Jim Webb’s son has been called up for duty in Iraq.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Where’s Jenna? Where’s Barbara?
August 31st, 2006
62 Comments
Oliver Willis
Like Kryptonite To Stupid
-
-
Breaking News
- Tila Tequila Live Streaming Mental Meltdown
- 31 Die In Chinese Mine Blast In Heilongjiang Province, 82 Trapped
- Victoria Justice Stars In New Nickeloden Show “Victorious”
- CERN’s Large Hadron Collider Back Up And Running
- Megan Fox Alive For Transformers 3
- Maryna Linchuk @ 2009 Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show
- Madison Parker Works Out
- Sony Reveals Lame Attempt To Fight iTunes
- Brian Thomas: UK Man Gets Away With Killing Wife In His Sleep
- Olivia Wilde @ US Weekly Hot Hollywood 2009 Party
Live News
Barbara has been doing volunteer work at a hospital in South Africa. She is starting a job with a New York firm that produces educational materials. Jenna will probably be starting a teaching job soon in South America. She has been teaching at a private school.
See, there is this cool website called “google” where you can type in famous people’s names and find news articles that tell what they are doing.
I also heard that when you go to the supermarket now, the checker holds your groceries over this little red laser beam that rings up the total amount of money you owe. Cool, huh?
BTW, how many volunteer hours did Chelsea put in, helping to rebuild Serbia after her father bombed it for 78 days?
Mike, if you would care to use your own beloved Google, you’d note that Chelsea would have been about 17-18 when the Serbian conflict occurred. Jenna and not-Jenna at that age were being busted for underage drinking in Austin.
And to extend your analogy, forget this cushy South America shit, when will they be “helping to rebuild Iraq after their father blew it to hell for 3 years”?
Counting down to the inevitable posts on the rightard blogs (LGF, Free Republic, etc.) that Webb’s son’s service is a campaign stunt…
Those jobs can wait, we need more people in Iraq, why aren’t the Bush twins at the front of the line?
Controller in Ky. crash slept 2 hours
In the day leading up to the crash of Comair Flight 5191, a federal investigator says the air traffi
Send the twins? I thought we were trying to win this thing! The last thing the true heroes of our military need is the “spring break duo” next to them.
When wingers attempt sarcasm, they fall right on their ignorant faces. Way to keep down your team’s batting average, Mike.
The twins are a couple of pampered trust fund babies; those rotten apples fell right into the roots. South America? South Africa? Sounds like someone was moving them out of range of our lazy corporate media’s scandal-hungry cameras (not that they needed to).
OW’s point is clear and on target: these right-wing, warmongering cowards (”war president” included) are in love with warfare, as long as someone else’s offspring has to the killing and bleeding. The same holds true for the twins as it does for their piece-of-sh-t father.
Well, they could be “comfort girls” for our brave soldiers….
Why? I thought you were pushing withdrawl.
How enlightening. Oliver sees military service not as a calling, but as a punishment. And he believes in… let’s see… how does the Bible put it… “visiting the sins of the father” on the child. I think there’s also a Constitutional prohibition against it — Article III, Section 3.
Young Mr. Webb chose to enlist in the Marine Corps, and he is to be honored for his actions. To use him as a political football — especially in such a craven way — is despicable.
And where was all this pro-military attitude back in 1992, when an admitted draft-dodger (note that there hasn’t been a draft in over 30 years) ran against a certified war hero. Or in 1996, when that same draft dodger ran against someone whose wartime service was even more heroic?
For the record: I thought it was irrelevant then, and it still is now. Pity you folks can’t claim the same consistency.
And if we’re gonna bring up the sins of politicians’ children, let’s not overlook some Inconvenient Truths about a certain prominent Democrat’s eldest son and namesake…
Nah. Not gonna go there.
J.
Hello, Jay Tea.
Here we go again. The notion that ADULTS who willingly join the military are just “children” being plucked from the safety of their Mother’s nest, having a gun thrown in their hands by mean Republicans and told, “Get out there and die, boy!”
Crikey. I’ve seen some asinine posts from you Oliver, but this one about takes the cake.
OW’s point is clear and on target: these right-wing, warmongering cowards (”war president” included) are in love with warfare, as long as someone else’s offspring has to the killing and bleeding. The same holds true for the twins as it does for their piece-of-sh-t father.
