The Timeless Words of Jefferson

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 4, 2005
Messages
3,213
Location
Amerikan Twilight Zone
I love peace, and am anxious that we should give the world still another useful lesson, by showing to them other modes of punishing injuries than by war, which is as much a punishment to the punisher as to the sufferer.

War has been avoided from a due sense of the miseries, and the demoralization it produces, and of the superior blessings of a state of peace and friendship with all mankind.

I value peace, and I should unwillingly see any event take place which would render war a necessary resource.

Having seen the people of all other nations bowed down to the earth under the wars and prodigalities of their rulers, I have cherished their opposites, peace, economy, and riddance of public debt, believing that these were the high road to public as well as private prosperity and happiness.

Believing that the happiness of mankind is best promoted by the useful pursuits of peace, that on these alone a stable prosperity can be founded, that the evils of war are great in their endurance, and have a long reckoning for ages to come, I have used my best endeavors to keep our country uncommitted in the troubles which afflict Europe, and which assail us on every side.

I do not believe war the most certain means of enforcing principles. Those peaceable coercions which are in the power of every nation, if undertaken in concert and in time of peace, are more likely to produce the desired effect.

We love and we value peace; we know its blessings from experience. We abhor the follies of war, and are not untried in its distresses and calamities.

<snip>

I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.

The insults & injuries committed on us by both the belligerent parties, from the beginning of 1793 to this day, & still continuing, cannot now be wiped off by engaging in war with one of them.

I have seen enough of one war never to wish to see another.

One war, such as that of our Revolution, is enough for one life.

The most successful war seldom pays for its losses.

War is as much a punishment to the punisher as to the sufferer.

War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.

We have obtained by a peaceable appeal to justice, in four months, what we should not have obtained under seven years of war, the loss of one hundred thousand lives, an hundred millions of additional debt, many hundred millions worth of produce and property lost for want of market, or in seeking it, and that demoralization which war superinduces on the human mind.

Great sacrifices of interest have certainly been made by our nation under the difficulties latterly forced upon us by transatlantic powers. But every candid and reflecting mind must agree with you, that while these were temporary and bloodless, they were calculated to avoid permanent subjection to foreign law and tribute, relinquishment of independent rights, and the burthens, the havoc, and desolations of war.

<snip>

Wars with any European powers are devoutly to be deprecated.

For years we have been looking as spectators on our brethren in Europe, afflicted by all those evils which necessarily follow an abandonment of the moral rules which bind men and nations together. Connected with them in friendship and commerce, we have happily so far kept aloof from their calamitous conflicts, by a steady observance of justice towards all, by much forbearance and multiplied sacrifices. At length, however, all regard to the rights of others having been thrown aside, the belligerent powers have beset the highway of commercial intercourse with edicts which, taken together, expose our commerce and mariners, under almost every destination, a prey to their fleets and armies. Each party, indeed, would admit our commerce with themselves, with the view of associating us in their war against the other. But we have wished war with neither.

It is much to be desired that war may be avoided, if circumstances will admit. Nor in the present maniac state of Europe, should I estimate the point of honor by the ordinary scale. I believe we shall on the contrary, have credit with the world, for having made the avoidance of being engaged in the present unexampled war, our first object.

The cannibals of Europe are going to eating one another again. A war between Russia and Turkey is like the battle of the kite and snake. Whichever destroys the other, leaves a destroyer the less for the world. This pugnacious humor of mankind seems to be the law of his nature, one of the obstacles to too great multiplication provided in the mechanism of the Universe. The cocks of the henyard kill one another up. Bears, bulls, rams, do the same. And the horse, in his wild state, kills all the young males, until worn down with age and war, some vigorous youth kills him, and takes to himself the harem of females. I hope we shall prove how much happier for man the Quaker policy is, and that the life of the feeder is better than that of the fighter; and it is some consolation that the desolation by these maniacs of one part of the earth is the means of improving it in other parts. Let the latter be our office, and let us milk the cow, while the Russian holds her by the horns, and the Turk by the tail.

<snip>

We have received a report that the French Directory has proposed a declaration of war against the United States to the Council of Ancients, who have rejected it. Thus we see two nations, who love one another affectionately, brought by the ill temper of their executive administrations, to the very brink of a necessity to imbrue their hands in the blood of each other.

The agents of the two people [United States and France] are either great bunglers or great rascals, when they cannot preserve that peace which is the universal wish of both.

The people now see that France has sincerely wished peace, and their seducers [federalists] have wished war, as well for the loaves and fishes which arise out of war expenses, as for the chance of changing the Constitution, while the people should have time to contemplate nothing but the levies of men and money.

<snip>

Never was so much false arithmetic employed on any subject, as that which has been employed to persuade nations that it is their interest to go to war. Were the money which it has cost to gain, at the close of a long war, a little town, or a little territory, the right to cut wood here, or to catch fish there, expended in improving what they already possess, in making roads, opening rivers, building ports, improving the arts, and finding employment for their idle poor, it would render them much stronger, much wealthier and happier. This I hope will be our wisdom.

