Discussion in 'Politics' started by ARogueTrader, Nov 24, 2003.
This is such a dumb statement. "playing on the fears...", what a crock of manure!
Our great president, who will be re-elected despite the opposition of idiots on this board, is doing all he can to protect USA from another attack. Stevie Wonder can see that. It's your dumbass type of liberal thinking that will make sure no democrat is put back as president any time soon.
I have to agree with Rogue's disagreement.....it will actually justify Bush's lunacy.......
Thats the part I dont get....THIS IS NOT A WAR ON TERRORISM. Saddam is not a terrorist, HE IS A DICTATOR...This war has been called many things and not one of those things has been accomplished...
"A war to save the people"....these same f*ckers are killing our boys...save us not them...
"A war to find WMD"...... where??
"A war on terrorism"..... then how the F*#K do people cross our borders at will.
"A war for OIL "...... this was what I thought at first...oh boy did they f*ck this one up....
I could make a joke about you in the National Guard, but the point Hart is trying to make is that national security needs to be a job that we all participate in, not just the military.
I genuinely think it is a shame that you get so emotional on these topics.
We can all scream our opinions and say we hate the other side, but what is the use of that?
There is value in what Hart says. I didn't say we need to agree with it or accept it all, simply that there are points he makes that we need to consider.
If you use Israel as an example, they have proven that their hard line approach has not stopped terrorism.
We need to look at alternative approaches, we simply cannot kill everyone who doesn't like us.
reminds me of a certain somebody named goering...
***WARNING TO NEOCONSERVATIVES: VIEWING THIS PICTURE MAY MAKE YOUR BRAIN SUDDENLY START FUNCTIONING***
Its this mind set that will be our down fall.
The correct answer is.. Of course we can, and should.
Of course we have seen this quote by Goering hundreds of times in the past two years. And it does indeed seem apropos to our nation's strategy now. Witness the arguments that went on right here in the ET forums just prior to our invasion of Iraq. To me, the most outstanding example of what is wrong with our country's divisiveness was when the ET poster who went by the name of Mondo Trader suggested that anyone who opposed the invasion should be imprisoned for sedition.
I thought that was as scary as it could get. Now we hear Sulong saying that we can and should just kill everyone who doesn't like us. Can Sulong be the recently absent Mondo Trader? Whether it is the same person or not, the mind set is the same. Extremists are dangerous no matter what flag, religion or currency they wrap themselves in.
Gary Hart's essay may not offer solutions. But it addresses the problems quite well IMO. And it makes clear what we all know. Which is there are no clear answers. Today's world is complex. And every day it becomes more so. His reference to the technological chasm between the computer literate and illiterate would have been laughable just 10 years ago. Now it is an un- arguable fact.
His statement: War is not an instrument of policy; it is a failure of policy is also a truism.
Clearly we have a major uphill battle that likely will go on longer than any of us will live.
Certainly I have no solutions. However, it is an absolute fact that without the freedom to question policies; to dissent and argue and explore all and any options, we will lose the war on terrorism. Therefore, those who believe in giving total control of our policies to a small handful of politicians...blind faith... if given their way would assure our demise.
What our nation is supposed to be about is freedom. To accede to the beliefs of a Mondo Trader or a Sulong is to give up on our freedom and accept a dictatorship. When a leader like GWB can change our system using the politics of fear and emotion (as he so blatantly did by declaring a "preemptive" war), we are well on our way to seeing our constitution becoming irrelevant.
What's next? We are presently engaged in what is really a war based on many things, but at the forefront is "Our God is better than your God (or your lack of a god)". So to make matters worse, the religious right and the political right are in an alliance that is striving to make us more like our enemies.
In all of history, religion and land have been the issues of war. In today's world, not much has changed. Except the technology of how to kill and terrorize. Borders are less and less important as the world shrinks. Around the World in Eighty Days was a fantasy 130 years ago. The Pony Express was our "high tech" way of communicating at that very same time. Now anyone can be halfway around the world and back in a day. How long before a "briefcase nuke" is delivered somewhere by terrorists? And meanwhile, we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars developing and deploying weapons of conventional warfare. We need a more highly developed missile defense system for what? We have trillions of dollars of tax money spent on weapons to oppose enemies that don't exist. Meanwhile we have almost no defense against the enemies we know with certainty will strike us again sooner or later.
Today's weapons systems are educated minds, not steel and gunpowder. Intelligence is a growth industry. This is where our money needs to be spent.
Hart is right. The world changes, and we need to adapt. Our enemies do.
The danger is how do we adapt and maintain our individual freedoms? Our technology is outgrowing us. And that can't be slowed down. Nothing can reverse progress. Except the unthinkable. We have enemies that have a different outlook on what is "unthinkable". We need to outsmart them. Not out-gun them.
So by definition, "conservatism" cannot work in a world that is rapidly changing. Progressive thinking is what is needed. Not reactionary politics. We cannot fight against ourselves.
Lincoln said, "a house divided cannot stand". Our national politics are just too divisive. What we need now is an administration of thinkers. We have too much to lose with an "us against them" administrations mind set. We can't even be sure who "them" is right now.
Where is Bin Laden? Where is Saddam? Where is the "anthrax killer"?
If we caught all three tomorrow, would that make things better or worse?
Anyone who claims to have the answers is welcome to give them. Reality is there are no ready answers. Except to do whatever is in our power to RETAIN our fundamental freedoms. If we give them up to defeat a hidden enemy, we lose.
My pal Hapaboy said that Hart's essay is "ridiculous". But what is "ridiculous" about questioning our positions and listing our problems? Hart indeed does not offer much in the way of solutions. But the whole point is we need a "manhattan Project" type effort at finding solutions. And without addressing the problems, solutions are never found. Hart at least did a pretty good job of addressing the problems we face.
osama, sadam are tacked away for future reference.
anthrax attacks silently swept under the rag. Remember this?
Anthrax matches Army spores
Bioterror: Organisms made at a military laboratory in Utah are genetically identical to those mailed to members of Congress.
From UCLA Department of Epidemiology
Is it time to dust the "letters" off, resend them so the PatriotII can pass too? Lol, congressmen admitted signing PatriotI without even reading it due to the anthrax scares building evacuations back then. Btw the attacks stopped once the Bill was signed into law. (I'm sure just a coincidence)
These guys are brilliant, using all the tricks in the book, but fear and confusion ranks number 1 approach.
Solutions? Pick up the phone, write a letter, talk to your congressman. Lunch an undeterred investigation. Bring the true evildoers to justice. Stop the madness. Stop the arrogance.
I agree on this part also, I already gave a solution, but I'll do it again.
If we agree that we are in a WAR, then we have to do WHAT IT TAKES to WIN, that means KILL, MAIM,destroy no matter who's in the way. We have to be DEADLY serious about the business of WAR.
If we as a nation cannot or will not do what it takes to win a WAR, we need to come on home and forget about it.
BTW,What is everybodys definition of WAR? What dose WAR mean to you?
Separate names with a comma.