What a stupid frigging comment. And EVERY other President in nation’s history involved in a military action sent their own kids in first right? Clinton, Carter, Johnson, Truman, FDR, Wilson. All of them, right? And every Democratoc Senator and Representative that supported those Presidents above also sent their kids in right?
Boy Jay Tea nothing gets your panties in a wad like the suggestion that someone able to
serve, should serve.
You know if we’re really facing an enemy as threatening as the Nazis in World War II, as suggested by Donald Rumsfeld, if the war on terror is indeed World War III as asshats like Hugh Hewitt proclaim, why, to paraphrase Digby, haven’t we mobilized the entire nation to fight this imminent existential threat?
Pity you folks can’t claim the same consistency.
frame, we aren’t facing a threat like the Nazis in World War II. We’re years from that. The idea (if you can wrap your head around it) is to deal with the threat BEFORE it gets that bad.
You say that “someone able to serve, should serve.” Funny, I thought your side was the one against mandatory military conscription. I say that anyone who wants to serve and is able should be free to serve, at the discretion of the service.
Converting our military to a meritocracy of those who choose to serve has been the greatest thing we have ever done for our armed services. Why are you so eager to undo 30+ years of progress and success by forcing people who do not wish to serve upon the military? And more to the point, what does it say about your opinion of the military that you want to force people you loathe and have contempt for upon them?
Eh, I think I can figure it out for myself.
J.
“we aren’t facing a threat like
the Nazis in World War II”
We aren’t? Could you please tell that to Counselor to the President Dan Bartlett:
Try to stay up with the latest talking points, Jay, you’ll sound like less of an idiot. If this is just like World War II, isn’t a draft absolutely essential to our surrvival?
And our side is not opposed to a draft. Charlie Rangel supports the idea of a draft even if he doesn’t support this war. A draft is, if put in effect equally across the board, a very egalitarian thing. And please don’t tell me that a volunteer army is necessarily what makes our military so effective. I believe Isreal has compulsory military service. Is the IDF not an effective military force?
Again, let’s have some consistency here.
Newt thinks it’s WW III:
Isn’t that cute? Newt wants to “nationalize” the elections by using the rhetoric of WW III but he doesn’t want to nationalize military service or service to the country in a time of crisis. How typical.
I’m sorry but if this isn’t a “temporary violence” why are we, as Digby points out, relying on temporary stop gap measures, like mobilizing the National Guard for front line military service, to fight this fight? Don’t tell me that Republican dickheads don’t really mean the shit they spew and just politicizing this conflict for political gain. I’m shocked, just shocked.
Of course, if idiots like Bartlett and Gringrich actually took their rhetoric to its logical conclusion an instituted a WWII style response complete with a draft they’d lose the support of the 101st Keyboarders pretty damn fast, all those morons who think they’re fighting WWW I.
“Oliver sees military service not as a calling, but as a punishment.”
!?! Whuh? Where?
And where was all this pro-military attitude back in 1992, when an admitted draft-dodger (note that there hasn’t been a draft in over 30 years) ran against a certified war hero. Or in 1996, when that same draft dodger ran against someone whose wartime service was even more heroic?
Tell it, brother!
And where was it in 2000 when a Vietnam veteran ran against a slacker who blew off his national guard duty? Or in 2004 when the slacker’s supporters mocked the veteran who won the Silver Star?
The notion that ADULTS who willingly join the military are just “children” being plucked from the safety of their Mother’s nest,
Is today Make Sh*t Up day?
That sound of footsteps you hear is JT running back to the sinecure of the wingnut blogosphere, where he can delete posts he doesn’t like.
fact: I do NOT delete posts and comments that I don’t like. I delete spam and, once, the ravings of a psychotic stalker harassing another blogger. I answer them or ignore them, but I NEVER just delete them.
Quaker: Like it or not, that’s what Oliver is talking about: taking Jenna and Barbara Bush out of the lives they’re building for themselves and dumping them in the military, their own wishes to the contrary, simply because they were dumb enough to pick the wrong guy to be their father.
frame: I thought I made it even clear enough for you, but I underestimated your cluelessness. My apologies. I said the Islamic fascists do not YET raise the same threat as the fascists OF WORLD WAR II. We’re still in the early to mid 30’s stage of things.
