Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

POWER OUTAGE AT THE WEEKLY STANDARD
The Weekly Standard ^ | 10/22/01 | The editors

Posted on 10/22/2001 4:16:47 PM PDT by Justin Raimondo

Power Outage An electrical failure at our building has left The Weekly Standard without power or phones today (Monday, Oct. 22). We expect to be operating normally tomorrow.


TOPICS: Announcements; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
An intellectual failure is more like it. Maybe it was that last cover story on "The Case for American Empire" by the aptly named Max Boot that finally blew the fuses.
1 posted on 10/22/2001 4:16:47 PM PDT by Justin Raimondo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
I didn't think you could write about anything in less than 7500 words...(g)...regatrds.....
2 posted on 10/22/2001 4:20:11 PM PDT by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
I hope good 'ole Tucker is ok!!
3 posted on 10/22/2001 4:22:52 PM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
Hey Raimondo- been getting alot of bad press lately here at FR. I have read your stuff and over the years I have come to agree more with your position- actually the old postion of the GOP in regard to foreign policy. I was in there for the cold war but see no reason now for our current empire. My friend suscribed to the Weekly Standard and he came to the same conclusion- they are false conservatives whose primary goal is justify the mega state and the global empire while paying some lip service to social conservative issues.

I also agreed largely with your "Retaliation Yes- Occupation No" column. Let's face some facts. First let me say this- US policy in the Mideast does not even come close to justifying the events of 9/11. But when you stick your nose in among a bunch of twisted snakes that is largely the Islamic world you are gonna get bit.

Time to develop our own oil resources- invest in clean coal technology- and for god sake build Nuke plants. Hey- I sympathize with Isreal- it is used by these Islamic countries and states to divert attention away from their own miserable corruption and harsh rule. And despite what is said- Isreal treats it's Arab citizens better than any Arab or Islamic country in the world treats it's own- with the exception of possibly Turkey. But America must realize that we are dealing with fanatics- wholly unreasonable fanatics. Is it worth it for us to be so involved in a part of the world that is so insane?

Death to Osama and his coharts- but please no troops in Afghanistan for the next 50 years.

4 posted on 10/22/2001 4:35:52 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
It's too bad that a power failure couldn't hit anti-war.com, a lengthly power outage could be usefull at that sewer hole
5 posted on 10/22/2001 4:37:24 PM PDT by MJY1288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
You put it well. Death to Osama -- and bring our troops home!
6 posted on 10/22/2001 4:37:40 PM PDT by Justin Raimondo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
POWER OUTAGE AT THE WEEKLY STANDARD

Now, that's an understatement. More Girlie-boys.

7 posted on 10/22/2001 4:59:07 PM PDT by San Jacinto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
Good God, did Raimundo move from antiwar.com to The Weekly Standard? Can Kristol be that ga-ga?
8 posted on 10/22/2001 5:02:23 PM PDT by gaspar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
PS- I know anti-war.com is a good address but perhaps you should reconsider the name. After all- only deranged utopians are truly "anti-war" and even you recognize the right of a state to protect itself and to retaliate for crimes or acts against it. Just curious- what did you think of the US war against the Barbary pirates? Was that not just?
9 posted on 10/22/2001 5:06:00 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Burkeman1
It's off-topic, but here goes: no real soldier is PRO-war, being far too familiar with the reality to glorify what is, at best, a terrible necessity. I admit that our web address may give the completely false impression that we are pacifists, especially in the present context, but when they read our columnists (and my stuff) they are soon disabused of this notion.

The point of being "antiwar" is really a commitment to a non-interventionist foreign policy: one that sees America as a Republic, not an Empire. Every "great leap forward" of Big Government has been the direct result of a war, and you'll notice that once passed, "emergency" measures that "temporarily" infringe on civil and economic liberties somehow become permanent. This is really the core of the case that Old Right conservatives and many libertarians are making in the case of the Halloween War: let's not let Osama bin Laden poison our political culture and kill off the Constitution.

11 posted on 10/22/2001 5:20:44 PM PDT by Justin Raimondo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
Which of America's wars since 1776 would you not have had America fight.
12 posted on 10/22/2001 5:24:02 PM PDT by Sabramerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
Yeah- I know that- but for the common moron- which is 90%- the name of your site conjurs up images of ignorant college students chanting "we don't want your racist war." Is that a problem for you guys at all? I would assume so.
13 posted on 10/22/2001 5:27:57 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
The point of being "antiwar" is really a commitment to a non-interventionist foreign policy: one that sees America as a Republic, not an Empire.

