BG Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 I read a review of his new book in today's USA today(hate this f'n newspaper). Seems interesting. While I don't agree with all of his political views, he had a quote from his review I found interesting: "We live in dangerous times. Our armies are powerful, and we spend billions of dollars on new prisons, yet our lives are still ruled by fear. We are like pygmies lost in a maze. We are not at war, we are having a nervous breakdown." Insightful, I thought. He then goes on to say that after Sept. 11, Bush and the U.S. have turned into " a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world- a nation of bullies and *******s who would rather kill then live peacefully." Hmmm, thought about it. Could be argued. I still looooove his writing. You can catch him on of all places espn.com here's a story he recently wrote: http://espn.go.com/page2/s/thompson/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 13, 2003 Share Posted February 13, 2003 Originally posted by IAMBG He then goes on to say that after Sept. 11, Bush and the U.S. have turned into " a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world- a nation of bullies and *******s who would rather kill then live peacefully." So he's alleging that the U.S. was essentially looking for an excuse - and 9/11 was that excuse - to go and make war on as many countries as possible? This is insightful? Inflammatory, naive and hoplessly misguided is more like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 The thing is Redman, we could have prevented 9/11. Yes, hindsight is 20/20 but we stand guilty of being negligent in protecting our homeland. There were many signs and numerous warnings from intelligence agencies inside and outside of the U.S. And now the U.S. intends to make other countries suffer the price for our negligence. Objectively viewed, yes, we are a bully nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp The thing is Redman, we could have prevented 9/11. Yes, hindsight is 20/20 but we stand guilty of being negligent in protecting our homeland. There were many signs and numerous warnings from intelligence agencies inside and outside of the U.S. And now the U.S. intends to make other countries suffer the price for our negligence. Objectively viewed, yes, we are a bully nation. Kurp, you're so backwards on this one your *** is in the air. So what you're saying essentially is that it's the woman's fault if she gets raped because she's the one who chose to wear a short skirt, eh? Give me a freaking break! We've been attacked by a group that wants nothing more than to kill as many Americans as possible. We've identified the regimes that contribute in various ways to this sourge. And you're wringing your hands about us doing this? We could have done more before 9/11. In hindsight, we've needed over 20 years to figure out that there's a bunch of people in the Islamic world who have thought they're making war on us, no matter what we thought we were doing at the time. But I'm not so naive as to think that merely defending our borders and relying upon everyone in law enforcement, from airport screeners on up, will detect and prevent every plot against us! And I'm damn sure not willing to do that in an age of WMD's! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by redman So what you're saying essentially is that it's the woman's fault if she gets raped because she's the one who chose to wear a short skirt, eh? Give me a freaking break! Nice try Redman, but over simplifying this doesn't make your retort any more effective. Using your analogy, if the woman is warned repeatedly not to frequent a certain area because of a significant risk of being raped, but chooses to visit that area anyway, well, she should not be surprised if she gets raped. Is it her fault? No? Could she have prevented it? Yes. Next time try not dumbing it down if you want to make a valid point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Kurp...I respect you for your consistency and intelligence....but you are barking up the wrong tree on this one. i realize that it follows hard upon the brief you (or TEG) directed us toward vis conspiracy theories. but, in your singleminded fixation on 9/11, you are missing the larger point. these terrorist attacks have been a sustained threat for decades. Americans have been murdered by terrorists for decades. 9/11 was just the most egregious event in a long line of killings. there are no options...these people have to be killed. their supporters have to be brought to account. had there not been a 9/11 there would have been 10/11 or 12/11. what does everyone think those training camps in Afghanistan were for? do you think there might be others? you think they might be receiving covert support elsewhere? or do you believe that all the money, all the personnel movement, all the infrastructure they use just sorta grows on trees or is manufactured by the powerful Al Queda industrial base, banking system, etc? think these guys might be passing through several countries along the Afghanistan borders with the knowledge of the governments whose territories they are passing through? naaaahhhh....not possible....we have no indisputable proof......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp Nice try Redman, but over simplifying this doesn't make your retort any more effective. Using your analogy, if the woman is warned repeatedly not to frequent a certain area because of a significant risk of being raped, but chooses to visit that area anyway, well, she should not be surprised if she gets raped. Is it her fault? No? Could she have prevented it? Yes. Next time try not dumbing it down if you want to make a valid point. Forgive me. I forgot how the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were off visiting where they shouldn't have been on 9/11. You obviously think 9/11 was justified then. Please explain how so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 FanSince62, All we have to do is look at the Israeli - Palestinian conflict to know that violence begets violence. The Israeli response to Palestinian terrorists has been heavy-handed and tenfold in kind. Have they been any more successful in stopping the violence against their innocent civilians? We cannot stop terrorists who truly want to inflict harm upon us. The Israelis have been unsucessful and I'm afraid that the U.S. will find the same to be true. I'm all for homeland security, even at the expense perhaps of civil liberties in some cases. But I'm afraid that given the current perception of the U.S. by many other countries, we are simply breeding more terrorists by our actions. An eye for an eye and pretty soon the entire world will be blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Isnt that a Gahndi quote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by redman Forgive me. I forgot how the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were off visiting where they shouldn't have been on 9/11. You obviously think 9/11 was justified then. Please explain how so. Read my extension of your own analogy again, think about it, and then let me know if you still have the same question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by The Evil Genius Isnt that a Gahndi quote? Could be. I certainly don't mean to take credit for it. I just read it somewhere and it stuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Kurp...if you're going to press your point, then the obvious response is to ask how the intelligence community got to the dysfunctional point leading up to 9/11. this didn't just happen overnight....what were the systemic and legislative causes that led to this failure? who should share blame for this? finally...we will never agree........we have fundamentally differing views on what it takes to "secure the peace"....I do admire you for the principled position you have taken and wish it were so....however, I also believe that it misunderstands the nature of the threat.......there is no negotiating or reasoning with these people.......they quite literally are terminators!