If Iran gets the bomb, though, hit fast-forward to 1941 Europe.
Let’s see… I’ve previously ripped Gingrich and Hannity, and don’t recall ever even hearing about Bartlett. Why the hell would I care to defend them? I speak for myself, and nobody speaks for me. That they say what they think is their business, and of little interest to me.
Again, I repeat my initial point, which nobody cares to refute: Oliver thinks it’s just dandy to force adult children into military service as “punishment” for the deeds of their parents, regardless of the effects on those children or the military that gets saddled with a bunch of newbies who have absolutely no desire to be there. And the rest of his amen corner think that’s just fine and dandy. Have I summed it up accurately?
J.
I don’t remember Oliver saying “force”- shouldn’t the Bush twins be rushing to volunteer? For that matter, if this is such a titanic battle, why aren’t all able bodied people volunteering? Including JT?
If you had the ability to stop the Nazi’s in the mid-30’s, wouldn’t you? Why won’t the 101st keyboarders step up now?
We all know the answer- because the RW is unserious about the threats- the real threats (hint: OBL) that this country faces.
They spew the rhetoric, but fail to back up the rhetoric with sacrifice, whether it is military service, or proposing new taxes to pay for the conflict, or diplomatic efforts to head off a conflict.
Instead you bleat about “Islomofascists” and “libruls” and compare them to Nazi’s, instead of taking real steps to secure America.
fact: I do NOT delete posts and comments that I don’t like. I delete spam and, once, the ravings of a psychotic stalker harassing another blogger. I answer them or ignore them, but I NEVER just delete them.
Lie. You’ve deleted mine in the past, when I dared question a RW talking point.
Factcheck is now resorting to Lazy Argument # 2.
We saw Lazy Argument # 1 which is, “You’ve never experienced it, so you can’t comment on it.”
Lazy Argument # 2 is pretty specific to issues of battle and war. “Why don’t you enlist? Why aren’t you volunteering?”
Lazy arguments from lazy minds. Factcheck fits the profile.
Oliver thinks it’s just dandy to force adult children into military service as “punishment” for the deeds of their parents, regardless of the effects on those children or the military that gets saddled with a bunch of newbies who have absolutely no desire to be there. And the rest of his amen corner think that’s just fine and dandy. Have I summed it up accurately?
In a word, no.
Please, sir, show us exactly where Oliver suggests anything of the sort.
He makes no mention of forcing Ms. Bush and Ms. Bush to do anything. He asked why they weren’t participating in the noble adventure ongoing in the Middle East. But he didn’t say anyone should “force” them to do so.
Punishment? You’re making that up too. It is you who insists that we’re at the analog of 1939 Europe. If we’re on the brink of a world wide conflagration, what makes it “punishment” to try to prevent it?
M.S.U., Jay Tea.
Feh.
I shake my fist in your general direction, factcheck.
While I was busily typing, you were reading my mind and posting my very thoughts over your own name.
Pirate.
Lazy argument? Maybe in crazy jays mind. But what is lazier than fighting a titanic threat against evil (in the eyes of the right) with….. blog posts?
Either the right should back up their rhetoric with action and sacrifice, whatever form that takes, or they should admit that the “battle against Islamofascism” is a fraud, a cynical ploy used to win votes.
He asked why they weren’t participating in the noble adventure ongoing in the Middle East. But he didn’t say anyone should “force” them to do so.
Please. If Oliver is going to accuse Glenn of linking to something he agrees with but won’t say so and then tries later to get cute about it, he can’t do the same thing.
Look at what Kos wrote in his entry. He says, “Republicans are too busy shipping other people’s children off to Iraq. They wouldn’t demand such sacrifices from their own family members.”
The implication is as clear as day. The Big Bad GOP and the President are shipping off the children of the serfs but not sending their own into what liberals love calling ‘another Vietnam.”
That punishment rhetoric is an interesting slip, Quaker, good catch.
JT and his ilk are objectively anti-military, seeing it as some kind of “punishment”.
“Oliver thinks it’s just dandy to force adult children into military service as “punishment” for the deeds of their parents …”
Coupla things here. I’m not sure where you’re getting this punishment idea. Seems to me that he think Jenna and not Jenna should step up to help defend the West from the existential threat of Islamic fascism.
