THIS PAGE
TO A FRIEND
Where Are You, James Monroe
When We Really Need You?
November 15, 2004
By Jim Moore
On December 2nd 1823 a stunning document surfaced in America.
It is not quite as important as the Declaration of Independence, but it runs a close second. Not only because it expresses a monumental idea for our nation, but also because it is especially relevant for our times.
The document, called The Monroe Doctrine, was written by James Monroe, our fifth president, and given in a speech to the Congress for their study and approval, which it got.
Here are a few words from Monroe's speech (bear with me).
"We should consider, therefore, any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and security. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. It is still the true policy of the United States to leave the parties to themselves in hopes that the other parties will pursue the same course."
In essence, Monroe's message put the European powers on notice that American continents were off limits to colonization and that any attempt---ANY attempt---to interfere with American lands would be considered the "manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States."
If you have trouble interpreting the ostentatious utterances of Monroe, here it is, plain and simple: We won't meddle in your affairs, and we expect you not to meddle in ours. If you do, there will be hell to pay.
You will notice that Monroe made a point of saying that it works both ways, i.e. you stay in YOUR backyard we'll state in OURS, and all will be well.
In our 200+ year history, however, the Monroe Doctrine has been ignored or violated so many times---in both directions---that it's a wonder patriotic citizens take it seriously at all any more. A very dangerous situation.
First, let's look at "them" interfering in our affairs.
The quintessential violation of this portion of the Doctrine was the foolhardy and unconscionable giveaway of our Panama Canal; the strategic waterway connecting North and South America, and the key to America's security in this hemisphere.
The Panama Canal, considered one of the most valuable pieces of real estate in the world, was turned over to Panamanian Dictator General Torrijos by President Jimmy Carter in 1978.
The Panama giveaway may have been one of Carter's more magnanimous moments, but not for the United States. The ink was hardly dry on the paper when Panama reneged on its agreement with the U.S. and allowed a hostile party to take over the Panama Canal operation.
And who was this hostile party? Communist China. China operates through the Panama Ports Company, a "front" for Hutchison-Whampoa Limited whose chief stockholder is Hong Kong billionaire Li Kashing. Hutchison-Whampoa, itself, is a "front" for somebody----the Communist military and intelligence arms of the Peoples Republic of China.
That makes China's nuclear missiles right at our back door a frightening possibility. And they did it without firing a shot.
Jimmy Carter may not be a traitor but he certainly never read the Monroe Doctrine.
Now let's took at us interfering in "their" affairs. We hardly come out of this transaction smelling like a rose.
Tim Kane, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation gives us a troubling, if revealing, look at ourselves.
From 1950-2000, 23% of our troops, 535,000 soldiers, were deployed on foreign soil. 52% were somewhere in Europe, 41% somewhere in Asia We have, or have had, troops in Spain, Portugal, Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Germany, France, Great Britain, Cuba, Greece, Turkey, the Netherlands, Bosnia, Herzegovina, even Iceland.
Troop deployment in the Middle East included Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Pakistan, Morocco, Egypt, Lebanon, India, Israel and now Iraq.
"No other military in world history," intones Prof. Lane, "has been so widely deployed as that of the United States. And the first priority in deployment strategy is not a particular foreign government's desire to keep a certain number of American troops in its country, but the American need to align its forces against contemporary and future threats."
What future threats, Prof. Kane?
I would submit that those threats might be political and military responses to one of two things: (1) our unilateral push for hegemony and the acquisitive forging of the American Empire, or (2) America's contribution to the multilateral task of building a New World Order.
Either of which ends America's sovereignty, locks us into global authoritarianism, and kills the American dream.
If this blatant disregard for the Monroe Doctrine doesn't turn President James Monroe over in his grave, he must indeed be dead.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml