Democrats & Liberals: Archives

I have two questions for Carla:

1) During the Revolutionary War, there were acts of terror committed. What was done about them and why have we not heard anything from the media on this?

2) During the Ming Dynasty, brutal acts of violence were rather customary. Had the governing bodies of the world acted then, would our society today be in a better situation?

I have two questions for Carla:

1) During the Revolutionary War, there were acts of terror committed. What was done about them and why have we not heard anything from the media on this?

2) During the Ming Dynasty, brutal acts of violence were rather customary. Had the governing bodies of the world acted then, would our society today be in a better situation?

Apparently the subtlety of my post was lost on you..so I’ll be more direct:

It’s practically a prerequisite for a Republican Party Membership Card to blame Bill Clinton for issues surrounding terrorism…so just how far to we get to reach into the past to cast blame?

Enlighten us all.

Carla,

I would ask Rummy “Why are you telling us this now? Is this an excuse to bomb the Iranian nuke facilities as a WMD site?”

I’m sure that stuff would be nice to know, but I’m not too sure about the relevance.

I think a slightly more important question is: what is he going to do to stop the weapons coming into Iraq?

Nice try, jbod. Neither the Mings nor the revolutionaries provided Iran with weapons.

Carla, Reagan handed the terrorists their first victory by pulling out of Lebanon after the Beirut bombing. He never even retaliated.

As for the guy who’s now President of Iran, he’s probably the radical that Reagan negotiated with to pull off the hostage release on his inauguration day.

Partisan sniping aside (for a moment). I just read in my paper this morning that various Iranian security forces have been infiltrating Iraq from the start of the occupation,

Just how dangerous to the U.S. effort Iranian support would be was apparent during the February 2004 assault on Fallujah, a town controlled by Sunni Muslim insurgents.

During the action, Iraqi police arrested a group of Iranians. About 30 to 50 Iranian fighters then staged attacks on a police station and Iraqi civil defense headquarters that were far more skilful than anything Iraqis had by then mounted. The commotion helped the prisoners to break out successfully.

Even more to the point, these are the same bunch of criminals from Iran-Contra.

I am surprised none of the Republicans want to invade Iran. It is the logical thing to do. Where is the “Go it Alone” spirit we used to have?

It seems we are already fighting them in Iraq.
I’ve been expecting that war for a year now…

I must have been napping when the evidence came out that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was one of the former captors in Iran. Last I heard it was based on supposition from a few former captives after some email exchanges about it. Then picked up by the media then the Whitehouse. So unless I’ve missed some startling new evidence, that was my impression.

The man denies it, and realistically with the way many feel about the US, if he truly had a larger part he probably would have bragged about it and gained points with many of them. Three of the actual hostage takers have also denied he was a part of the group.

Given our history of giving weapons to countries it’s probably a given some of those weapons being used to send into Iraq by Iran were from us. Some of the weapons used by Iraq before this were from us.

Carla,

Nope…I don’t blame Clinton for terrorism. I blame Sun-Tzu. For modern terrorism, I blame the Black Setemberists and Yassar Arafat.

As for invading Iran, I am content to let the EU negotiate with them…until the mushroom cloud appears over Berlin and Paris.

Traveler,

Perhaps the difference is I don’t trust Rummy.

Remember it was this administration that claimed there were WMD in Iraq and that Hussein was tied to OBL. Now they say weapons come from Iran. They probably come from everywhere, especially from Syria where it seems most of the foreign insurgents come from. Why pick Iran and why now?

They need to start manufacturing another threat to either influence midterm elections or distract from Roberts and Rove.

Dave,

I think maybe you were responding to someone else? I’ll try to answer you anyway.

Now they say weapons come from Iran. They probably come from everywhere, especially from Syria where it seems most of the foreign insurgents come from. Why pick Iran and why now?

I would guess it’s because they found weapons in Iraq that came from Iran and Rumsfeld decided to include it in his briefing because it wasn’t widely reported yet. As for why Iran was singled out, perhaps ol’ Don knows his speeches are boring enough without rehashing stuff that’s already been reported. ;-)

Carla-

There WAS no subtlety to your post, so nothing to miss. You reached back in an attempt to blame a Republican. No subtlety at all.

Here’s the deal: American foreign policy, in regard to acts of terrorism, has not been strong through the years. Carter allowed America to look weak, as did Reagan, Bush and Clinton in their own ways. Its not a Republican/Democrat issue, but rather an American one.

We have chosen to use gestures as policy, meaning that Reagan bombed Khaddaffi and Clinton had Operation Desert Fox. Both made an impact, but neither made a lasting impact. There was not enough followup, either diplomatically or otherwise.

For years, America has been accused of being powerful, but weakminded, sort of like a boxer with a Greek God body, but a jaw of glass, and an unwillingness to mix it up. The Vietnamese saw that, and used it against us in their strategies.

We need to be fair, but tough. There are many varying definitions of fair and tough, which makes it an open ended discussion with no real answers. You may see the US as being unfair and tough right now and I’d disagree…so lets not go there.

During the Cold War, mutually assured destruction (MAD) was effective both for the Soviets and the US as a deterrent. Our show of military strength deterred the Russians from acting….theirs deterred us from acting.

Physically, I have been able to prevent several fights in my life not by backing away and running, but by showing no fear or weakness. It didnt result in fights; instead it showed an inner strength that the other person could sense. And it ended up achieving my purpose—-avoiding the fight. That is what America needs to present as well. Not the DESIRE to fight, but the willingness to fight when necessary.

Isn’t part of the problem that we are the only superpower? Who could dream of opposing us in any conventional manner? Given enough time China? We are the top dog but we have fleas.

Now that Iran is creeping into the picture, we should rally some support for taking them out as well. It would be a good thing because the best Pistachio nuts in the world come from Iran. I am getting tired of those that come from California.

It will naturally be a Republican war so we can start the enlistment process as soon as possible.

One of our posters will be able to revise his boiler plate statement about the Republican war simply by changing the Q (Iraq) to N (Iran).

Not to be a trouble maker but in the interest of being some what fair minded, how can it be a Republican war if Democrat Congresspersons voted for it as well?

They were all going on the same data, so if the line is to be they were misled then they all were misled. If it is to be a matter of responsibility then those who voted yes should all be responsible no matter the D or the R behind the name.

Steve,

Have you been out drinking with Aldous? Sure sounds like it.

Cliff,

Obviously you are familiar with the normal rhetoric we hear from the individual you mentioned. You can appreciate that I was being sarcastic in my post.

The Black Septemberists learned all about modern terrorism from Irgun and Menachem Begin.

—-
Physically, I have been able to prevent several fights in my life not by backing away and running, but by showing no fear or weakness. It didnt result in fights; instead it showed an inner strength that the other person could sense. And it ended up achieving my purpose—-avoiding the fight. That is what America needs to present as well. Not the DESIRE to fight, but the willingness to fight when necessary.
—-

We need to avoid the avoidable fights. Our military might must look like it is in the hands of intelligent people. We have neither, so to many people in the world, we look like the drunken bar-room fighter… and there really is little to prevent them from fighting. Try the inner-strength method and you will loose teeth.

People fear the US - not because we have the weapons, but because we use them with little forethought or validation of our agenda.

—-
Not to be a trouble maker but in the interest of being some what fair minded, how can it be a Republican war if Democrat Congresspersons voted for it as well?

They were all going on the same data, so if the line is to be they were misled then they all were misled. If it is to be a matter of responsibility then those who voted yes should all be responsible no matter the D or the R behind the name.
—-

I agree that everyone should be held responsible, but the central player in all this - the Bush Admin. - has top accept what they did in the lead up to war. They relied on very questionable sources (most of their WMD facts were based on the word of a single, highly questionable source) and omitted any questions on it’s validity from Congress.

Rummy - who is this nice young man you are with?

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php

Carla’s point, that it was the blatantly treasonous actions of former President Reagan that enabled the current turn of events, is well taken

There WAS no subtlety to your post, so nothing to miss. You reached back in an attempt to blame a Republican. No subtlety at all.

Yes…but merely to make a point about the absurdity of blaming Clinton for the Republicans problems with the “war on terror”.

Here’s the deal: American foreign policy, in regard to acts of terrorism, has not been strong through the years. Carter allowed America to look weak, as did Reagan, Bush and Clinton in their own ways. Its not a Republican/Democrat issue, but rather an American one.

We’re no stronger now than we were then. We’re just different.

Physically, I have been able to prevent several fights in my life not by backing away and running, but by showing no fear or weakness. It didnt result in fights; instead it showed an inner strength that the other person could sense. And it ended up achieving my purpose—-avoiding the fight. That is what America needs to present as well. Not the DESIRE to fight, but the willingness to fight when necessary.

What if the other person isn’t willing to back down? What if they’re desperate enough to get their way…to the point that their own life is insignificant to them and will fight you to the death?

A showing that you’re willing to fight is all fine and good. But unless you’re able to address what’s causing the other guy to lay down his life even in the face of you standing your ground…one or both of you will likely end up gravely hurt or dead.

That’s the real issue here. It’s not about the US being weak on terrorism prior to 9/11. It’s not about casting blame on Reagan or Clinton or Carter or Americans in general. It’s about understanding what’s causing these guys to kill themselves no matter how tough we come across.

When you have that…then you’ll defeat terrorism.

Carla:

It would be nice to be able to understand the seeds of terrorism. I’m not so sure that its all that logical though. I’d like to understand how professional athletes can claim poverty when they are making $10 million a year. No matter how much I try, I can’t understand it though.

I think terrorists are committed to their cause, but they are misguided. Unfortunately, I don’t know that you can ever convince them of that. It is said that poverty and frustration are the seeds of terrorism, but in reality, many terrorists come from reasonably wealthy backgrounds.

I’m not saying we shouldnt look at what causes terrorists to do what they do. We should…but I dont hold out much hope for truly understanding them, nor for being able to provide them with a solution. sometimes their solutions are untenable. For instance, some Palestinean terrorists will continue until Israel is no more—-that presents an untenable solution.

In the meantime, showing resolve and strength is important. Terrorism works by creating fear and a resulting weakness. We simply cannot bow to that, or we lose. We also lose if we allow them to take our freedoms away.

As Londoners did in the face of the Luftwaffe bombing in WWII, we must go on with our lives, mourn our losses, but never ever give in or up.

Several points: There is an old saying that I’m sure many have heard and it simply says that if no one cares who gets the credit, there isn’t anything we can’t do. In a country where ALL politicians, R or D, are vying for credit for everything they perceive as good while slinging mud to make the other guy look bad, they seemingly spend more time finger-pointing than working the issues. I absolutely abhor both sides of the aisle and their “holier than THEM” attitude. Stop the oratory bullshit and make a decision to work together.

I have no doubt whatsoever that both sides of the aisle are doing what they think is best for the country, and that is great, but for God’s sake, let’s move forward and stop the bickering. (I know it’s a Utopian dream but a forest fire starts with a spark).

Secondly, I think it was George Patton who said something to the effect that no son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. Let the OTHER guy die for his country (enter country name here). Simple and yet profound. It’s an honorable thing to die for one’s country…even more honorable, in my estimation, to come home alive after totally decimating the opposing forces and accomplishing the mission. Come on, George, sh*t or get off the pot.

Blame-casting gets us nowhere and takes our eyes off of the task at hand. Making someone else look bad just to make oneself look good says volumes about the total lack of character. If you want to look good, do so by excelling at what you do and NOT by muddying the waters and then coming out “less muddy.” I have ZERO respect for someone like that.

Are there any easy answers in all of this? I suspect not. Will more Americans die for what appears to be a stalled effort to bring democracy to a nation that has never had it? Certainly. Is it right? I won’t go there. I think what I’d really like to see is a ceasing of hostilities between parties and a move toward singleness of thought. Can I hear an amen???

Good day to all!

Mike