Now you say that were “still in the early to mid 30’s stage of things” but if that’s the case the whole analogy falls apart.
Hitler was appointed Chancellor in 1932. Tell me, was that when we were supposed have invaded Germany right then?
The Anscluss and Kristallnacht didn’t occur until 1938. Now was the US supposed to invade Germany then? And at that point, do you think the US could have accomplished this and achieved victory without a massive military build up, including a draft, given that Hitler had been building up the German army for six years at that point?
And we haven’t even mentioned Italy and Imperial Japan.
If you will, Jay, please tell me at what point in the mid to late 1930s the United States could have legitimately attacked Germany, Italy and Japan without a massive military mobilization, including a draft, of its own. I’d love to hear when you think this magic moment would have occurred.
But remember Newt said that this “i>is WWIII as in we are already in it, not preparing for it. Same with Bartlett. They’re saying were IN world war III, not trying to prevent it. Big dif dipshit.
Either the right should back up their rhetoric with action and sacrifice, whatever form that takes, or they should admit that the “battle against Islamofascism” is a fraud, a cynical ploy used to win votes.
Oh horseshit. Debate the merits of the war using some kind of intellectual honesty.
This nonsense about “Join up!!” is the pussy way of ‘defending’ your position. You can’t, so you turn it into the equivalent of a schoolyard, “I double dog dare you!” routine.
Leave it to the fanatical brand of crackerpolitik like New Hampshire’s biggest pussy Jay Tea and his infinitely vacuous team of armchair warriors all packed into the Wizbang Clown Car, waiting to stumble out and swing wildly into the air when the Presidency is under attack by a hypothesis –or sagging polls. Well done, boy.
In 1992 and 1996, Clinton’s choice to not fight in Vietnam did come under scrutiny by the Lee Atwater-tainted Republican campaigns. Back then, Karl Rove was an aspiring piglet trickster who was taken under Atwater’s wing.
Sadly for wingnuts, war was the last thing on the minds of Americans as campaign issues, this despite Bush Sr.’s untidy business of leaving Hussein in power. Just ask any Kurd or Shiite. Or the disposal of former CIA asset Noriega that left 4,000 dead.
With that, the “family values” RNC juggernaut steamrolled its way to failure and America suffered 8 years of economic prosperity, intervention in the Balkans which yielded no U.S. casualties and an attack on the World Trade Center that led to the successful apprehension of the perpetrators and their subsequent prosecution.
-Only to be assailed by Scaife-funded ass-huffers over extra marital dalliances and real estate deals that occurred while Clinton was not President.- Some standard of scandal.
Who was the “white house dog” according to Big Pharma Rush Limbaugh during the Clinton years?
But the rules have changed -take it from those who making a living moving the goalposts.
Harken stock trades?, Father working on the board of an arms dealer?, Too cozy a realtionship with the House of Saud?, Vice president on a war profiteering stipend? Look away, we’re in a time of war!
God forbid policy would be guided by someone with combat experience. What America needed in 2004 was a man who protected Texas and Alabama from the Vietcong with savvy skills in taking imperialist cues from PNAC likudniks.
Hell, If Bush Sr. and Dole were running as Democrats today, their military service would be questioned and both would be insulted for getting shot down / wounded.
Tea-bagger might realize that. Then again, Tea-bagger’s ongoing record of idiocy over at his blog continues to prove otherwise. Ever see a homeless guy who talks really loudly into the air and everybody deliberately ignores him? That’s the Wizbang blog- only it smells worse than a homeless guy.
Cry and soil yourself over Bush twin jokes all you want, Jay. Your ilk took the debate down into the sewer years ago. Plan on bitching even more because you’re now getting the snot beaten out of you down there.
OK, final words before I head off to work (unlike our gracious host, my employer frowns on me blogging while I’m earning my paycheck):
The whole “why aren’t they over there” is just another reiteration of the “chickenhawk” argument, and a particularly vile one at that. It boils down to a single contemptible tactic: to turn the argument about the merits of an issue into a discussion of the individual making the argument. If the position is valid, it makes no difference who is making the argument. It is the hallmark of a coward, who has no interest in actually ascertaining the truth but instead focused on winning regardless of the tactics employed. One might as well tell those endorsing national health care to shut up and go be a free doctor somewhere.
Just for the sake of argument, let’s say I’m a triple amputee with five Medals of Honor and a veteran of three wars. How does that change a single thing I’ve written or said about the war? I never say anything like “take my word for it” or “trust me” or “I’m an expert, so don’t question me on this issue.” I don’t ever rely on credentials to make my point, because that’s the lazy way.
frame, I have to confess that you are largely unmemorable. Just when did I delete a comment of yours? Usually, I don’t think you’re worth that kind of effort.
Also, perhaps Oliver didn’t spell out the “draft Jenna and Barbara” this time, but he’s sung the praises of Operation Yellow Elephant in the past, and that’s one of their major gibbering points. But again: why bring them up at all? What have they done to merit being dragged into the national spotlight? (For the record: I lost any respect and affection I had for Rush Limbaugh when he went after Chelsea Clinton. He’s redeemed himself a little in my eyes since then, but I still don’t listen to him.)
And, amazingly, you folks have once again turned the issue away from Oliver’s fixation on the Bush twins and on to me. I’m almost flattered.
J.
“frame, I have to confess that you are largely unmemorable. Just when did I delete a comment of yours?”
WTF are you talking about?
Oh and nice total dodge of my point that the World War II analogy is fatally flawed.
My mistake, frame. factcheck accused me of deleting his comments, not you. My apologies for the carelessness — the sudden rush of attention all on me and away from the actual SUBJECT of the discussion made my head spin.
J.
The question boils down to “what are you doing to fight the Titanic battle against Islamofascism” that wingnuts like to espouse.
Warblogging is not a valid contribution to our war effort.
“Also, perhaps Oliver didn’t spell out the “draft Jenna and Barbara” this time, but he’s sung the praises of Operation Yellow Elephant in the past, and that’s one of their major gibbering points. ”
Shorter jt: “Even though Oliver didn’t say this, I condemn him for saying it.”
Hitler was appointed Chancellor in 1932. Tell me, was that when we were supposed have invaded Germany right then?
Well, if you use Cheney’s 1% doctrine, then yes.
And, amazingly, you folks have once again turned the issue away from Oliver’s fixation on the Bush twins and on to me. I’m almost flattered.
Golly, Jay Tea. I wonder why that happened. It wouldn’t be because you offered up a post that wildly distorted Oliver’s original comments and then doubled down when you were called on it, would it?
JayTea, the reality is that you are not a triple amputee but a working stiff who spends his off time excusing bad behavior. Triple amputees, and there are many from this war, are busy dealing with their rehabilitation.
The question boils down to “what are you doing to fight the Titanic battle against Islamofascism” that wingnuts like to espouse.
Warblogging is not a valid contribution to our war effort.
And pray tell, who appointed you and your ilk the arbiter of who does what and what constitutes a valid contribution?
OK, for Jay and Jay Tea and anyone else lurking out there who can’t quite puzzle out the “Where are Jenna and Barbara?” jibes, I’ll explain. Slowly.
The United States has soldiers deployed in Iraq. Why? We’re not sure. They were sent there just after a group of Saudis, operating from Afghanistan attacked New York and Washington.
Nevertheless, the U.S. has troops in Iraq. Our president, vice-president, secretary of state, secretary of defense, and a whole babble of pundits regularly remind us that the operation in Iraq is the “central front in the War on Terror” and a critically important fight to preserve our domestic safety. We are also told that our commitment of warm bodies and cold cash is not in vain, but a commitment of mighty importance, one that all Americans should support. Our government’s commitment of lives to this cause is worth the price, or so they say.
However, the children of the very people who make these arguments don’t seem to see it quite the same way. Apparently members of Mr. Bush’s family find the growing threat of Islamofascism not so threatening as their father does. They have, quite rightly to my mind, placed other priorities ahead of joining the army so they can witness first hand the birth of a new middle east.
So here it is, slow readers: The president and his close associates try to convince us that the cost in young lives is worth it.
His own children seemingly don’t agree.
“My apologies for the carelessness …”
Understood. Carelessness is your modus operandi.
Jay, nobody appointed him, but it is a recognized fact. There are many, many soldiers who are being deployed on their third rotation. The Marines are forcing callups of 60 year old men for combat operations. The number of AWOLs has begun to increase quickly. We hollowed out the military in Vietnam and we are hollowing it out again.