<snip>

Unmeddling with the affairs of other nations, we had hoped that our distance and our dispositions would have left us free, in the example and indulgence of peace with all the world.

To cherish and maintain the rights and liberties of our citizens, and to ward from them the burthens, the miseries, and the crimes of war, by a just and friendly conduct toward all nations, were among the most obvious and important duties of those to whom the management of their public interests have been confided; and happy shall we be if a conduct guided by these views on our part, shall secure to us a reciprocation of peace and justice from other nations.

The desire to preserve our country from the calamities and ravages of war, by cultivating a disposition, and pursuing a conduct, conciliatory and friendly to all nations, has been sincerely entertained and faithfully followed.

<snip>

If ever there was a holy war, it was that which saved our liberties and gave us independence.

It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it. In that, I have no doubt, we shall act as one man.

Obviously, traversing oceans to bomb places that many Americans cannot even locate on a map would not fall into this category.

<snip>

The power of declaring war being with the Legislature, the Executive should do nothing necessarily committing them to decide for war in preference of non-intercourse, which will be preferred by a great many.

I opposed the right of the President to declare anything future on the question, Shall there or shall there not be war?

Considering that Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their authority for using force in any degree which could be avoided. I have barely instructed the officers stationed in the neighborhood of the aggressions to protect our citizens from violence, to patrol within the borders actually delivered to us, and not to go out of them but when necessary to repel an inroad or to rescue a citizen or his property.

As the Executive cannot decide the question of war on the affirmative side, neither ought it to do so on the negative side, by preventing the competent body from deliberating on the question.

Congress [must] be called [if there] is a justifiable cause of war; and as the Executive cannot decide the question of war on the affirmative side, neither ought it to do so on the negative side by preventing the competent body from deliberating on the question.

We have already given in example one effectual check to the Dog of war by transferring the power of letting him loose from the Executive to the Legislative body, from those who are to spend to those who are to pay.

The making reprisal on a nation is a very serious thing. Remonstrance and refusal of satisfaction ought to precede; and when reprisal follows, it is considered as an act of war, and never yet failed to produce it in the case of a nation able to make war; besides, if the case were important enough to require reprisal, and ripe for that step, Congress must be called on to take it; the right of reprisal being expressly lodged with them by the Constitution, and not with the Executive.

The question of war being placed by the Constitution with the Legislature alone, respect to that [makes] it [the Executive’s] duty to restrain the operations of our militia to those merely defensive; and considerations involving the public satisfaction, and peculiarly my own, require that the decision of that question, whichever way it be, should be pronounced definitely by the Legislature themselves.

<snip>

There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army.

Were armies to be raised whenever a speck of war is visible in our horizon, we never should have been without them. Our resources would have been exhausted on dangers which have never happened, instead of being reserved for what is really to take place.

Nor is it conceived needful or safe that a standing army should be kept up in time of peace.

The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force.

<snip>

We must do as the Spaniards and English do. Keep them in peace by liberal and constant presents. Another powerful motive is that in this way we may leave no pretext for raising or continuing an army. Every rag of an Indian depredation will, otherwise, serve as a ground to raise troops with those who think a standing army and a public debt necessary for the happiness of the United States, and we shall never be permitted to get rid of either.

(some other quotes)

"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other." ~ James Madison

"There was never a good war or a bad peace." ~ Benjamin Franklin

"Preparation for war is a constant stimulus to suspicion and ill will." ~ James Monroe

"While there are knaves and fools in the world, there will be wars in it." ~ John Jay

"The fiery and destructive passions of war reign in the human breast with much more powerful sway than the mild and beneficent sentiments of peace." ~ Alexander Hamilton

"My first wish is to see this plague of mankind, war, banished from the earth." ~ George Washington
 
"We are alarmed here with the apprehensions of war and sincerely anxious that it may be avoided, but not at the expense either of our faith or honor."

And then President Jefferson ordered the U.S. Navy and Marines to war against the pirates of the Barbary Coast, the terrorists of his day, and put an end to their piracy. Maybe this song rings a bell: From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli...

John
 
From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli

And we set up FOBs there after the cessation of major hostilities and
occupied those entire countries for at least 3 years afterwards while
making plans to remain there another 50 years?.....:rolleyes: Yep, exactly
the kind of military actions Jefferson would have warned us about abusing:

The question of war being placed by the Constitution with the Legislature alone, respect to that [makes] it [the Executive’s] duty to restrain the operations of our militia to those merely defensive; and considerations involving the public satisfaction, and peculiarly my own, require that the decision of that question, whichever way it be, should be pronounced definitely by the Legislature themselves.
 
