Posted on 09/18/2001 6:41:29 AM PDT by Pokey78
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:19 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
As the twin towers of the World Trade Center came down in flames, taking 5,000 Americans with them, an unserious era in U.S. history came to an end. "All is changed, changed utterly," wrote poet W.B. Yeats. President Bush has now received full authority to wage war against all who abetted the slaughter. It must be done. Our American family cannot permit the mass murder of our brothers and sisters to go unpunished. But as the president directs the moral outrage of his wounded nation, he will need the wisdom of Solomon.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Bump the truth.
I haven't kept up with it,but the only targets being bombed in Iraq that I heard mentioned were military targets."Collateral damage" is when innocent civilians and civilian structures are hit while going after the military target. Since there are danm few civilians living on Iraqui airbases or radar sites,my guess is few were hit.
Then again,if you have the correct numbers,why not share them with us all?
>>Oh I forgot, for your type the only kind of life that counts is American life.<<
No,American life isn't the only life that "counts",but it DOES "count more" than the lives of anyone else as far as *I* am concerned. If you don't like that,too bad. Whine about it to somebody who gives a damn.
>>You think hitting the other side relentlessly for years would not eventually result in that side striking back?<<
I'm going to try to dumb this down to your level so you MIGHT be able to understand it. I know this is a enormous undertaking and that I will probably fail,but have to at least try.
We have NOT "hit the other side". EVER. Not ONCE! The "other side" in this case is the Taliban and bin Laden. In fact,we have aided them.
Then again,you are probably one of the people who think "all A-rabs are alike". Tell me,are all Jews alike,too? How about blacks? Are "all Negroes just alike"?
He most certainly did not. In fact he backed off several positions. I remember the flame wars which insued in which we were saying "told you so!" after it was reported he would "still hold the views" but back off a little on his rhetoric.
That Buchanan and his crazy immigration policy...
Saying that we should not be giving foreign aid to Israel (or any other country short of aid in time of diaster) is blaming OUR behavior not their's.
How odd it is that you perceive this as blaming Jews for everything!
If a family borrowed money with interest and turned around and gave money to folks down the street wouldn't you think that that family was not managing their finances properly.
Thanks for the reply, and take care.
J.R.
Perhaps when one reaches that stage in the transition to profit monger where truth can be ignored if it interferes with gain, a rational perspective of freedom, tradition, country and even God is also forfeit.
First, many thanks for your thoughtful defense of your position. In the past week, I have not seen a rational defense of your point of view at all on this site. Hence your qualification regarding thoughtful people.
My main point is to discuss the question of Why since this is the key question in the formulation of an end strategy for this "war".
Ending the ability of a soverign nation to excercise political control over territory is pretty straigtforward war aim but how do you know when this war will be over? If "hatred of America all it stands for" is the standard will we be fighting until everyone either loves us or is dead? I know that this is reduciao ad absurdum but it illustrates the slippery slope we'd be on without a clear idea of why. Many people on this site and in the media ARE calling for a clash of civilations on a global scale. For personal reasons, I'd like to avoid having a third of the world fighting a battle to the death with another third.
Has the US been aggressive against all Islamic peoples? How would Kuwait answer this question? What about our support of the mujahadeen? We haven't exactly bombed the hell out of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, have we? Haven't we also been accused of arming some of those same Islamic countries?
If push came to shove where would the Saudi's go? Or the Kuwaiti's? In a battle royal with the white devil I think we know where the next folding chair to the back of the head would be coming from.
My point is not to defend all of US foreign policy in the region. It is to show that our policies have not been focused on "aggression" against "Islamic peoples".... ....unless you include US support of Israel, and assume that support of Israel equals an attack on Islam. What a nice sentiment for Buchanan to align himself with. I'm not surprised, unfortunately.
While you and I may see support for Israel as a policy which the US pursues for a variety of reasons all good, I'm sure that a healthy minority of Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular see it as support for a bully. So, that support has a price and the US must either pay the price or cut bait. That's a choice for our leaders and our polity to make.
To address the rest of your post, traderkirk, the goal should not be to kill every person who is anti-American, which is your deduction from your flawed Theory One. People, all over the world, should be able to think what they want to think. That is part of our freedom here - unfortunately beginning to be limited via political correctness and hate crimes laws - and it is something that billions of people have not really had the luxury to do.
Acting on those thoughts, however, especially violently, is another matter. If anti-American people of any religion want to take up arms, become suicide bombers, etc., then we will have to deal with them, no matter how many of them there are. But doing so will be their choice, not ours. And do you think they would stop if we were to pull out of Israel today? I don't.
But where does the killing end if our war aim is destruction of anti-american thought? I picture the scene in Good Morning Vietnam where Robin Williams is pretending to be an intelligence officer who says that's it very difficult to find a Vietnamse man named Charlie. So, how do you find the enemy? Well, we ask them Are you the enemy and if they say Yes we shoot them.
And as far as the implications of Theory Two goes, you just might as well have put it in these terms: radical Islam dictates to America - stop support of Israel, and everything will be fine.
So how come Buchanan supports being dictated to by some foreign countries and peoples (radical Islam), but not others (Israel)?
The point of asking why is to determine how to end the conflict. If we as a nation accept our interventionist foreign policy, then we also must accept heightened security, terror as a weapon and greater government control. That's not such an easy choice.
"In the presidential campaign of 2000, we failed to make foreign policy the issue. But what I said then retains relevance: "How can all our meddling not fail to spark some horrible retribution ...." - Pat Buchanan, Sept 18, 2001
Pat, why couldn't you take your own advise?
"In the presidential campaign of 2000, we failed to make foreign policy the issue. But what I said then retains relevance: "How can all our meddling not fail to spark some horrible retribution ...." - Pat Buchanan, Sept 18, 2001
Pat, why couldn't you take your own advise?
Probably even some you don't hate enough to pervert their concern for America into some nasty, spiteful political innuendo.
Come on now aren't you a little nitpicking? The facts remain as I stated!
The dems/reps were framing the argument and Pat had to respond. Please, have a little respect for the truth, its essential for our survival.
Considering that my post was nothing more than buchanan's own words that should read "silly chidlish quotes". You are free to characterize buchanan's word however you wish, I just wish he had heeded his own advice.
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.