WAR -- good gawd, y'all -- what is it GOOD for?

[Xaviel]

How\'s it going Bob? I totally agree with you. Why go after Iraq just because they supposedly have WMDs. So does China and other countries you have mentioned. I\'m a Texas Guardsman and not in a hurry to visit the desert just cause our Commander in Chief wants more oil or wants to finish up daddy\'s job. If Iraq was so big of an issue they should\'ve settled it the Gulf War.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

If you did have to go, which I pray not, would you feel that you were serving your country or would you feel taken advantage of?

Either way, thank you for your work.

[Xaviel]

I\'m gonna go with the latter part. Nice to finally meet you FTR.

[belgareth]

Druid,

It\'s irrelevent who votes for them! Each of us should concern ourselves with learning the issues and the candidates then voting for what we believe is right. Mindlessly voting for any person or party is a cop-out. Unless you make the effort to make a difference in what you do and how you do things, you have no cause for complaint. Instead of being part of the solution, you are helping to perpetuate the problem. That is exactly what the major parties want you to do. Why do you think there is no real content to their platforms? It\'s all hyperbole and personal attacks. They are playing on emotional responses because thinking people are much harder to manipulate.

The system needs change but it cannot be changed overnight or by wishful thinking. It takes action on the part of every concerned individual. And it will take time but it\'s a worthy goal.

Ok, I\'ll get off my soapbox now. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] I\'ve been involved for a long time and the apathy I see in the general public is frustrating. Even the tiny percentage that votes these days does not bother to learn what they are voting on for the most part. I guess we get what we deserve.

Belgareth

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Hi, Xaviel, nice meeting you, too!Belgareth, it\'s not so easy to figure out what\'s the best course of action to take for best citizenship. It\'s very hard to tell who\'s who and what\'s what -- to those of us who are not so sophisticated in these matters, it\'s hard to see what\'s propaganda and what isn\'t. And what makes it worse is that people don\'t talk so much anymore because it\'s not PC to talk politics. So it leaves the naive but well-intentioned person wandering in the dark. I\'m twice Druid\'s age and still don\'t know for sure that I\'ve done the right thing once my vote is cast. I\'m left with \"at least I voted,\" which is cold comfort sometimes.

[belgareth]

Well, when you voted did you understand who the candidates were and what they stood for? If they are an incumbant I always check their past voting record, it\'s available on the web and most politicians have a web site with that info. Do they vote for the things you believe in? Vote against the things you oppose? Did they keep promises made in the last election? If no, what was their excuse and do you believe it?

Do you believe in professional politicians? Or do you believe it\'s better to have inexperienced people who are better in touch with the daily grind running the country.

I rarely listen to campaign speeches. Instead, I read their position papers and write or call their campaign headquarters for more information. I absorb better by reading than by listening. If I get concrete answers, I am much more likely to trust them. When I get wishy washy crap or platitudes or they talk in circles, I generally scratch them off my list.

On the various issues, did you read them over? They are all available to you on the web and at any library. You\'re lucky, I loved wandering the libraries in DC the times I\'ve been there.

The information is easily available to everybody. A quick search on the web will provide tons of information about any issue. It does take a little more work to glean the facts but I feel so much better when I understand what I am really voting for. Every special interest group presents their own slant, ignore them! Instead, read the voter information packets you recieve in the mail.

When all else fails, you can try this: Draw a line down the center of a sheet of paper. On one side, list the positive aspects of a candidate or issue. On the other list the negatives. Assign point values based on your opinion of their importance then tally the points. It helps a lot to clarify how you really feel about things. And lastly, go with your gut feelings. I may not understand intuitive thinking, but it is right most of the time.

Does that help? It does take time but it is so important to our futures.