The only options are to find more recruits or to end the mission. If you believe in the mission, you better be the recruits or find someone to act on your behalf.
And speaking of dodging the issue, at what point in the mid to late 1930s could the US have “preventively” attacked Germany, Italy and/or Japan without a massive, national mobilization, including a draft?
Actually, many historians believe if any of the major powers had intervened during the Rhineland seizure, 1936, Hitler would have been stopped (the German Army was dubious of Hitller and looking for a pretext to do something). No draft, no mobilization required.
“Many historians believe” doesn’t prove you right, Dugger. Neither, of course, does it prove Frame wrong, but his scenario is, on balance, the more likely one.
I’m sorry NG, but you are being far too equanimous in the face of these bullshit artists. There is simply no historical similarity between the current situation in which we find ourselves and 1936 Germany.
Germany and Japan were spending between 15%-25% of their GNP on militarization throughout the 1930-1940s, had clear regional ambitions fully expressed in their public pronouncements, were actively invading their neighbors and were relatively advanced technological economies. Those were the hallmarks of the age of fascism. NONE of those factors exist today.
More importantly, the people who attacked us REMAIN FREE and the president has expressed publicly that he doesn’t even spend any time thinking about it.
Most critically, do we really want to be the only major industrialized country boots down in the Middle East while the rest of the industrialized nations continue to cash in their peace dividends? What the fuck is the matter with you people?
Indeed, I forgot about the Rhineland, but be that as it may, it doesn’t exactly make the current analogy to pre-WWII any more apt. The United States wasn’t in any position to attack Germany at that time on any level be it politically or militarily.
At the same time, it doesn’t exactly address the question of Imperial Japan. When should we have pre-emptively attacked Japan? And what’s the contemporary correlary for that?
The bottom line is that the WWII analogy is little more than a Republican attempt to politicize this war while utterly failing to act on its own rhetoric. Not to mention the fact that if we had invaded Germany in 1936 and handled it as badly as we’ve handled Iraq, well, who knows what would have happened.
Rhineland seizure?
Dugger’s history is extremely fractured.
Germany didn’t seize the Rhineland; in fact, when German troops arrived in the Rhineland, many were riding bicycles and encountered little opposition as most in the Rhineland (Germans)considered it an act of liberation.
Islamo-fascism…doesn’t exist. Sorry, but if you understand what fascism is AT ALL, you would then realize that it doesn’t apply to Mid Eastern terrorists. But when you are a death profiteer with a war to spin, why not dip your chocolate (Islam, which may as well be a synonym for terrorism for the feeble minded) in your peanut butter (fascism, which is just a notch below “Nazi” in the lexicon of easily recognized but rarely understood terms from WW II)? The math is simple:
WW II = “Good” war, U.S. saved the world…on its own…with a pair of jet fueled nuclear fists…or at least that’s how many Americans care to remember it.
Nazi = Ultimate bad, just ask any video game designer. For fun, try this experiment, paint a swastika on an orange and leave in on the sidewalk. Watch as within seconds people from miles around come running to step on it.
Fascist = Kinda like Nazi-lite. Whereas Nazis=terrorists makes people immediately have visions of SS troops sieg heiling alongside their swarthy bearded stereotyped Arab counterparts, fascism lacks that immediate punch, plus it lacks an obvious symbol to use for the fruit test. Still, any red blooded American knows that fascists, like Mexicans and Ay-rabs, needs to be punched first and waterboarded later.
But why invoke one when you can routinely invoke all of them? Just because any comparison between a multinational conflict between warring nation states and the current overblown military enterprise in the Middle East is both tactically and historically inappropriate shouldn’t stop the faithful. So please, feel free to squelch any real debate with emotionally laden appeals to that uniquely American trait of egotis gigantis ignoramus, where afflicted Americans toss their brains in the shredder for a chance to puff up their chests and prove to the world just how awesome they are. You know, just like in WW II. Except we were awesome then, mostly (sorry Japanese Americans), and everyone got on board, and not the water kind. Even the rich (just ask Prescott Bush).
Those still in possession of a bit of grey matter tend to recognize the whole “war on terror” charade for what it is, a golden opportunity for those hungry for profit and power to leverage American hubris against that most human failing, fear of the “other.”
The next time you’re pulled aside and questioned at the airport for wearing the “wrong” shirt, are forced to empty your pockets before being allowed to ride the subway, pay double for your prescription while Paris Hilton gets another tax cut, or read about calls to jail “traitorous” dissidents in the press, consider again the true meaning of fascism.
“So please, feel free to squelch any real debate with emotionally laden appeals to that uniquely American trait of egotis gigantis ignoramus, where afflicted Americans toss their brains in the shredder for a chance to puff up their chests and prove to the world just how awesome they are.”
That’s why I question these people on why they don’t sign up- it deflates their balloon real quick. Because when it comes down to it, they don’t believe in their so-called war on Islamofascists or they’re chicken. I’ll allow them to pick their poison.
Men ran to the recruiters during wwii, lied about their age, and ,if they weren’t accepted, were ashamed that they couldn’t fight Hitler or Hirohito.
Now? Not so much.
Bravo, Bill.
From Merriam-Webster
Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: ‘fa-”shi-z&m also ‘fa-”si-
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
Somehow Islamic extremeism just doesn’t fit the definition very well. Lately, it fits something else much better.
Indeed.
My own question would be does anybody here believe Islamic based terrorism to be an actual threat against America, or will they just go away, or are we just willing to accept periodic attacks every few years and just deal with it? I’m not being sarcastic or snide, I’m really interested in what level people believe the threat, or non-threat Islamic terrorism poses.
The general consensus seems to be there is a threat, but nothing that warrants a war in Iraq (I agree), but my follow up would be, what should we be doing about it? Should we project our power, or just protect our borders. Is this a military situation, or police situation?
Steve
I beleive at this point it is more of a police situation. Military might has historically been ineffective in battle ideology (unless you count the stalemate of the Cold War) because it is hard to aim at or bomb a concept.
In the long run (and here I fully expect to be excoriated for being a touchy-feely liberal) ideology can only truly be battled with education and mutual understanding. Ignorance and fear are the biggest and most effective weapons of the terrorist’ arsenal. Xenophobia a close second.
It makes me think of the difference between how we treated the Indians when we got here and how the French did. We killed them. The French married them. Hard to make war on your brother-in-law.
Steve, we can start with inspecting containers and air cargo. We can also unite with the rest of the world in securing the world’s nuclear inventory from the old Soviet Union- the Clinton administration took lots of nuclear material out of the hands of rogue entities- an effort that was stopped when the current resident took office.
We can stop antagonizing other nations- it is important to remember that Ahmenijad was only elected after the US inflamed fears with his “axis of evil” proclamation. Iran was well on its way to rejoining the world community when that happened.
We can also catch and bring to justice terrorists, such as Osama bin Laden, on the loose for 5 years now after financing the largest attack on American soil.
There is a terrorist threat, as there has been throughout our history. But it is nothing that we should have to give up our Constitutional Rights in order to fight.
jadegold
Bizarre.
Here, here.
This whole line about we have to fight them there so they don’t come here is crap. if that were the case, we should be working alot harder to make our nation as safe as we can, not somebody else’s.
The issue here isn’t what Jenna and Barbara should or shouldn’t be doing; it’s what would their old man do if his daughters were over there. My guess is that if Jenna’s and Barbara’s arses were magically transported to within 500 miles of Bagdad the troops would be home by Labor Day. If you believe in a war of choice then you should be willing to accept the death of your own kids. I don’t believe for one second that Bush would have gone to war if he expected to see one his kids come home in box. This administration can live with the death of 2,600 volunteers; they’d call the whole thing off if it meant the life of one of their own. The all-volunteer army has made it too easy to commit troops. There’s no justification for asking others to suffer in ways you never would.
Ignorance and fear are the biggest and most effective weapons of the terrorist’ arsenal.
And the element of surprise.
Oh man, I’m not even gonna go there with you, Q
I’m not particularly fond of the “his kids should serve” thing, but dammit, you pro-war people deserve it for all the World War II comparisons you make. You argued that Hussein was like Hitler, that the Iraq invasion was as important as overthrowing the Nazis, but you aren’t willing to go to the recruiting centers in droves like they did during WWII. Its not like the army doesn’t need more recruits, they do.