angstzeit: (Shakey WTF)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/03/tancredo-bomb-muslim-holy-sites-first/

Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo’s campaign stood by his assertion that bombing holy Muslim sites would serve as a good “deterrent” to prevent Islamic fundamentalists from attacking the United States, his spokeswoman said Friday.

“This shows that we mean business,” said Bay Buchanan, a senior Tancredo adviser. “There’s no more effective deterrent than that. But he is open-minded and willing to embrace other options. This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.”

On Tuesday, Tancredo warned a group of Iowans that another terrorist attack would “cause a worldwide economic collapse.” IowaPolitics.com recorded his comments.

“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said. “That is the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they would otherwise do. If I am wrong, fine, tell me, and I would be happy to do something else. But you had better find a deterrent, or you will find an attack.”


Man, are you wrong.
Seems to me like a great plan to get all Muslims to be our enemies. And with the powers that be saying that everyone who criticizes our Iraq policy is "emboldening our enemies" I'd say in return that statements like this are the real danger to us. This is what Muslim extremists will use to recruit new members.

When are our leaders going to get it through their thick skulls that terrorists don't fear military threats--they love them. They're already willing to blow themselves up. So they wouldn't fear battle. But the more we act like the "Evil Empire" the extremists portray us as; the easier it is to recruit new members. It is no coincidence that Al Qaeda is as strong as ever now.
angstzeit: (Shakey WTF)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/03/tancredo-bomb-muslim-holy-sites-first/

Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo’s campaign stood by his assertion that bombing holy Muslim sites would serve as a good “deterrent” to prevent Islamic fundamentalists from attacking the United States, his spokeswoman said Friday.

“This shows that we mean business,” said Bay Buchanan, a senior Tancredo adviser. “There’s no more effective deterrent than that. But he is open-minded and willing to embrace other options. This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.”

On Tuesday, Tancredo warned a group of Iowans that another terrorist attack would “cause a worldwide economic collapse.” IowaPolitics.com recorded his comments.

“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said. “That is the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they would otherwise do. If I am wrong, fine, tell me, and I would be happy to do something else. But you had better find a deterrent, or you will find an attack.”


Man, are you wrong.
Seems to me like a great plan to get all Muslims to be our enemies. And with the powers that be saying that everyone who criticizes our Iraq policy is "emboldening our enemies" I'd say in return that statements like this are the real danger to us. This is what Muslim extremists will use to recruit new members.

When are our leaders going to get it through their thick skulls that terrorists don't fear military threats--they love them. They're already willing to blow themselves up. So they wouldn't fear battle. But the more we act like the "Evil Empire" the extremists portray us as; the easier it is to recruit new members. It is no coincidence that Al Qaeda is as strong as ever now.
angstzeit: (Default)
Video from CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2007/07/20/ware.iraq.americas.militia.cnn

What have we become?

Who are the terrorists now?

What are you thinking when you watch this?

I have routinely answered the question, "Why haven't we been attacked again?" "Because we are killing ourselves." With one act a few terrorists have crushed a nation. I have few illusions about the nobility of the US throughout history, but we are rushing to new lows of morality. I suppose some might say not soon enough. The cynical notion that the only way to defeat an enemy is to become them has some popularity. And we have become our enemy. We torture, we kill. We have given up our most precious ideals. Our Constitution is now virtually meaningless.
How low will we go? How low do you want to go?
angstzeit: (Default)
Video from CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2007/07/20/ware.iraq.americas.militia.cnn

What have we become?

Who are the terrorists now?

What are you thinking when you watch this?

I have routinely answered the question, "Why haven't we been attacked again?" "Because we are killing ourselves." With one act a few terrorists have crushed a nation. I have few illusions about the nobility of the US throughout history, but we are rushing to new lows of morality. I suppose some might say not soon enough. The cynical notion that the only way to defeat an enemy is to become them has some popularity. And we have become our enemy. We torture, we kill. We have given up our most precious ideals. Our Constitution is now virtually meaningless.
How low will we go? How low do you want to go?
angstzeit: (Default)
I think we're all familiar with the parade of reasons we're fighting a war in Iraq. Those who are for it have latched on to those reasons that make sense to them. Those who oppose it will likely not be convinced by any reasons.
But here I ask a question. Would anyone have been for the war we've fought? Given the reality, would anyone have backed this war before it started?