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 FanSince62, EXACTLY! I knew there was a reason I respect for the most part, your dialogues on this matter. We cannot change 9/11. But we can fix in our own house what led to a successful plot by the terrorists. I'm beginning to think that's where we need to focus the bulk of our resources. In other words, the best offense is our best defense. I greatly fear that our increasing image as a global tyrant will accomplish in the long run, an unprecedented growth in the ranks of terrorists who would like nothing more than to take out as many Americans as they possibly can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 kurp...ok...we're getting somewhere....i agree that we need to fix some things internally. the congress held hearings on this and legislation has been passed, institutions created (e.g., HLS), and resources provided to drive greater interoperability, cooperation and coordination. but...there are many parts to the solution. when dealing with asymetric, unpredictable threats many things have to be done. you have addressed one of them: 1) intelligence & warnings: we need a better, faster system for detecting these threats, sharing the information, and directing defensive respones....this is the part you are covering. 2) better preventative measures. we need to understand the threat and build mechanisms that, where possible, can prevent or mitigate. 3) response strategies. we have already been attacked....multiple times. we are now responding with force globally. and this is where we seem to disagree most....given the evolving nature of the threat, we cannot afford to absorb any more blows. it is this part of the solution that appears to bother folks the most. we aren't being bullies: we are going to liquidate the people who are trying to kill you, me and our families. that's the cold reality of all of this. and you are right...innocent people like the ones in the WTC are likely to be killed. that's the nature of war. it may not be right or noble. and everyone should stand back and give thought to the human ost of all of this...on all sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp Read my extension of your own analogy again, think about it, and then let me know if you still have the same question. So where did "the woman" go that she shouldn't? There, is that better? The bottom line is explain. Answer the question. But I have to say that if the world expects us as to not be involved in some way everywhere given our economic size, then they're the ones with stupid misconceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn X Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Hunter S. Thompson got his brains beat in back in the mid '60s by a Hell's Angel and then followed that up with about a decade's worth of heavy drug use. And we're supposed to take what this guy has to say seriously? Riiiiiiiiiight. BTW, I completely understand what you're saying, Kurp. We asked for it on Sept. 11th. Totally. Absolutely. I mean, there we are out there in the world being ourselves in such quintessential and overbearing fashion (i.e. ostentatiously un-fascist, un-puritanical, and non-jihadist). As a result, we were practically begging Bin Laden and his merry band of pious, murderous nutjobs to come over and slaughter us. Just as we we begged the Japanese to bomb the hell out of us on December 7, 1941. I mean, hell, we surely had it coming because we'd been so mean and unfeeling as to cut off oil and steel shipments to the Japanese after they'd joined with Nazi Germany and fascist Italy to form that little tea party known as the Axis Pact. The United States... What a big ol' bully of a country, eh? If only we had somebody really open-minded in charge, eh? Like Hunter S. Thompson! Can you imagine if he were prez? Boy, we'd be so much better off with a real clear-thinking individual like him in charge! Can't you just see Hunter and Osama kicking back at Camp David, downing a couple of brewskis (or uppers perhaps), and getting to know one another better? Détente, 21st century style. Ah, to dream the impossible dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I find it comical that the same people who complain we should have done more to prevent 9/11 are the same ones crying that we shouldnt go to war with Iraq. We learned a harsh lesson on 9/11. NOw Bush is doing what he can to prevent another one, but he gets resistance from the likes of Hillary CLinton who then goes on camera and complains that we arent doing enough to protect ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Glenn, redman, you just don't get it, do you? When someone perpetrates such a terrible, henious act like mass murder it's obvious there must be a reason other than the murderer is a total nutcase. Mansons' victims, Andrea Yates' kids, Jeffrey Dahmer's favorite dinner selection, those kids in DC that were sexually abused by the school janitor ... they all must accept their share of culpability. After all, noone in their right mind would committ such a terrible crime just because he's a psycho nutjob. Because the crime is so terrible there MUST be a rational reason for it's commission. Don't you understand the logic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 14, 2003 Author Share Posted February 14, 2003 It's good to see commentary on this and I don't --repeat--don't agree with most of Thompson's political views. This is nothing more than an attempt to rekindle the flair of shock value he used to have while writing for Rolling Stone. I did however take to heart his comment about our nation having turned into a pack of warmongers. I myself use to consider myself quite the leftist until Sept. 11. Now I find my self sicerely believing that it would be great to destroy Iraq's regime, gain a strong footing in the area in effort to infiltrate the terrorist networks where they spawn. This quote made me think long and hard. When did I start condoning war? Well, in this case I believe it was forced upon me. I have never liked violence or fighting, but I will defend myself at any cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 There's an old saying: "A Democrat is a Republican that hasn't been mugged yet." We just got mugged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 14, 2003 Author Share Posted February 14, 2003 :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn X Posted February 15, 2003 Share Posted February 15, 2003 Bingo, Henry. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.