Maybe if we had occupied Tripoli we could have forestalled years of trouble in Libya, and the area in general, including their ongoing sponsorship of terrorism.

"The city was a major base of the Barbary pirates, whom the United States fought (1801–5) in the Tripolitan War. In 1911, Tripoli passed to Italy, and later it was made the capital of the Italian colony of Libya. During World War II, the city was captured (1943) by the British. In Apr., 1986, Tripoli was bombed by the United States for Libya's involvement in international terrorism." - googled up at random
 
Yep, let's just garrison ourselves across the world like the former Roman
Empire --any place we can't hold we just bomb.

Would that mesh well with the Christian-inspired ideals of Jefferson
and the Founding Fathers or come closer to the aims of Caligula?
 
Find a copy of Ellis' "American Sphinx" (The Thomas Jefferson Papers) to read a very well written/researched essay on the Pro & Con side of this controversial leader.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/mtjessay1.html

Jefferson's words, as well as his deeds, can be embraced by both sides of the political spectrum... conversly, they can also be used against him, if one chooses to "rewrite" history or tweak it to suit one's need.
He was a great man. An intelligent man. A controversial man, tho moreso in the recent past.
The correspondence between Adams and Jefferson in their later years, were, and are still, timeless pieces of the American Ideal, and show how two diametrically opposed political ideals can later come together to understand (and tolerate?) each other's point of view.
 
"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other." ~ James Madison

Yet soon afterward Madison declared war on Great Britain for it's interfernce with the commerce and soviergn nature of the United States. (The brits were agitating the indians against us on the Canadian frontier and boarding our vessels at sea - mainly those trading with France - and impressing their sailors into servitude in the royal navy. Yep- we started the war of 1812 - and won it.

Despite Madison's published aversion to war, he recognized that sometimes it was necessary to sustain the nation. Madison was no Monroe or Teddy Roosevelt - he was a diminuitive man - what we would today view as a passive "bookish" type. His declaration of war was very unpopular at the time . . . moreso after the British burned Washington. Yet in the end this was a war that defined and solidified our nation as it is.
 
While I consider Jefferson a great man, a great patriot, and one of the most important figures in the creation of modern democracy, I don't put much value into his words on war. Jefferson was a pacifist whose short-sighted refusal to spend money to strengthen the Navy and Army while he was President contributed directly to the War of 1812. The Navy was unable to protect US territorial waters from British encroachment and the Army was too weak to repel a British invasion.
 
My favorite and that I feel the most applicable to both national and personal defense:

"Speak softly and carry a big stick." -Teddy Roosevelt

What caliber of stick you carry is left to your discretion.
 
"Yep, let's just garrison ourselves across the world like the former Roman
Empire --any place we can't hold we just bomb.

Would that mesh well with the Christian-inspired ideals of Jefferson
and the Founding Fathers or come closer to the aims of Caligula?"

Given up on using Mr. Jefferson's quotes to try and support your conclusions?

John
 
Actually the rather long IN CONTEXT quotes of Jefferson I posted support
my points completely. By providing this context, it also shows the intent
of one of our country's primary authors in its foundation.

It seems you support a continuation of her involvement in garrisoning a
global empire that IMHO benefits Eurasia more than the USA --if that is
not true, please elaborate.
 
I'm still trying to figure out how you started with one post containing nothing but selected quotes of Mr. Jefferson and ended up talking about the aims of Caligula?

You do realize don't you that your first post didn't invite discussion, but was simply a tour de force of cherry picked quotes to support of your conclusion?

Time for a coffee refill.

John
 
Thanks for the quotes, TBL. They sure ain't making Democrats like TJ any more.

If any party could field a modern Jefferson that stuck to his word, I'd
vote for him.

I voted for Bush, but given what we've learned over the past year (and
after my deployment to Iraq) I greatly regret doing so. I gave him a
chance but now know the apple didn't fall far from the tree.

Careful there you might scare some of the board republicans.

Only a narrow faction of republicans who no longer honor the Constitution as
much as our other faction. They are completely unable or unwilling to see
how FAAAAAR they are dragging the party and the country from the ideals of
the Founding Fathers. Instead they have taken the ambitions of empire
along the lines of ancient Rome into a hedonistic embrace. They use the
same lame rhetorical arguements for past actions and the manipulation of
current data to justify their version of a globalist empire which is completely
antithetical to the spirit and purpose of this country's founding.

Jefferson scares both this faction of republicans for his complete refutation
of their globalist goals just as much as he does Democrats for his love of
GUNS. Sadly, within this faction of republicans there are still some who
consider themselves nationalists. They have such an advanced case of
entrenched tunnel vision and yes-man-itis that they can't see that they're
helping turn America into a hinterland for Eurasia.

We're a debtor nation and it's getting worse everyday as we sell out future
generations of our children for a temporary meal of porkloin from the barrel.
 
TBL, when was the United States ever an ideal reality? What country in the world has something better going for them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top