Belgareth

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Thanks, that actually helps quite a bit. On a theoretical level, it would seem that inexperienced people would be better because they don\'t have the \"taint\" of the machine. If you live inside the beltway, though, you quickly realize that everything here is hierarchical -- and sometimes figuring out the hierarchy is not as easy as looking at an organizational chart. Folks here take their power very seriously. Offend the wrong person and you\'re dead in the water. No one will throw you a line out because they won\'t side with failure. So I don\'t know how an inexperienced person would ever get anything done at all. You have to know how to work the system.So, Belgareth --just for purposes of discussion--in this last election, for example. If all the people who had voted for an alternative party had voted Democrat, and that would have made the difference and elected Al Gore, do you think we\'d be worried about war today?

[tounge]

Gee let us see. Under Clinton- Gore. Haiti,Somalia,Yugoslavia and others. Of course the liberals never bitched too loud because it was their boy. I shudder to think what things would be like if Al Gore was President, during 9-11.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

How do you think it would have been different?

[belgareth]

That\'s quite an assumption, FTR! My bet is that the election would have been just as close.

During the election, I was hosting an exchange student from Belgrade. For her American government class, her and I watched a couple of debates. Now, remember that she is a complete neophyte to American politics but very perceptive. After the first debate , she looked over at me and said \"I don\'t like that Gore guy. He\'s arrogant, mean and vicious!\" It drew a good laugh.

Personally, I think things would be worse. Keep in mind that most major events take years to come to fruition in the real world. The economy began it\'s collapse under Clinton. The intelligence failures were under his regime. Who was it that initiated bombing Yugoslavia? Gore is to Clinton as baby Bush is to Daddy.

Do you remember when Carter (Democrat) was president and 50 American citizens were held hostage? And when Reagan (Republican) was elected, they promptly decided to give them back? Why do you think that happened?

I do not specifically support either major party but the Democrats frighten me worse than the Republicans. Action is always better than inaction. The action in itself may be inappropriate, but it is better than waiting for the other side to walk all over you.

Belgareth

[tounge]

Belgareth, I almost totally agree with you. You state it much better than I am capable. I happen to believe that if 9-11 happened under Gore,he would probably have continued to appease the terrorists,much as Clinton did, when we were constantly getting attacked around the world by them.

[belgareth]

ALMOST? What do you mean almost? Kidding!

You are probably right. While I know it\'s unrealistic, sometimes I wish we could do like China did and close our borders for a few years to get our act together. Then we could rejoin the rest of the world. There is no real reason for us to believe we have to lead everybody else all the time. It\'s our national ego and it hurts us more often than helps.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

This is SO not my area that please be assured, if I ask a question, I\'m not baiting you or asserting a position by implication. I really don\'t know, I\'m truly ignorant. I\'m not assuming anything would have been better under Gore. Just wanted to know, if you think it would have been worse, tell me why so I can learn something. Belgareth - you raise another good issue and I do agree with you that it would be nice if we could stop and get our act together for awhile. Another component of the decision re who to vote for is domestic vs foreign affairs. It would seem that the Democrats are generally more concerned with domestic affairs than Republicans.

[franki]

Qoutes from Belgareth:

\"I am not saying that we should not go to war, nor am I advocating isolationism.\"

\"I wish we could do like China did and close our borders for a few years to get our act together\"

???? [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[belgareth]

Didn\'t think you were. However, I do love a good debate and try to stay current with politics. My involvement goes clear back to the Vietnam era.

Gore would have continued to run the economy into the ground. The democrats have never figured out that when the government takes money out of the economy, it drags the economy down. There is less money available for investment into research, manufacturing etc. That means fewer jobs. With fewer jobs, there is a reduced need for new products and services. The economy is a huge, slow moving feedback loop. Every action taken by government, private industry or individuals has an impact on the economy.

As far as the war goes, Gore might have reacted one of two ways; either he would have gone ballistic and started bombing everybody in sight or he would have apologized for getting those big ugly buildings in the way of those jets. Neither response would have been appropriate. At least Bush took time to calm down and think it through.

If you watched the presidential debates, you saw how petty and childishly he behaved. Is that what we want in a president?

[belgareth]

Quoting a little out of context, aren\'t we?

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Yes, but ... begging your pardon, Bush embarasses me to tears. Can\'t string a sentence together, talks like an idiot. Not that Gore\'s delivery is anything to brag about, and his shifting image makes me uncomfortable ...

[belgareth]

I know, and it\'s puzzling. They are both pretty bright people with excellent educations.

[upsidedown]

A good example of appeasement that the Democrats seem to always advocate is the deal that former president Carter struck up with North Korea during the Clinton administration, where they promised to stop their nuclear development. \"We have to play nice with these thugs so they will like us!\" Now, hey, guess what...we find out that they lied!

That\'s all we can ever expect from Saddam Hussein as well, a bunch of lies while he continues to plot ways to hurt and destroy us. And, he\'s continued to thumb his nose at us for 5 years after kicking out the inspectors. Notice, only when Bush threatened military action against Saddam did he actually get religion and decide to allow the inspectors back in. That\'s because he believed that Bush would really do something, but he apparently was just thumbing his nose at Clinton the last several years of his administration.

Sometimes you just have to asses who you\'re dealing with, and determine the best course of action. I believe, as do the majority of Americans, that Saddam is going to become an even greater threat if he isn\'t stopped now.

If we did nothing now, and in 3 or 4 years Saddam develops a nuclear device and then slips it to some terrorists who then proceed to use it somewhere to kill tens of thousands of people, all these people today who are critical of Bush\'s tough stance would be the first ones to criticize him for letting it happen...\"What an idiot....that stupid Bush knew that Saddam Hussein was dangerous and he didn\'t do anything about it. Now look, thousands of people are dead because of him...\" etc. etc.

Bush may not be articulate, but is that any more embarrassing than a president who can\'t open his mouth without saying something that\'s a lie, or a president who takes credit for creating the internet?

Bush\'s stance on the war may not be popular with everybody, but that\'s what leadership is all about. I think Gore would have been like Clinton...looking at the polls to decide what would gain him the most political capital.

[Elana]

Yeah...what Upsidedown said [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] and BTW, I am a registered Democrat.

[druid]

hey I like clinton [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Weed smoking fornacator, I know lots guys like that [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]. Seriously few years ago the econmy was fcking great under clinton. And I don\'t blame bush, or any one person for the present state of the econmy (and I grad from college in less than a month) The econmy is not sole responsibilty of one person. And for all those people out their who think democrats know nothing of econmics well all I got to say is FDR. And everyone who thinks that since other countries besides IRAQ have weapons mass destructiona and therefore we should not single out IRAQ for a good-ole american a$$ whoopin, ask yourself this question. Are our relations with those countries as with IRAQ\'s???? (or the rest of middle east). I personally think that if Sadam is removed from power then the rest of the world (including IRAQ) would be a lot more safe.

[a.k.a.]

If Gore had been president, he would have bombed the hell out of somebody. Probably Afghanistan, but not necessarily. US foreign policy is tied into these kinds of over-the-top, strong-arm tactics irregardless of who’s president.

I don’t believe we would have the Patriot Act, detainees in Guantanamo, or other violations of the constitution. There is even the remote possibility that the NSA and INS would have been held accountable for their catastrophic failure.

In other words. He would have still fallen for the terrorist provocation. Scapegoating and symbolic gestures would have still taken precedence over real security issues. But it’s doubtful that our political freedoms would have suffered.

A more uncertain track of speculation is, would 9/11 have even happened under Gore? Judging from some reports, the Bush team knew some sort of hijacking attempt was going to take place. What would a Gore administration have done with this information?

[a.k.a.]

Robert Fisk is a real investigative journalist with many years experience in the Middle East. He takes great risks to uncover the truth. (He was severely beaten by Afghani refugees while covering the US invasion.) He’s one of the few Westerners to interview Bin Laden and the following article is damn scary.

http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk1115.html

[**DONOTDELETE**]

A.K.A., what does Bin Laden want from us? Anything? Or just to hurt us back? Am I completely off base to think we cry too much about one attack here when we\'ve left Afghanistan in complete ruins, and that we should have anticipated for a long time now that someone in the Middle East would get up and say, \"That\'s it! We\'re comin\' to getcha.\"

[a.k.a.]

FTR,
I don’t know and don’t consider myself knowledgeable enough to speculate.

His stated objectives (Meant to apeal to the Arab conscience, and to be taken with a grain of salt) are: US out of Saudi Arabia, an end to Iraqi sanctions and a Palestinian homeland.

Noam Chomsky, an MIT professor who IS extremely knowledgeable about Middle Eastern affairs, is convinced that Bin Laden wants to rule Saudi Arabia and sees the US as the major obstacle in his path. All his pro-Muslim rhetoric and inflammatory propaganda is geared towards getting the US military out of the region so that his holy warriors can crush the Saudi Royal family.

[a.k.a.]

PS. I don’t think we cry too much. The attacks were horrific and whatever our government has done to Muslims is no excuse for all the innocents that suffered. Imagine the terror of being in a plane that’s flying into a building, the terror of being trapped in that building, jumping out of windows to escape the inferno...

We don’t cry enough. We insist on macho posturing and pseudo-patriotic flag waving that is totally inappropriate under the circumstances.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Oh, I do imagine. I don\'t think I could take the grief if it had been a loved one of mine on a cell phone minutes before dying, knowing death was coming. It was horrible beyond belief. But we\'ve done as bad or worse to them, haven\'t we? Killed as many innocents, caused as many children to starve or be killed?

I hate the \"pseudo-patriotic flag waving\" too and my gut feeling is that it is inappropriate. Why is it inappropriate? I haven\'t been able to articulate that to myself, I just feel it and don\'t know why.

[druid]

well I will speculate. He is a sociopath bent on ruling something(a piece of that desert called the Middle East). But too rule something he needs too make some people love him(or at least join his cause). So he creates his \"jihad\" (twisting Islam around and using it to say that this is holy -- and I think commiting something like this in the name of any GOD is a one way ticket to HELL) with western soceity as the enemy and since the US is kinda the empotie of western society(and because we will stand against him trying to conquer something) we are his main targets. He also uses the turmoil in israel too his advantage (further consolding his hate of the US because we are allys of Israel\'s) and also probably has sadam on his side -- because he hates us too.

Then again this is just my opinion, I could be wrong...(but if I was a betting man I would put the farm on it)

[a.k.a.]

FTR,
I think, as a nation, we have been anticipating something in the order of 9/11. Compare the news footage with images from action blockbusters prior to 9/11.

Frankly, I’ve been anticipating worse. This is the era of germ warfare, depleted uranium, and genetic manipulation. 9/11 was a spectacle. An advertisement for wanna be terrorists. A provocation for the ruling class.
Imagine people dropping dead and nobody knows how or why.

Deep in our psyche we all know that what goes around comes around. I pay taxes, but I’ve never killed anybody. I’m assuming you haven’t either.

In psychoanalysis the function of dreams is to guard sleep against wakefulness. That’s what’s inappropriate about flag waving.

Sorry for the sketchy reply, but I’ve got to run. Maybe I can post a clearer response tomorrow.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

A.K.A., you\'re good. Always leave \'em wanting more. Your sentence about the flag waving is very intriguing and I\'d love to hear you elaborate.

I only knew Chomsky from his transformational generative grammar which I studied as part of linguistics courses in school. I know he\'s a brilliant man but not much else. I bought a little booklet he wrote on 9/11 but it was stolen off my desk at work and I haven\'t replaced it.

It could be that themes of retribution are in our collective psyche and therefore came out in action blockbusters; it could also be that the studios were manipulated to prime us. I believe there are powerful links between media and government. Do you think this could be another piece of the truth?