I am well aware of the reticence to deal with the reality of a situation when the consequences are this high. The fear that admitting the facts will give the enemy courage. It is natural for any animal to keep the bluff going as long as possible. And when backed into a corner, the bluff may be all one has. But really, aren't we only fooling ourselves? Our enemies have eyes and ears. Surely, they don't need CNN to tell them what is going on in Iraq. Isn't the truth that we don't want to hear these things? And isn't it an insult to the American people to assume that we can't make reasonable decisions when given the truth? Perhaps we can't, but at least lay it out straight and don't patronise us. Many of us are not fools and resent being played for such.

Is pulling our troops out the answer? Hell, I don't know. The public hasn't been given a real idea of what is going on in Iraq. Ever. Is the story of Pat Tillman an abberation or the norm? I think most will agree it is the norm--they would only differ as to whether it was appropriate or necessary.

I keep hearing the word "victory" in administration rehetoric about the war. We are told the only acceptable outcome is "victory." But what is that? As I suggested in my opening, the goals of this war have been changed regularly. We've never been given a clear idea of victory since its inception. But I have lately looked at things more closely.

What was the purpose of the war? As I remember it, to remove Saddam Husein from power, thus removing his support of Al Qaeda and destroying his WMDs. News flash--we won that war. Husein is gone, he never had any connection with Al Qaeda and there were no WMDs. The goals were achieved.

However, a non-war sprang up. Admitted "mistakes" led to chaos and insurgency. Long rivalries were unleashed. The foolishly expected panecea was a pipe dream. So our military troops are fighting battles they were never trained for. The short period of real war--at least the proper war we expected, was, for the most part, executed well by our troops who were well trained and equipped for such action. But just like the British against the American colonists, we are fighting the new situation with old tools. And until we admit what is really going on we will continue to fail in our objectives and the people of America fail to understand what it is we're involved in.

The multiple layers of ignorance, stupidity, stubbornness, obfuscation, greed, power, lies, corruption, beauracracy, etc. lie between us and any real idea of what is going on and what might be done about it. We do not know the real reasons we are there. We do not know the extent of positive and negative outcomes that have happened so far. We are in the dark and simply told to continue to trust those who have failed us repeatedly in the past.

They have and continues to put forth that we cannot afford questioning of our strategy and efforts in Iraq. Of course this is couched in terms realting to those hapless pawns that are given endless praise but no honest backing--"the troops." Used by all as the excuse for any ideas they seldom figure past PR. Their deaths and the deaths of many thousands of Iraqis are routinely dismissed as the result of "mistakes." How does that sit in your gut?

So. Here we are. At a crossroads of what to do--with politicians exploiting this issue for what they can--spinning it as they will. And we don't know enough to make any sound decision. We don't even know if the people making the real decisions know what is going on. We don't know their real objectives or purposes. We float on a cloud of ignorance and espouse this idea or that but are unwilling to fully demand the truth--all of it--and make serious decisions beyond the politics of today and of this country. Further, to ignore history is to miss that whatever happens in this region, it will effect us well into the future.

This is not a game. This is not a political football. This is reality and our future.
angstzeit: (Default)
I think we're all familiar with the parade of reasons we're fighting a war in Iraq. Those who are for it have latched on to those reasons that make sense to them. Those who oppose it will likely not be convinced by any reasons.
But here I ask a question. Would anyone have been for the war we've fought? Given the reality, would anyone have backed this war before it started?

I am well aware of the reticence to deal with the reality of a situation when the consequences are this high. The fear that admitting the facts will give the enemy courage. It is natural for any animal to keep the bluff going as long as possible. And when backed into a corner, the bluff may be all one has. But really, aren't we only fooling ourselves? Our enemies have eyes and ears. Surely, they don't need CNN to tell them what is going on in Iraq. Isn't the truth that we don't want to hear these things? And isn't it an insult to the American people to assume that we can't make reasonable decisions when given the truth? Perhaps we can't, but at least lay it out straight and don't patronise us. Many of us are not fools and resent being played for such.

Is pulling our troops out the answer? Hell, I don't know. The public hasn't been given a real idea of what is going on in Iraq. Ever. Is the story of Pat Tillman an abberation or the norm? I think most will agree it is the norm--they would only differ as to whether it was appropriate or necessary.

I keep hearing the word "victory" in administration rehetoric about the war. We are told the only acceptable outcome is "victory." But what is that? As I suggested in my opening, the goals of this war have been changed regularly. We've never been given a clear idea of victory since its inception. But I have lately looked at things more closely.

What was the purpose of the war? As I remember it, to remove Saddam Husein from power, thus removing his support of Al Qaeda and destroying his WMDs. News flash--we won that war. Husein is gone, he never had any connection with Al Qaeda and there were no WMDs. The goals were achieved.

However, a non-war sprang up. Admitted "mistakes" led to chaos and insurgency. Long rivalries were unleashed. The foolishly expected panecea was a pipe dream. So our military troops are fighting battles they were never trained for. The short period of real war--at least the proper war we expected, was, for the most part, executed well by our troops who were well trained and equipped for such action. But just like the British against the American colonists, we are fighting the new situation with old tools. And until we admit what is really going on we will continue to fail in our objectives and the people of America fail to understand what it is we're involved in.

The multiple layers of ignorance, stupidity, stubbornness, obfuscation, greed, power, lies, corruption, beauracracy, etc. lie between us and any real idea of what is going on and what might be done about it. We do not know the real reasons we are there. We do not know the extent of positive and negative outcomes that have happened so far. We are in the dark and simply told to continue to trust those who have failed us repeatedly in the past.

They have and continues to put forth that we cannot afford questioning of our strategy and efforts in Iraq. Of course this is couched in terms realting to those hapless pawns that are given endless praise but no honest backing--"the troops." Used by all as the excuse for any ideas they seldom figure past PR. Their deaths and the deaths of many thousands of Iraqis are routinely dismissed as the result of "mistakes." How does that sit in your gut?

So. Here we are. At a crossroads of what to do--with politicians exploiting this issue for what they can--spinning it as they will. And we don't know enough to make any sound decision. We don't even know if the people making the real decisions know what is going on. We don't know their real objectives or purposes. We float on a cloud of ignorance and espouse this idea or that but are unwilling to fully demand the truth--all of it--and make serious decisions beyond the politics of today and of this country. Further, to ignore history is to miss that whatever happens in this region, it will effect us well into the future.

This is not a game. This is not a political football. This is reality and our future.
angstzeit: (Default)
I keep occasionally thinking of things to say here but don't seem to get around to it or lack the energy to hash my thoughts out. Here's some bits.

Wisdom. What's that all about? It seems to be a popular theme in books and movies and TV--You know the "Wise Man" (or Woman) who helps the hero to their goal or see themselves clearly or...well I hope you get it. So why in our "real" culture are these people dismissed so often? We only seem to recognize them after they're dead. I don't want to get into the whole "what is wisdom thing." I suppose many are wise in their own way. Anyway, I'm rambling.

I don't get this sudden "Hey, lets pull out of Iraq" thing. I sure as hell was against going in. I think the whole affair was rushed, poorly planned, abysmally executed but we all marched right on in and now we just want to split? It may well be that we will never accomplish the wonderful democratic utopia we supposedly are there for but if we up and book out--I can't imagine the chaos. We've created a terrorist breeding ground. I had an image come to me the other day. Ol' Dubya deciding he's man enough to go screw this bull in the ass he's got a grudge against. Well, now he's in there and the bull's mad as hell but Dubya can't pull out or the bull will turn around and ram a horn or two up Dubya's ass.

Recently found a new obsession. http://www.portalofevil.com/buzz.php Hit the Livejournal Random Images Generator. It shows you 30 of the latest pictures posted to Livejournal pages. As the page says, it is surprisingly addictive.
angstzeit: (Default)
I keep occasionally thinking of things to say here but don't seem to get around to it or lack the energy to hash my thoughts out. Here's some bits.

Wisdom. What's that all about? It seems to be a popular theme in books and movies and TV--You know the "Wise Man" (or Woman) who helps the hero to their goal or see themselves clearly or...well I hope you get it. So why in our "real" culture are these people dismissed so often? We only seem to recognize them after they're dead. I don't want to get into the whole "what is wisdom thing." I suppose many are wise in their own way. Anyway, I'm rambling.

I don't get this sudden "Hey, lets pull out of Iraq" thing. I sure as hell was against going in. I think the whole affair was rushed, poorly planned, abysmally executed but we all marched right on in and now we just want to split? It may well be that we will never accomplish the wonderful democratic utopia we supposedly are there for but if we up and book out--I can't imagine the chaos. We've created a terrorist breeding ground. I had an image come to me the other day. Ol' Dubya deciding he's man enough to go screw this bull in the ass he's got a grudge against. Well, now he's in there and the bull's mad as hell but Dubya can't pull out or the bull will turn around and ram a horn or two up Dubya's ass.

Recently found a new obsession. http://www.portalofevil.com/buzz.php Hit the Livejournal Random Images Generator. It shows you 30 of the latest pictures posted to Livejournal pages. As the page says, it is surprisingly addictive.

March 2016

S M T W T F S
  12345
67 89101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 24th, 2017 11:05 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios