Tucker Carlson of Fox News appears to be a lone voice in the mainstream media urging caution with relation to action over the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria:
There are a few things to this, I will focus on two.
The first is the obvious question: Why would the Syrian regime led by Bashar al Assad use chemical weapons against its own people when it appears on the verge of victory, and the US looked set to withdraw its forces?
It is a pertinent question, because such an action would be counter productive, thus it casts doubt on whether the Syrian regime is culpable, and doubt on whether the West should take military action against it.
I find my second point more important, and it isn’t the possible onset of World War III. Tucker Carlson is decried by the left in the usual ways that Fox News anchors are. He is decried as a racist and an apologist for racists. Moreover, the alt-right love him.
Here’s the thing: don’t you find it odd that the people on the side of peace are the racists? The reason for this is sound – we want to avoid open conflict with Russia, and in short, no more brother wars.
But this should concern the left in a fundamental way for the following reason:
If Australia reaches the point where its Anglo-Celtic population is well and truly in the minority; where foreigners own most of its assets; the government continues to burden its citizens with high taxes and over-regulation; and the cultural sphere is dominated by a struggle for dominance between the SJW left and an increasingly assertive Muslim population; if these trends appear irreversible and in this scenario Australia is invaded, I for one will not raise a finger to defend it.
I doubt I am the only one.
We’re the ones the left should be hoping are clamouring for war, because ultimately we are the ones who make our nations safe for them to carry on with their nonsense.
When the racists adopt the attitude of Romans in the fifth century AD, rest assured the barbarians will soon be ruling.