Very dumb, ostrich like thinking. A one size fits all approach. You are on the same side as Saddam and Bin Laden who both want us out of the Mid East. Of course if we abandon the Mid East then China moves in. Saddam takes Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. He controls world oil along with China as his military protector. Not that you care. You'll only squeal after these geopolitical forces hammer down the United States over a period of years and the USA becomes a beggar nation.

commitment to a non-interventionist foreign policy:

In the real world this is nonsense. We are the 3rd most populous nation. We have economic and military power. And we will engage abroad to suit our national interests.

14 posted on 10/22/2001 5:38:13 PM PDT by JJ59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tauzero
Hell- yeah of course. We did the right thing. And the best part was that after we bombbarded Tripoli- and got the peace settlement- our troops were not there the next 50 years.

I don't want to see troops in Khandahar or Kabul for 50 years. Do you? Why are troops still in Saudi Arabia? To protect a corrupt regime that won't pay for their own defense against Sadam? Why were we in the Gulf War to begin with? To protect the same pathetic regime? Some of whose members almost certainly knew of the 9/11 attack?

I still go back to what Pat Buchanan said (and I am no Brigadeer member)- "What- we can't buy oil from Sadam?" And he was right. The Gulf War was not about stopping "agression." If that were so why did we sponser Sadam's war against Iran for 8 years? We backed him. He attacked Iran without warning or cause at our behest. We sided with Kuwait largely becasue we have a huge foreign policy establishment that is dedicated to keeping alliances that have long out lived their usefulnes alive. Suadi Arabia is no "ally".

The US is a nation not used to the Byzantine world of these freaks and their lies. And yet we are wrapped up in them largely because people in Washington need jobs and something to do. Saudi Arabia is just as evil and every bit as corrupt as Iraq and yet we have sanctions against Iraq and we call Saudi Arabia a friend. Horse crap.

15 posted on 10/22/2001 5:41:06 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
...no real soldier is PRO-war...

Bollocks. Are you saying that the men of Easy Company now being profiled on HBO were not real soldiers? They were pro-war before Normandy and they were even more pro-war after they liberated a concentration camp. Some wars must be fought, and since you hide behind intellectual lies to claim war is wrong, others will fight and die to defend you.

Some wars are wrong, some are right. When you've grown up, maybe you'll understand.

16 posted on 10/22/2001 5:48:38 PM PDT by Petronski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican
Let's put it another way: the only two I would endorse without reservation are the Revolution of 1776 and the War of 1812. The rest were disasters in terms of the US national interest.
17 posted on 10/22/2001 5:49:34 PM PDT by Justin Raimondo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JJ59
Let me take the Devil's advocate approach. Sadam goes into Kuwait and we did nothing. He controls alot of the reserves and puts a price cap on it. We sit back and think. Then drill Alaska- let clean coal technolgy go through- and build nuke plants for we have the biggest depostis of Uranium in the world. Sadam knows this. We could have bought from him as easily as we could from Kuwait. There was no need for that war. We took the side of one illegitamte regime over another.

As to China moving in- how so? They are not even as cash rich as these oil nations. Plus they don't have the power to project their forces. And further if they did- would they not inherite such a 9/11 attack from these freaks?

The Business of America is Business! Not getting into the geo politics of ignorant superstitous naitons like we have done. We supported Sadam in his "war of aggression" against Iran for 10 years- where was the US to stop that? ANd now our "ally" in Saudi Arabia won't even run traces on the freaks from their country who plowed 767's into our towers and the pentagon. Some foreign policy we have going. Time to sit back and look at what we are doing. We give 2 billion a year to Eygpt and they spit in our faces. And we take it.

18 posted on 10/22/2001 5:52:37 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
War of 1812? Well wasn't America trying to support France and thus we earned the anger of the Birtish and thus their resentment- thus we desreved that DC be burned to the ground? Just doing your job.
19 posted on 10/22/2001 5:55:29 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Justin Raimondo
The rest were disasters in terms of the US national interest.

The rest, includes the American response to Pearl Harbor.

Imagine. There are people who take you seriously enough to debate your views.

I won't tell. Do you laugh that those simple minded imbeciles?

20 posted on 10/22/2001 5:57:27 PM PDT by Sabramerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson