Fear This (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


Musicmystery -> Fear This (8/26/2007 8:30:38 AM)

Yet again, President Bush has tried to bolster his credentials and his power by appealing to fear—this time attempting to draw comparisons between his middle east meddlings and World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War, arguing that “staying the course” in Asia proved wise when completed, catastrophic when abandoned. Interesting if weird parallels, as WWII involved fighting Japan, an imperialist power (as the U.S. has become), Korea, a Communist threat to world security that never materialized, and Vietnam, another instance when listening to the French would have been wiser.

His purpose, of course, was once again to argue that his warmongering keeps America safe from al-Qaeda, ignoring that Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist organization until the U.S. invasion, glossing over his complete failure to capture Osama bin Laden—in fact, the president doesn’t even bring it up anymore. He DOES like to keep trying to scare the public, warning that another attack could come at any moment, and claiming his administration’s policies have so far prevented such attacks (an unsupported claim), ignoring that his administration dropped the ball and allowed the 9/11 attack he loves to reference so frequently. Truth is, we’ve been LESS safe on his “watch.”

His blind obsession with Iraq, fought on the heels of Afghanistan, has made the country even less safe, straining the military so far that commanders warn we can’t continue past this spring, while officers quit in droves and troops fall to the extreme stress of drastically increased deployments, and the U.S. commitment needed to end the mess with no end in sight. U.S. military planners had always prepared to fight wars in two theaters simultaneously. We’re doing that—for longer now than we were in WWII. Another conflict would leave us simply vulnerable. Imagine Iran and North Korea decide to push their advantage and attack together. We couldn’t handle it. We’re weak.

Bush’s arrogance and go-it-alone attitude has left the U.S. with few friends, and mostly made clear to foes that the only power we respect is nuclear power. Hence, the sooner a nation can achieve nuclear weapons, the better. How does this make us safer? We’ve given them every incentive to ignore diplomacy and pursue arms.

And how about the cost of all this invasion? The U.S.S.R., remember, fell under internal economic pressure, not at the hands of enemies. The increase in U.S. debt is financed by overseas borrowing, and adding this to our large, continuing trade deficit will only hasten our almost inevitable second place status to solid, expanding economies like China, India, and the European Union. This won’t help our safety either—in fact, it will largely prevent our recovery.

What is it about 9/11 that makes so many Americans so myopic? Take the hero worship of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, praised for his leadership following the 9/11 attacks. Yet what did he do other than what any mayor would have had to do?

And while Bush harps on the New York attacks, he gutted every dollar he could from every program he could, leaving FEMA a shell of its former self with an incompetent political appointee at the helm—not to mention denying global warming and pulling out related environmental treaties and programs, a step toward more frequent and more destructive storms. He has come as close to repealing free speech as possible, hand picking audiences, censuring media images of the war, using the justice system to harass politic opponents, and spying on U.S. citizens while striving to keep such practices secret from Congressional oversight. How does this make us safer?

All in the name of 9/11.




Alumbrado -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 8:39:01 AM)

http://www.collarchat.com/m_1226901/tm.htm




TheHeretic -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 9:16:30 AM)

       C'mon now, Music.  If you want to argue that Bush has made America less safe, then do it right.  Here is a little something to steer you along the way. 

      Heads up though.  This stuff doesn't fit another important set of talking points.  You might get in trouble. 


In addition to the Muslim snipers who terrorized the Washington area for weeks on the first anniversary of 9/11, the U.S. has been plagued by dozens of terror attacks or disrupted plots over the past several years, including:
• The "Lackawanna Six" from upstate New York who were caught training for terror with al-Qaida overseas.
• The Columbus, Ohio, trucker who helped al-Qaida case the Brooklyn Bridge for attack.
• The Los Angeles man who fatally shot two and wounded three at an Israeli airline ticket counter at LAX.
• The New Yorker found guilty of plotting to blow up a Manhattan subway station.
• The Lodi, Calif., native who trained with al-Qaida in Pakistan to blow up fellow Americans at supermarkets.
• The three black Muslim converts from Torrance, Calif., jailed for plotting to attack Army recruiting stations and synagogues.
• The Virginia jihadists busted for training to kill U.S. soldiers overseas.
• The San Francisco Muslim who took his SUV on a hit-and-run killing spree.
• The black Muslim cell in Miami which plotted to attack the Sears Tower.
• The jihadist who went on a shooting rampage at a Jewish community center in Seattle, announcing "I'm a Muslim American; I'm angry at Israel."
• The Fort Dix Six who planned to penetrate the New Jersey base as pizza delivery men, then open fire on troops.
• The black Muslim converts who recently plotted to blow up JFK airport.
• The honors student-turned-jihadist who rented an SUV and rammed it into a crowd at the University of North Carolina.
• The pro-Taliban operatives caught training for jihad in the Oregon woods.
• The shotgun-toting 18-year-old Muslim who murdered five shoppers inside a Salt Lake City mall.
• The black convert recently busted for plotting to blow up Illinois shopping malls with grenades.
 
(from Investors Business Daily 8/10/07)




Musicmystery -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 9:53:50 AM)

OK, but the problem is that you present this as if these are new problems. Terrorist attempts are over a century old, and continually frequent. What makes these foiled attempts in the last few years special?

What makes 9/11 unique is a colossal failure to acknowledge the available intelligence and subsequent warnings--followed by this administration's unabashed manipulation of that tragedy to support itself and its agenda.

Failure after failure is presented as success and security. "Mission accomplished."

I pray Americans are not so foolish. I fear many are.




TheHeretic -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 11:01:35 AM)

       I thought we were discussing The Bush II era, Music, or are you just going to dash from one convenient set of facts to another if it starts looking less convenient?  Hell, I was trying to be helpful and provide you with the opportunity to make a case, instead of just stringing half-remembered talking points together.

      That's ok.  You know "Bush baa-ad."  From each according to his abilities.




luckydog1 -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 12:14:11 PM)

Heretic, its a preview of the 08 elections.   Along with "Republicans are fags", which has been tried several times, and doesn't work.  Air America is running with that one now. 

I keep trying but no one will discuss the ramifications of the Democratic led Congress EXPANDING BUSH'S RIGHT TO WIRETAP WITHOUT WARRANTS.  




Musicmystery -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 1:56:57 PM)

Heretic--

Not at all--you're just arguing a different issue.

I raised the point that Bush pushes his agenda by sowing fear, mining and remining 9/11, claiming he's the king at protecting America, despite the consensus that his administration's careless parade into pretending they were the Coolidge administration allowed al-Qaeda to finally succeed in attacking. Further, I argued that Bush turned that into a bogus case for Iraq, leaving al-Qaeda in the dust.

You presented a list of prevented attacks, ignoring that we're been preventing attacks for years and years before this administration finally decided to do something--while still abandoning New Orleans, veterans benefits and whatever else it could gamble on the cheap. But I digress, as did you.

You also ignored the economic impact and the strain on our military. Probably inconvenient.

lucky--I have NO idea what you're talking about. I've never heard that. The closest I can guess is that you're one of the people who believes that if you criticize anything in platform A, then you must be one of those fanatics in platform B, no middle ground--a silly logical position.

See http://writingtrue.blogspot.com/2007/08/liberal-conservative-are-you-sure.html

Enjoy.




SimplyMichael -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 2:55:23 PM)

Fear works because Republicans are always ready to surrender freedom for security.  Name anything important republicans have really fought and died for.  It wasn't right wing cowards who volunteered to fight fascism before WWII it was liberals.  Liberals said Iraq would be the exact mess it has turned out to be.  Look how many in Bush' cabinet avoided combat, every single one of them...most didn't even serve!




luckydog1 -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 3:33:05 PM)

Music, the "republicans are fags" thing?  it has been the subject of 2 seperate threads here in the past few days, as well as being discussed on Air America




slaveboyforyou -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 3:35:00 PM)

quote:

Fear works because Republicans are always ready to surrender freedom for security.  Name anything important republicans have really fought and died for.  It wasn't right wing cowards who volunteered to fight fascism before WWII it was liberals.  Liberals said Iraq would be the exact mess it has turned out to be.  Look how many in Bush' cabinet avoided combat, every single one of them...most didn't even serve!


The American Civil War does come to mind. 




Musicmystery -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 3:42:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Music, the "republicans are fags" thing?  it has been the subject of 2 seperate threads here in the past few days, as well as being discussed on Air America


If this is any consolation, I'm pretty sure that's not true (that Republicans are fags).

Granted, we have the Log Cabin Republicans, but I doubt they represent the majority of Republicans.

And it's certainly not the point of my thread.

Thanks.




Musicmystery -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 3:46:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou

quote:

Fear works because Republicans are always ready to surrender freedom for security.  Name anything important republicans have really fought and died for.  It wasn't right wing cowards who volunteered to fight fascism before WWII it was liberals.  Liberals said Iraq would be the exact mess it has turned out to be.  Look how many in Bush' cabinet avoided combat, every single one of them...most didn't even serve!


The American Civil War does come to mind. 


Note, however, that Republicans at the time were the liberals.

If we're going with such stretched historical definitions, then we'll have to go back to Thomas Jefferson, a Democrat.

And who, incidentally, I believe was in favor of individual liberty (while a plantation owner from Virginia).

In both cases, though, the interests of the wealth class were the primary concerns. Not much has changed there.




slaveboyforyou -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 4:18:10 PM)

quote:

Note, however, that Republicans at the time were the liberals.

If we're going with such stretched historical definitions, then we'll have to go back to Thomas Jefferson, a Democrat.

And who, incidentally, I believe was in favor of individual liberty (while a plantation owner from Virginia).

In both cases, though, the interests of the wealth class were the primary concerns. Not much has changed there.


Actually that depends on what part of the country you live in.  The Democrats here in the South are very conservative.  My state legislature is mostly Democratic, and we have a new Democratic governor.  They are not liberal by any means.  The entire civil rights era was held back because northern Democrats did not want to lose the South, which was mostly Democratic.  I wouldn't even call Bill Clinton a liberal.  He was a oppurtunist and a populist.  I don't see anything admirable about that.  Putting aside your convictions in order to gain power is not benevolent. 

Democrats still aren't offering any alternatives this election.  Most of them voted for the Iraq invasion, and most of them are not calling for a immediate pull out.  Despite what you believe, the Democrats are not champions for personal liberty either.  Look at all of the Democratic candidates and find me one that is for drug legalization or hasn't been a coward on the gay marriage issue.  Democrats are completely responsible for encroachment on individual property owners rights.  I have my problems with the Republicans, but the Democrats have not and will not stand up to them.




Musicmystery -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 4:55:25 PM)

See, this is the circle these debates must suffer, apparently.

This thread has nothing to do with Democrats and Republicans. Since you raised the Lincoln (Civil War) issue, yes, traditional liberal/conservative roles have changed typical parties. I believe I've already raised that issue--certainly I did in my blog post. And yes, southern democrats were the norm until the civil rights legislation of the 1960s.

Still ignores the point of Bush pushing fear as if logic to cover his administration's mistakes and attempt to consolidate his power. (He's also good at changing the subject to reframe the debate, incidentally).

Additionally, to disagree with Bush doesn't equal holding up the Democrats as paragons. That's just the defensive posture Bush supporters seem to embrace. I said no such thing--that's a whole other debate (and since it would pull in the lack of performance of the Republican led Congress for years, probably not one worth pursuing).

One debate at a time.




slaveboyforyou -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 5:30:21 PM)

quote:

See, this is the circle these debates must suffer, apparently.

This thread has nothing to do with Democrats and Republicans. Since you raised the Lincoln (Civil War) issue, yes, traditional liberal/conservative roles have changed typical parties. I believe I've already raised that issue--certainly I did in my blog post. And yes, southern democrats were the norm until the civil rights legislation of the 1960s.

Still ignores the point of Bush pushing fear as if logic to cover his administration's mistakes and attempt to consolidate his power. (He's also good at changing the subject to reframe the debate, incidentally).

Additionally, to disagree with Bush doesn't equal holding up the Democrats as paragons. That's just the defensive posture Bush supporters seem to embrace. I said no such thing--that's a whole other debate (and since it would pull in the lack of performance of the Republican led Congress for years, probably not one worth pursuing).

One debate at a time.


Actually, I didn't raise the issue.  A previous poster asked for ONE example where Republicans fought and died for a good cause.  I answered him.  You went on to criticize my answer with the claim that Republicans were once liberal.  I wasn't trying to debate whether George Bush is good or bad.  I was simply anwering a claim by another poster.  Since you decided to defend an argument that wasn't yours to answer, I answered you.  Southern democrats are still the norm, and they still exist.  I guess you believe all Republicans or anyone who disagrees with you is obviously a Bush supporter.  I would call that myopic, which is something you accused others of being.   




Musicmystery -> RE: Fear This (8/26/2007 6:30:29 PM)

You are right.

Sorry.

[except for the last two sentences, which are a stretch]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125