, and youth
Defy his power? Has he no arts in store,
No other shafts save those of war? — Alas!
Ev'n in the smile of Peace, that smile which sheds
A heavenly sunshine o'er the soul, there basks
That serpent Luxury: War its thousands slays,
Peace its ten thousands..."

Yes, its ten thousands and indeed millions and billions. Because of the sickness of our present day society, war by comparison becomes almost a stint on the health farm.

If some kind of long-lasting war or even Cold War were to emerge, not only would it break the spell of soulless materialistic hedonism that is the siren song of our civilisation, and call forth higher values on both sides, but it would also expose the contradictions in the West and our civilisation's inherent incompatibility with heroism and self-sacrifice.

It would, of course, bring out the best and worst in us, and, in my opinion, the West would have more of the worst, so a war between the West and Russia would also most likely result in a victory for Russia and its allies. This would then resonate around the World and sound the death knell of the unimperial empire that is America, a true victory for the World.

So, in the immortal words of Shakespeare’s Mark Anthony:

"Cry ‘Havoc,’ and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial."