PDA

View Full Version : Bush opens up a can of whoop a$$



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Flash44
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:21 PM
Everyone watching? He looks just like his daddy! And sounds like him too.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

Flash44
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:21 PM
Everyone watching? He looks just like his daddy! And sounds like him too.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

Magnolia
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:28 PM
Is he sending in DMK's Peeps?

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Erin
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:31 PM
I just wish someone would tell him there's an "r" at the end of "terror." I keep wondering what in the world a "terra" is. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But a good speech so far, otherwise...

DMK
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:42 PM
LOL - Is he saying that there will be no terra in 'merca?

I confess, I have to wait for the written transcript when he speaks - something about that man's voice that makes my spine crawl away!

Mariequi
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:44 PM
And enjoying the fact I'm here to appreciate it. My Mom from Mass. would've left off the 'r' and this gentleman from Texas is doing the same. Considering that 'terra' is earth, not a problem!

Duffy
Sep. 20, 2001, 06:52 PM
I'm sorry - No, I won't apologize. I think he was great. So there. I had to pause a minute to say this.

Rocinante
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:00 PM
I agree, Duffy. He can drop the 'r' from terror all he wants, I care more about what he said than how he said it.

S2N

"What am I lying here
for?...We are lying here as
though we had a chance of
enjoying a quiet time...am I
waiting until I become a
little older?"

Beezer
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
I just wish someone would tell him there's an "r" at the end of "terror." I keep wondering what in the world a "terra" is. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, Erin! I kept thinking, "Tara? As in, 'Gone With the Wind'? Terre? As in, Terre Haute?"

But I have to say ... that was an excellent speech; kudos to the speechwriter. And he rose to the occasion. Very, very good.

****Bulletin Board Goddess****

Erin
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:07 PM
Hey, I'm not arguing... it was a very good speech. It just took me a while to figure out that terra = terror. Once I got that figured out, it was smooth sailing. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Seriously, I did like the speech a lot. Very good.

Kachoo
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:10 PM
The fam and I were watching just now, and boy oh boy, I got goosebumps! When Bush issued the ultimatum to the Taliban, when he spoke about the state of the Union, when he mentioned the badge of the police officer that he now carries around with him . . . What a great speech. As a sidenote, my mom mentioned that British Prime Minister Tony Blair reminds her a little of Kevin Costner /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Cheers,
Susie
http://www.kachoom.com

"Laugh at yourself first, before anyone else can." ~Elsa Maxwell

SLW
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:11 PM
Oh Erin, we're going to have to take you on a road trip through the deep south and Texas!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I have always understood what Dubya and Jimmy Carter were saying! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SLW

elizabeth
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:12 PM
Not unlike the announcers at stock car races who keep talking about the big brown Shitty. (Which means the big brown Chevy, if you take away the accent.)

I didn't hear the speech, sadly, but I will look for the transcript tomorrow. You GO George!!

spaz
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:16 PM
Don't make fun of Texans. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://user.boardnation.com/ythejuniorsclique/board.cgi
Junior Clique!

elizabeth
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:22 PM
I'm not! I'm not!!

I've got my New Yawwwwwk accent! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Snowbird
Sep. 20, 2001, 07:42 PM
I was impressed by what he said. Even the left twistin liberal press gave him kudos. To campare him to FDR when you're in the press is hutspha.

He didn't threaten, he promised and he laid out his terms of engagement plain and simple. This has created the worst nightmare for all terrorists, a strong single purpose America, that's not so busy fighting with each other that they don't notice what the terrorists are doing. Finally, our guys don't have their hands tied behaind their back just taking punches.

I've known lots of folks with different accents and I really find it offensive to have the only criticism his speach patterns. Look at it this way to him our New York accent is almost unintelligible. I don't think he looked at all like a copy of his Daddy. And, you know what if you had a job and the closest person who would understand, and had experience was your Daddy so what?

His father had the unfortunate quality of talking in abstractions that people didn't undestand. Now Bubba on the other hand was fabulous with the four word four letter synopsis of an idea, so it could become a mantra.

Erin
Sep. 20, 2001, 08:04 PM
Oh for crying out loud...

IS ANYONE LISTENING?? I SAID IT WAS A GOOD SPEECH!

I am not "worried" about how he says it. Annoyed, yes, but not worried.

BTW, as someone cursed with a Midwestern accent (which makes most people think my name is "Ann" when I introduce myself), who spent four years going to school with people from New Yawk and Lawn-Guy-Lind, I have a very good appreciation of accents... I quite enjoy different accents, actually.

Yeesh... /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

As I have said three times now, I thought it was a very good speech. Got goosebumps during the "the state of our union is strong" part.

elizabeth
Sep. 20, 2001, 08:07 PM
Yes, yes!! Erin and others, tell me MORE about what was said.

You GO George Bush!!

Erin
Sep. 20, 2001, 08:16 PM
Elizabeth, I'll bet CNN or MSNBC will have a transcript by now...

elizabeth
Sep. 20, 2001, 08:17 PM
Found the transcript:

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript/

Oh, yeah, and in case I forgot to say it earlier. . . . YOU GO GEORGE BUSH!!!

dcm
Sep. 20, 2001, 09:12 PM
Don't worry about the accent thing, Erin. As a Native Texan who has been misplaced in Michigan for 13 long, cold years, I sound like I'm from Ohio! My hubby says he'll get me talking like a michigander within the next 2 years! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Even tho' I'm way up here, I had no problem understanding Gee-Dubya. Very loud and clear to me. I just hope the "terra-ists" are smart enough to get the message.

We're a-comin'. Make no mistake about it.

Member - Baby Greenie Support Group, HorseShowMom Clique, and Midwest Clique

elizabeth
Sep. 20, 2001, 09:13 PM
Love it, DMC!!

Nomatter how you say it, we're a comin'!!

God guide our leaders and bless America!

Kryswyn
Sep. 20, 2001, 09:21 PM
Got goosebumps reading it (no TV here). Reading it also let me fantasize that Harrison Ford was giving the speech (ala Tom Clancy's character Jack Ryan). **Sigh**

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

Bumpkin
Sep. 20, 2001, 09:27 PM
I went out to give Elliot a brushing and do his carrot exercises.
So I missed it!!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif
Hope to catch it on rerun sometime.

Merry
Sep. 20, 2001, 10:39 PM
So, after watching the speech I have just a few words to say:

"Saddle up, we ride at dawn!" /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Weatherford
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:10 AM
My landlords took me out to an Irish pub last night, and when I got home I searched and searched for a radio station that carried it live - FINALLY got an old AM Station /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif out of Scotland (BBC) with some excellent comentators. Sound left a lot to be desired, but I heard most of it!

Wonderful speech (I did notice the accent, but given I can only understand half what my Irish friends say, it was a pleasure!) And it got surprisingly GREAT reviews from the very, very liberal BBC - I didn't sit up for too much analysis, as it started at 2 in the morning, and I need to close my eyes!

God bless the USA - and good going, President Bush!

brilyntrip
Sep. 21, 2001, 03:12 AM
I agree with you he is completely illiterate but ....the speech was good rousing etc .Thats what these speeches are supposed to be !My mom and I were talking about him two days ago.. I said I do not know what he was doing at Harvard but studying the English language was not it .My stepdad who knows former Pres. Bush said "he was partying girls !"
Yes but you have to admit it was a rousing speech and in the long run we all respond to someone who does not "put on airs right?"
Here's my question ....
After the fervor dies down from this speech Exactly how are we all of us from every part of the world going to succeed ?I see this "war" as being almost impossible to win.Anyone who helps us can look forward to attacks on their homeland.That results in public outcry etc etc .All of this gives the "TERRAISTS"what they want.I have to admitthat the reality of this mess makes me depressed.

Canter
Sep. 21, 2001, 05:33 AM
But why on earth would the man thank everyone in the world except the Canadians?

Not only are we forced to watch his televised speeches, but Canada has lent military support, donated blood, sent doctors, ME's and rescue workers to NYC amongst many other things.

Yes his speech was good. But frankly I'm a bit insulted by this.

BTW - Terra is my dogs name. Everytime Dubya said the word, my dog looked at the television. Good thing he never said the word "park" in the same sentence.

Magnolia
Sep. 21, 2001, 05:34 AM
It was a good speech, and it had to be a good speech. Does anyone know who wrote it? Or did he wing it? He sounded much more composed this time.
Still gotta disagree with the warrin' though... Methinks the can of whoopa$$ will mostly hurt the innocent. I bet 70% of the Afghanistan population has no clue bout what is going on. Ouch, terraism, no matter how ya say it is one tough enemy to fight. They say Bin Laden has people in over 50 countries including the good ol' USA...

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Louise
Sep. 21, 2001, 05:56 AM
I noticed that Canada was not mentioned last night. I really do think that it was just an oversight, I can't think of any reason that your Nation would be deliberately overlooked.

Anyway, as an individual citizen of the United States of America, let me extend my apologies and my sincere gratitude that Canada and the US have always stood side by side, in the face of any adversity. Living as close to the border as I do, I really appreciate the fact that we have a strong and stalwart friend to our north.

FlyingCircus
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:01 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by brilyntrip:
I agree with you he is completely illiterate but .... I said I do not know what he was doing at Harvard but studying the English language was not it . [QUOTE]

I'm not so sure that Erin and DMK are saying that our esteemed President is illiterate. It seemed to me that they were just commenting on his accent. Oh and if he were completely illiterate, he couldn't have read the teleprompter. But I digress.

Can we, for once, not criticize the man and instead applaud his efforts? I've been lurking on many of these threads for the past week and you're all starting to get on my nerves with your complaining about the intelligence of our President. Now is NOT THE TIME to tell me that you think he's not up to the job. The future will show us that. It is the time, however, to unite behind our President, not divide the country further. For now, I'd like to feel safe in my office that is 2 blocks from the White House. I'd also like to mourn the loss of one of my firm's partners, who had the bad luck to be on the flight that hit the Pentagon.

Maybe he isn't the brightest light bulb in Washington, but he is our President and he deserves our support and respect, accent aside.

SLW
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:10 AM
Canter- I had not noticed that Canada was "left out" until I read your post. It has to have been an oversight, geesh, on the day of the attack Canada was instrumental in helping us get planes out of American air space.

I bet GWB is just jealous because you all have the fabulous mounted troopers up there! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In conclusion, I second Lousie's sentiments!

SLW

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:27 AM
Canter, I'll bet it's like when someone is accepting their Oscar, and is trying so hard not to forget anyone that they overlook the REALLY IMPORTANT people... like Mom, the S/O, etc.

So look at it this way... Canada is SO important that it almost goes without saying that y'all are the US's best buddy. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Flash44
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:37 AM
Dubya did emphasize the friendship between USA and Great Britain. However, please note that Great Britain fought unsuccessfully for years in Afghanistan. The country is mountainous desert, think southern Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona mountains. It is extremely difficult to maneuver on foot, and has many hiding places for those on the ground to evade air strikes. Bombing the populated areas will result in heavy civilian casualties, chasing shadows through the mountains will result in the loss of many US soldiers.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

elizabeth
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:42 AM
What are the other options, Flash?

Every day at lunch, my colleagues discuss how a land war is going to be tough. But an air strike will kill many innocents. I always want to say "well, which is the lesser of two evils. . . or is there a third option?"

I, however, am to ashamed of my ignorance to ask THEM that, so I will ask you.

Flash, which is the lesser of two evils or do you see a third way to do it?

Thanks in advance for any insight you have!!

DMK
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FlyingCircus:

I'm not so sure that Erin and DMK are saying that our esteemed President is illiterate. It seemed to me that they were just commenting on his accent. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you FlyingCircus... I was just about to reiterate what Erin said - Did anyone READ what we wrote??? You did though, and that took the wind right out of my sails /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Everyone else, as for what I said, it is, has been, and shall be, his VOICE that I cannot listen to. Note that VOICE is somewhat a different concept than WORDS (sentences, paragraphs, phrases, concepts, speeches and other various forms of assembling words). I did watch 2 hours of political commentary afterwords and read the speech, and it was indeed a good speech.

As for the man's voice, I confess I had the same problem with George Morris for years when he was schooling someone within earshot - I had to leave the immediate area. I'm over it now, but people humming and snapping gum will still drive me over the edge.

And spaz00, don't worry. I'm a native Texan, my family is all in Texas, and have been there for quite some time (think generations). Texas accents thrive aplenty in my relatives. Whatever it is about Dubya's voice that my spine takes offense to isn't about a Texas accent /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AHC
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:03 AM
Brilyn, I think dubya went to Yale... I know his father did. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I am a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat who thought Bush gave an excellent speach last night.

davidgud - equestrian jihad
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:06 AM
Speaking of accents . . .

I'm not really sure how many American women south of Mason - Dixon are aware of this but we Canadian males are often absolutely enchanted by American Girl southern accents . . .

A few years ago at the SM Masters, I was talking to this girl from Virginia . . . (she was with one of the breed associations or possibly a breed farm, I' really not sure, I can't remember . . .)

Anyway, she was really good looking, but when I heard her speak, I just melted on the spot . . .
I must have stood there for half an hour or so, encouraging her to talk just so I could listen in totally enchanted silence.

Beautiful Virginia girls with southern accents - America's secret weapon when negotiating with intransigent Canadian males (U.S. State Department take note . . .) /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

David G./Seoul

Chief2
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:08 AM
in the group is a gentleman named Michael Gersten. I agree, it was a good, solid speech. Also, please remember that for the first 22+ years of GW's life he was brought up and educated solidly in New England, so there's bound to be a dropping of the r now and then. If you listen carefully to him when he gets mad, the Texas drawl drops clear away, and the New England speech patterns take over. And don't be insulted, dear Canada. We're thrilled you are with us! /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

FlyingCircus
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:19 AM
I may a blonde girl from southern (well, central, originally) Virginia, but I can read, write AND ride! Y'all be careful - we only seem sweet, silly & innocent! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

David G. - Thank you for realizing how powerful we southern girls really can be!

Robby Johnson
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:21 AM
Very often drop the "r" too. In my hometown of good old Mobile, Alabama, it's not uncommon to hear old families talk about having a glass of "wohta" (water) and going on and on about their "mohtha" (mother).

I guess I've watched too much "That's My Bush" because when he pauses and gets a blank look on his face, I start to laugh and cannot take him seriously. I always do my best Mystery Science 3000 impressions and say, "now, was it the lasagna or the baked zitti that I liked so well at Macaroni Grill?" or another totally off-the-wall comment.

His speech was great, I thought. I think it was perceived as being greater, simply because of the energy in the room. And I think it was a speech that America really needed to hear. I was actually a little worried that a hi-jacked airplane, or strategically-placed bomb, could've wiped out the leaders of our government in one fell swoop. The reign of terror seems to be taking over, despite the lack of further terrorist acts. I just read that film studios in Hollywood are on high alert by the FBI as possible terrorist targets in a retaliation against any US military strikes against Afghanistan. I hate having to look over my shoulder now. We all were robbed of innocence on September 11.

Oh, I did love Bush's sentiments regarding Muslims and I thought he was EXCELLENT in delivering that vein of the message. I could tell he firmly and whole-heartedly respects traditional Muslims and I am happy that he made the distinction between the radical Islamic religion the terrorists practice. Though it took me twice to register he was calling it a "fringe" or Islam and I could've sworn he said, "French."

And, finally, Tony Blair has always given me fever. He is very much a hottie.

Robby

M. O'Connor
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:56 AM
<<New Yawk and Lawn-Guy-Lind>>

LOL Erin! I felt much the same way, even though I was only 45 min from home at SUNY Stony Brook--you see, speech patterns on the East End of Long Island for the most part have much more in common with those of New England than with those of our up-Island and City neighbors --we got the "terra" thing right away!

Great speech, indeed, though I share Brilyntrip's trepidation about exactly what we are now in for--the peace protests are already gearing up, in all likelihood envisioning wars of the past, which this one of the future promises to resemble not at all. The only thing missing from the mandate is a parallel all-out attack on the root causes of the discontent that leads to such outrageously depraved behaviors. Until these are addressed, the task we have now set course on will not be completed, and in fact will always need to be perpetuated...

DMK
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M. O'Connor:
The only thing missing from the mandate is a parallel all-out attack on the root causes of the discontent that leads to such outrageously depraved behaviors. Until these are addressed, the task we have now set course on will not be completed, and in fact will always need to be perpetuated...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was my concern to (had that vision of the hydra in my head), but a coworker saw a very recent interview with Colin Powell, who has been stressing equal parts military, social, political and economic approaches to the problem, so I feel a lot better about that aspect...

Smart Alec
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:30 AM
...and say I thought it was a very empowering speech. I think the energy in the room definitely helped but it was powerful and he did well.
To be honest, I was not very fond of Bush previous to the attack but I must say, I think he truly has handled himself well...and after his speech last night,I definitely am in support of him!

Also, just to clarify (lol) not all people from New England drop their r's and talk like Kennedy's. I don't ...I may have a hint of an accent but I definitely NEVER say claaam chow-daa! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chief2:
Also, please remember that for the first 22+ years of GW's life he was brought up and educated solidly in New England, so there's bound to be a dropping of the r now and then. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe this is why I find his accent disconcerting sometimes... it's not really Texan, not really New England. "Y'all go on and pahk the cah now, pardner." /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Anyway, before someone jumps on me again, let me reiterate that I really liked the speech. This speech and the one at the National Cathedral a week ago were really some of the best speaking he's done.

My only lingering worry is that, in our rush to be strong and make it clear that these attacks were totally unacceptable, we'll become too devoted to the idea of our own attacks. As others have mentioned, I'm worried that we'll be plunging into an endless cycle of retaliation.

I just hope that all options and all avenues are explored, and that we don't just try to bomb the heck out of them and hope that solves the problem. /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

InWhyCee
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:47 AM
Methinks the can of whoopa$$ will mostly hurt the innocent. I bet 70% of the Afghanistan population has no clue bout what is going on.
________________

I'll bet that NONE of the Afghani people has a clue what's going on, because 1) the Taliban controls the media, 2) so many of them can't read, and/or aren't allowed to even learn to read, 3) they're too busy looking for something to eat, and 4) a significant number of them are standing on the border while their OWN military beats them back into the country with sticks!

That said, I'm NY Democrat from a long line of Arkansass Democrats (Go, Razorbacks) and I was impressed with Dubya's speech (As in "Dub-yuh" not "Double-you"). He's no Anne Richards, but he's more coherent than his Daddy.

PS to Robbie: Tony Blair? Tony Blair? All yours, darlin'; those public-school boys can be a little perverse. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kachoo
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:15 AM
I did find an interesting article concerning the American public not being too thrilled about the Canadian response during a televised CBC town hall meeting the other day. You can read it here:

http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/09/20/town010920

I doubt that would be enough reason for them to be excluded from the speech, but hey. I know that the PM is meeting with Bush on Monday to discuss what Canada can do, so it was more than likely a slip than anything else.

Cheers,
Susie
http://www.kachoom.com

"Laugh at yourself first, before anyone else can." ~Elsa Maxwell

Bumpkin
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:17 AM
I would like Tony Blair, but as a Hunt Supporter I cannot even bear to look at him on Television.

I have too many good friends who depend on making their livings in the British Hunting and Country Sports Fields to trust Mr Blair. /infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Portia
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:22 AM
George W. Bush did indeed go to Yale, as did his father, and both were members of Skull & Bones, the powerful secret society based there.

Magnolia, I think we can very safely say that the speech was written for him and he did not wing it. Pres. Bush has a very different speech pattern when speaking extemporaneously than when reading prepared statements -- his normal speech pattern is filled with pauses and use of "uh" as a filler while he thinks of what he wants to say next. (Something which drives me crazy because I was taught long ago to be aware of and consciously avoid the use of "er" and "uh" and "um" and other such non-word sounds as fillers for pauses. But that's my own pet peeve. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ).

I thought it was an excellent speech, very well written and delivered surprisingly well. It did hit the right notes and was what much of the country needed to hear.

And Robby, I agree with you on Tony Blair. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AMom
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As for the man's voice, I confess I had the same problem with George Morris for years when he was schooling someone within earshot - I had to leave the immediate area. I'm over it now, but people humming and snapping gum will still drive me over the edge.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL DMK! Is this sort of like the guy a few years back who couldn't listen to Mary Hart of Entertainment Tonight without having an epileptic seizure? /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

On a serious note, I was truly impressed by the speech and found the following section particularly powerful:

"We have seen their kind before. They're the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies."

I, for one, certainly hope so.... /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Snowbird
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:44 AM
I mean really this country is loaded with people who have accents and who are courageous enough to learn our language to communicate with us.

Does it really matter in the big scheme of things? Every President has had speech writers, people picked on Ronald Reagen because his speeches were so perfect because he was an actor, now you don't have a packaged salesman but a down to earth human like Harry Truman and you still pick..pick..pick. Don't complain if all you get are managed and packaged candidates who don't resemble their advertising if sound bites and presentation is more important than ideas and proposals. I'm surprised you haaven't found anything wrong with his suit, or his tie or maybe even the way he walks. OH! wasn't there a hair out of place (so distracting).

This was not a rabble rousing speech from a cheerleader, this was a statement of policy by the President of the United States of America. If you agree with the policy then leave it alone and if you don't then disagree with the policy and say why and what you prefer as a way to solve the problem of our dead and missing due to an attack in our home. No risk no gain!

As to Canada my guess is that Canada is considered a member of the family. I don't think they felt that since you were a neighbor and a part of our continent that was an understood. The thank-you went across the pond to other members of the world. Please don't take it personally just as we in New Jersey and those from Connecticut who were all involved with the WTC did not feel offended because New York got all the attention.

They also did not emphasize the remarkable job done because 25,000 people were evacuated and only 6,000 were victims. There were over a 1000 that were nationals from other countries and they suffered losses too, they were not itemized. If he ahd then you'd all be complaining because the speech was long and boring.

[This message was edited by Snowbird on Sep. 21, 2001 at 12:53 PM.]

heads up to the oxer
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:51 AM
Canter...I'm not surprised in the least that Canada wasn't mentioned. Yes, ordinary people stepped up to the plate, donated blood, took people in who were stranded etc., however, the government hasn't committed to anything yet...not even to working with America to strengthen our borders. Infact, when he goes down to the States next week (I can't believe he wasn't down there in the first couple of days since NYC is only an hour away) he has already said that he can't visit NYC because he has a prior committment which is a fundraising dinner. This guy is a liability and make no mistake, there wasn't an ommission last night. We were deliberatly left out of his speech to send us a message. I think he has totally mismanaged this entire situation.

That's my two cents (which in Cdn. $ is not much).

heads up to the oxer
Sep. 21, 2001, 10:14 AM
I hope you weren't referring to my post. I think President Bush is doing an outstanding job...it's our Prime Minister that I think is doing less than a stellar job. However, I do agree that we need to put things into perspective. I personally don't care that we weren't mentioned...all I care about is protecting our way of life and getting Bin Laden and his cronies.

Jair
Sep. 21, 2001, 10:18 AM
I agree! Chretien should have gone to NY last week /infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif There is no excuse. What a weenie /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Tony Blair Robby and Portia?? TONY BLAIR?? The man looks like a weasel /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

I agree too about not supporting him much because of his very strong anti-countryside opinions. Although he is a very good speaker.

I agree with all you guys about Dubya's accent! I don't always understand him! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Heck, up until today I never even knew what you guys meant when you were talking about "Dubya" /infopop/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

Magnolia
Sep. 21, 2001, 10:29 AM
The whole nice thing bout America is that we can and should question our leaders, no matter how unpopular. Many of the people on this BB who choose to make fun of Bush's speech patterns have indeed offered alternate solutions to bombing a nation which already looks like a firing range.
I do not mock Bush, I just wish that at some point he would consider an alternate to war, at least entertain this notion of non-violence. Feed these starving people, make them strong enough to turn on their captors. Get them on our side.
We always seek to end these conflicts violently (of late, we do a little violence and stop....). Why not bomb them with bread, ideals of liberty and kindness? Help them to support their own revolution. If we bomb them now, and for some reason can not stomach finishing the job (Vietnam anyone?), we will assure that these people will never escape the starvation, and cruelty from their "leaders".
Snowbird, I know you always want us to speak out, but frankly, many people are frightening me right now. People I remember as rational tell me I'm as bad as the terrorists for not wanting to blow up Afghanistan.
This whole thing saddens me. I've said what I stand for. I hope to GOD the only blood shed in this are the evil ones who bombed our nation, and the evil rulers of Afghanistan who think so little of women that they kill them for no reason. I hope not one US soldier dies, and I hope not one innocent Afghani bystander dies. If that makes me un-american than so be it.
We have been on this earth for thousands of years. God gave us this wonderful place, and created us in his image. It is time we learn how to deal with our issues by not killing one another, and we, the USA must take the lead and set that example.

Ride it Like You Stole It...

DMK
Sep. 21, 2001, 10:32 AM
jumphigh and snowbird... just think of us as true believers in the constitution. You know... the one that protects free speech? /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And I do not believe anyone on this thread has called the man a moron, stupid, incompetant or any other derogatory name. No one, to my knowledge has insulted the speech, the principles behind the speech, the man, his dress, his shoes or his speechwriter.

Please don't look for things that are not there.

And as John Stewart said last night " 'Sublimbinal' is not a catch phrase around here anymore... not for a long while... but I hope it is one day, because then we will know we have weathered the storm."

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:13 AM
Yeah, yeah, yeah... we're all ruining the country by daring to keep our eyes wide open and notice that THE MAN DOES HAVE AN ACCENT. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Blasphemy! We're pointing out that the emperor has no clothes!

No one said he should not be president because of it. No one said it implied he was doing a bad job. And I'm getting a little tired of people here jumping all over everyone else for expressing their opinions, which may or may not be in line with yours or with the President's.

I would not have voted for Bush (couldn't vote at all, due to an absentee ballot mixup /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif ) and I am vehemently opposed to many of his policies. However, I have been pleasantly surprised with his ability to step up to the plate in the last 10 days, and I look forward to seeing how his plans bear out.

I have not seen one single person here say they do not support Bush right now. I do see some thoughtful questioning of what the country should do next, but I would say this board is a pretty good representation of Mr. Bush's whopping approval rating right now.

Now can we stop ripping people new ones for daring to disagree? It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round, folks...

By the way, not only do I think the President has an accent... I also think his ears kind of stick out funny and he reminds me of Howdy Doody. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif And yet, lo and behold, I am still standing right here and saying I think he made a good speech. My goodness! How does that happen? Could it be I am thinking critically for myself? Nah... /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Brookes
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:20 AM
Ok, I'm totally confused here, where exactly and when exactly has Bush or anyone in his cabinet mentioned that we are going to bomb Afghanistan? Please enlighten me as I seemed to have missed this important point along the way. Yet many of you are against what you are calling "war" and attacking Afghanistan. Again I ask you, where and when did this information come to light??

All I've been hearing is for requests that Afghanistan cooperate with turning over Bin Laden. We've asked not invaded or launched an assault. They have said no, so now what should we do. Just let it slide. We did the nice nice thing, well nice nice is over now. Choke up Bin Laden or suffer the consequences. Bush has never mentioned just what those consequences would be.

Why are you assuming that this is what they have in mind? Or do you know something that I don't?

Lions and Tigers and Bears, oh my!!

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:24 AM
Regarding the article Kachoo posted... um, am I missing something here, or are the angry letters in response to the fact that the Canadians at this meeting said the US shouldn't bomb anyone without strong evidence? Uh, now why would that be a BAD thing?

See, this is what's starting to worry me. Everyone is so gung-ho that we hurry up and bomb someone, and you're perceived as being unpatriotic or unsupportive if you're saying, "Hey, wait a second... are we sure this is what we want to do?"

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brookes:
Bush has never mentioned just what those consequences would be.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, there are those aircraft carriers headed to the Middle East...

N&B&T
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:26 AM
I would have said the same or similar until this morning.

An ABC.com news report indicates that Afghani citizens are embittered by the US rejection of their clerics' ruling to allow Bin Laden to leave. They are 1) now more supportive of the Taleban (go figure); and 2) angry at the US for eliminating a chance for non-military involvement. The citizens interviewed take the latter as evidence of US hostility to Islam generally.

I can't get the url to work, and also cannot cut and paste the article here so I am going to email it to Erin and hope she will help out by posting the pertinent sections (it's long!).

IMO, the US must be (and I believe, will be) extremely careful in its response to the terrorist attack, not only for humanitarian reasons, but in its own interest, and in the interest of the global community.

Every international news report (and many American ones) I have read suggests that the US attempt to build a coalition against terrorism will be successful in direct proportion to the perception and reality of US actions as just, measured, principled, and in accordance with international law. Even countries most supportive of the US at this time are cautioning our president and our country not to lose sight of what makes America great by reacting in ways that will make the very problem we are trying to begin to eradicate worse.

The US has an enormous task ahead of it now, not only in its direct response to the terrorist attack on September 11, but in its avowed commitment to eliminate global terrorism. Listen carefully to the president when he says this will be a long haul, because it will be.

I think the speech was excellent. I also think peoples' comments about speech patterns are coming from a kind of punchiness--we have all been, and still are, under a lot of strain--and should not be interpreted as serious attacks or criticism. Everyone wants the perpetrators brought to justice. Our country and our world is united in a virtually unprecedented way in response to the September 11 tragedy. Our actions now and in future cannot undo the tragedy, but may, in a way, provide a kind of redemption. There are many changes ahead of us all; I hope that the cooperation and empathy between people will last to become one of the good changes.

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:38 AM
Taliban Stirs on Anti-American Sentiment (ABCNEWS.com)

By Sayed Salahuddin

KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan (news - web sites)'s ruling Taliban, faced with a U.S. ultimatum to hand over Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), said on Friday that they would not do so without evidence that the Saudi militant was involved in attacks on U.S. targets.

Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban ambassador in neighboring Pakistan, told a news conference there that in line with a recommendation from Muslim clerics in Kabul bin Laden would be asked to leave Afghanistan and not forced to go.

President Bush (news - web sites), addressing the U.S. Congress earlier, rejected the clerics' intended compromise as inadequate and told the Taliban to hand over bin Laden and his lieutenants or share their fate.

``We are not ready to hand over Osama bin Laden without evidence,'' Zaeef said, when asked if Kabul would extradite him to the United States. Thursday's recommendation from the clerics, he added, was ``a suggestion... and not a decision by a judge.''

Ordinary Afghans in Kabul expressed bitterness at Bush's response to the clerics' olive branch and predicted that it would unite the people behind their Taliban rulers.

The clerics announced their compromise in an edict, which called for Muslims worldwide to join a jihad or holy war should the United States attack Afghanistan.

Bush said on Thursday he wanted the Taliban to hand over both bin Laden and senior members of his al Qaeda organization, close their training camps and release all foreigners held by the Taliban -- apparently a reference to eight aid workers on trial for allegedly promoting Christianity.

``These demands are not open to negotiation or discussion. The Taliban must act and act immediately. They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate,'' Bush said.

Bin Laden faces earlier charges of masterminding the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998.

BITTERNESS

Ordinary Afghans said Bush's rejection of the clerics' edict indicated the United States wanted to fight Islam.

``We don't like or support the Taliban or Osama, but American's policy after the ulemas' (clerics') decision is clearly an indication that this sole world superpower wants to fight against Islam as the Taliban claimed,'' said a grocer.

``The U.S. should revise its stubborn decision and no more bring about a situation whereby youngsters like me join the Taliban against the devil America,'' he added.

The council of clerics convened by Taliban ruler Mullah Mohammad Omar ruled that bin Laden should be asked to leave Afghanistan ``whenever possible,'' apparently leaving the timing up to the Saudi-born multi-millionaire.

``The U.S. has decided to attack Afghanistan and will not accept whatever flexibility the Taliban show. We are sad about the U.S. line and really condemn it,'' said an Afghan university student.

He called for Washington to see if bin Laden actually does leave the country, saying that if the Taliban were not serious, Afghans would back the U.S. position.

``But without any discussions, rejecting it means imposing its stupid policy on us. Without any deliberation about the issue and then attacking will rally support behind the Taliban and with this the U.S. is laying an axe to its own leg,'' the student said.

Neighboring Pakistan's military ruler Pervez Musharraf has pledged to help the United States.

But Zaeef predicted that Pakistan, one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban, would not join any U.S. attack on Afghanistan.

Pakistan's foreign minister, Abdul Sattar, said the Afghan clerics' recommendation was ``significant but not a giant step.''

Afghans said Washington should have shown more understanding.

``People are fleeing because of the U.S. attack and when the Taliban somehow want to provide a type of opportunity to avoid it, America turns it down. I condemn it,'' said a pharmacist.

``The decision of the ulema can be tested first and if not implemented, then you decide about the next move. The U.S. is itself a terrorist and despotic government,'' he added.

Bush said on Thursday the evidence the United States had gathered all pointed to bin Laden's organization as responsible for the September 11 attacks and that by ``aiding and abetting murder, the Taliban regime is committing murder.''

Australian officials said on Friday the Taliban reported moving the eight detained aid workers -- two Australians, four Germans and two Americans -- to an unknown ``safer location'' elsewhere in Kabul.

The foreign aid workers and 16 Afghani staff of German-based Christian charity Shelter Now International were arrested in early August. The charges could carry the death penalty.

The detainees appeared well and in good spirits, the spokeswoman said, quoting a Pakistani delegation that visited them on Wednesday.

[This message was edited by Weatherford on Sep. 21, 2001 at 02:52 PM.]

Jair
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
See, this is what's starting to worry me. Everyone is so gung-ho that we hurry up and bomb someone, and you're perceived as being unpatriotic or unsupportive if you're saying, "Hey, wait a second... are we sure this is what we want to do?"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly Erin! That has been very noticeable to me here and in the news in general in the last week or so - any signs of patience or caution seem to be viewed as unsuportive and wimpy /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Too many people are too quick to judge what someone else's idea of patriotism is.

Not to mention the accents! good lord Erin, I could hear that midwest twang of yours even in your writing! I agreed with your "speech", but didn't understand every word /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Magnolia
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> . Choke up Bin Laden or suffer the consequences. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do you really think the Taliban can send some police to 123 Terror St. and incarcerate Bin Laden? Their only hope is that the man turns himself in or dies in his sleep. Honestly, the people of Afghanistan really can't win this one. They can face the wrath of the USA or the wrath of Bin Ladens numerous supporters.

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Weatherford
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:55 AM
Another perspective - are we targeting the wrong person?

Janes article (http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/fr/fr010919_1_n.shtml)

Interesting reading.

[Edited to fix URL so page is not so wide.]

[This message was edited by Portia on Sep. 21, 2001 at 07:08 PM.]

HeyYouNags
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> ..and yes, I do defend your (generic) right to post inane and thoughtless things on this or any other BB......I stopped making fun of "other kids" in..oh about 8th or 9th grade....It is STILL a free country inspite of the fact that some don't feel compelled to protect it as such. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, Jumphigh83, you didn't stop making fun of the other kids, you just use different words to do it now. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

AM
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:58 AM
I'm with Magnolia. I just can't figure out how we could do it. But I did make the suggestion to my members of Congress and to the President in emails I sent last night.

The more I hear about the people of Afganistan, the more I want to send/take them food, clothing, medicine and to help them find a way to support themselves.

If air organizations try to do it, they won't likely have enough resources to accomplish the mission. If our government wants to do it, I don't know how they would get around the Taliban. Can missles deliver humanitarian supplies without destroying them?

Erin
Sep. 21, 2001, 11:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jair:

good lord Erin, I could hear that midwest twang of yours even in your writing! I agreed with your "speech", but didn't understand every word /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why do you think I'm a writer, Jair? /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif There's a damn good reason I didn't go into broadcast journalism!

Oh, the Midwestern curse... I call my fizzy drinks "pop" instead of "soda," I stand "in line" not "on line," I call it "gapers' block" not "rubbernecking"... Oh, the tortuous teasing I endured going to school in upstate NY where I stood out like a sore thumb! How COULD THEY?!! Scarred for life, that's me... /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hey, if you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?

Sincerely,

Ann Heidi

(which is the Midwestern translation of Erin Harty, and is the name to which much of my mail is addressed because people don't understand me on the damn phone!!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

P.S. - y'know, I'm pretty sure even Bush has poked fun at his gaffes and Bush-isms... he seems to have a pretty good sense of humor.

N&B&T
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Weatherford:
Another perspective - are we targeting the wrong person?

Janes article (http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/fr/fr010919_1_n.shtml)

Interesting reading.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, it's very interesting, Weatherford!

[Edited to fix URL so page is not so wide.]

[This message was edited by Portia on Sep. 21, 2001 at 07:10 PM.]

DMK
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
I do defend your (generic) right to post inane and thoughtless things on this or any other BB...that's what makes this Country great. I however do not have to agree with them or decline from opining upon them for the same reasons.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed 100% and right back atcha, babe! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Gosh, harmony is a beeeyutiful thing /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Erin, agreed with you 100% If people didn't stop and pause before following their leaders, I doubt that tea would have ever ended up in the harbor. Nobody said a) they were always right and b) you have to agree. And as many have pointed out, disagreeing with your government is NOT the same thing as not supporting it. Although that distinction is NOT made in countries like Afghanistan...

Funny thing, though... There has not been one statement/action made by our government regarding the events of September 11 that I disagree with to date, I just don't like anyone implying that I should (goose?) step in line and blindly accept ALL things coming from the mouth of elected officials, as though they were infallible. They are NOT, and part of MY job as a citizen in a democracy is to be educated to the issues, to understand the issues, and when necessary, to challenge the government that represents ME as it relates to those issues.

If you like to believe in the infallibility of your government, may I suggest a good old fashion monarchy or perhaps a dictatorship?

Robby Johnson
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:12 PM
That's hysterical. For some reason, people always think I'm from England. I always have to correct them with, "no, Alabama."

InWhyCee ... Arkansas in the house? Really? Where? Do you ever come back here? If so, you must "holler at me."

Portia - I'll share Tony Blair with you.

Robby

Jair
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:18 PM
I don't get you Jumpinghigh... what is it you want?

People holding hands in a circle simultaneiously singing Kumbuyah and waving banners with "bomb the bastards" on them? With interjections of "USA USA!" /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

You seem to get upset at the slightest sign that someone does not 1000% agree with either you or the government.

Well, BIG NEWS: people will always discuss politics, even more so in a crisis!!!!!

Look at any old news articles, programs or even plays that were about any of the other major wars or crisis situations - I bet you they will have political content in them! I remember my parents making comments about Churchill's speech declaring Britain was at war - they didn't agree with everything he said! So what is different now?

We are not the lemmings you (and others) seem to want us to be, following blindly, without questioning actions that will surely affect all of us in some way or another.

tle
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:26 PM
Weatherford... thanks for posting the link. Interesting article. But doesn't it still come down to al Qaeda, which is essentially bin Laden's group? I agree that we need to find our what state possibly sponsored it all, but if bin Laden is in Iraq instead of Afghanistan... well, I believe that will be found out. I dunno... maybe I've been thinking about all this too much and am not making any sense... but I still have faith that our military and our intelligence community will sort it out and they, along iwth our leaders, will act appropriately.

naive? maybe... but I like it at the moment. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!

moose
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:34 PM
Well, here's something to think about, so far there has been no clear mention of re-instating the draft. I think at present that is hinting towards special forces and not a ground war.

I appreciated his speech. I think it was powerful and said a lot in between the lines and with what was not said.

Bin Laden sent his edict to kill all american's, civillian or not, in 1998. He has proven he meant it. It shouldn't scare us just now that the Talaban/Bin Laden is claiming to now remake that threat and declare a holy war. It's already been said, done and prepared for, years ago.

A footnote is that it was written that Bin Laden decided the US were paper tiger's in the Sudan, in 1993 when 17 American Soldiers were tortured and dragged through the streets caused us to re-acess the situation and pull out. He couldn't believe that such a "little" act of terror would make us run. He then proceeded to the embassy's to test us more. What's more, both he and his organization have repeatedly tried to attain Uranium. Is there any doubt in anyones minds on how he would use it?

I don't know if anyone saw Walter Cronkite later, but in his many years of wisdom and observing battles, he said it's a given that we must take this organization out, but that we still need to realize and cure the economics that have caused such a hate/envy to grow. In a nutshell, all of the western world need to become more aware of how the rest of the world is living. He also said that's important that all events be recorded by a war correspondent, censored for wartime, not because we have a right to know, but because it our "responsibility" to know, as a democratic society. Gotta love that guy.

[This message was edited by Moose on Sep. 21, 2001 at 04:09 PM.]

jparkes
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:48 PM
Give them food, while we get death!
Terrific idea!
Gosh guys, when will we realize that this isn't some little petty thing going on? There is a true threat to this nation and the free world!
Giving bread to the people of that region isn't going to help us over here when our buildings are being attacked and our way of life is put into complete fear!
How many American buildings need to be destroyed before we take serious action?
How many American lives need to be lost before we declare war?

muley
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:51 PM
Hello everyone! I'm new to this board. I've been lurking for sometime, but had to comment on the speech last night. I have a question to y'all. How many of you generally watch a president address congress? When was the last time it was a media event like it was last night? Usually, I will have the TV on, and I'll listen to it while I'm doing other things, but last night, I sat and watched the whole enchalada including the commentarys afterward. I personally love the accent and have no trouble what so ever understanding him. I also think that he laid out his plan very well.
I voted for Mccain "I live in AZ." And until now, really didn't care for Bush all that much. But he has proven to be just what we need in this time of crisis.

This crisis will either make him or break him.

Thanks for listening!

/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Sweet Pea
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:55 PM
Not to mention that I sincerely doubt that the Taliban would just allow anyone to waltz in there and start handing out freebees and spreading good cheer. They have worked very hard to keep those people oppressed, why would they let the good 'ole US of A ("the great satan") come in and undo all of their work? /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Bin Laden has already commented how easily the US backs down... now we need to show him that we mean business.

HeyYouNags
Sep. 21, 2001, 12:56 PM
The point some of us are trying to make, jparkes, is we can't bomb "them", because we can't find "them". What kind of victory would it be to drop bombs on a country that's already poor, starving, and without much in the way of natural resources? We could bomb the heck out of Afganistan, and still not hit Bin Laden and his crew. Then we just reinforce the already existing view of the US as a big, powerful bully.

I guess if we had bombed strategically in Florida and Maryland, where some of the suicide bombers lived for several years, we could have stopped the attacks...

Sweet Pea
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:00 PM
But, we do know the locations of many of these terrorist camps in Afghanistan... and they need to go! For the safety of everyone on the planet!

HeyYouNags
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:07 PM
Bush Invites Canadian Prime Minister to Washington
From the Washington Post web site:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 3:53 p.m. EDT--The White House sought to smooth ruffled feathers in Canada over President Bush�s omission of the U.S. neighbor from a list of countries he thanked for offering anti-terrorism support.

Spokesman Ari Fleischer announced that Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien had been invited to Washington for talks with Bush Monday.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lily
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:16 PM
Before last week, I would have joked that Bush was going to discuss "strategery" in his speech with a picture of Will Ferrell from SNL in my head. No more, though. Bush is really starting to impress me- which is quite a feat considering I'm a pretty liberal Democrat.

I think last night's speech, as well as the reaction from Congress, made it clear that in this situation, there are no Democrats, no Republicans- only Americans. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

InWhyCee
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:19 PM
Robby Johnson (aka Robbie Williams)... Sorry, my family done sold the farm in Arkansass (Hope, Home of the Giant Watermelons!) after the Big War, when Dubya and all the other young'uns decided to move up Nawth... But if you're ever in New York, give me a holler; we can ride around Central Park and run over joggers (it's legal!).

PS: A young John McCain, yes... Blair, I still don't get.

InWhyCee
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:29 PM
Weatherford.... Janes is fascinating. Really, really scary, but fascinating... From the start, I felt that there might be much more going on then the media presents (like, WHERE in the hell is Dick Cheney?); and that Bin Laden might be no less of a pawn than the actual hijackers... I hate to agree with Bush on anything, but I think this IS going to be an ONGOING battle, and Bin Laden is only the start... /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Canter
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:44 PM
Good to see another lurker come out of the closet!

Frankly you guys, what is going on in Pakistan is scaring me more than President Bush's accent.

Flash44
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by magnolia:
Quote: " . Choke up Bin Laden or suffer the consequences. "
Do you really think the Taliban can send some police to 123 Terror St. and incarcerate Bin Laden? Their only hope is that the man turns himself in or dies in his sleep. Honestly, the people of Afghanistan really can't win this one. They can face the wrath of the USA or the wrath of Bin Ladens numerous supporters.

Ride it Like You Stole It...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


That would be 123 TERRA Street.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

Jane
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
Hey, I'm not arguing... it was a very good speech. It just took me a while to figure out that terra = terror. Once I got that figured out, it was smooth sailing. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Seriously, I did like the speech a lot. Very good.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, I'd rather listen to him then some conniving, insincered jerk who thinks he's fooling everyone. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I thought it was a great speech...and I never listen to SotU speeches! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Flash44
Sep. 21, 2001, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by elizabeth:
What are the other options, Flash?

Every day at lunch, my colleagues discuss how a land war is going to be tough. But an air strike will kill many innocents. _I always want to say "well, which is the lesser of two evils. . . or is there a third option?"_

I, however, am to ashamed of my ignorance to ask THEM that, so I will ask you.

_Flash, which is the lesser of two evils or do you see a third way to do it?_

Thanks in advance for any insight you have!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I most certainly would'nt use the same strategy that I'm using to wage the War On Kitchen Ants.

I'm just dreading a repeat of Vietnam, only this would be on a global scale. I don't see an easy way out at all.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

Magnolia
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:08 PM
Flash-
The food thing works on ants as well.
You must kill them with kindness. Ewe. This is gross.
1/4 cup of honey, one disposable plate. Ants crawl in, can't crawl out!

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Palomino19
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Robby Johnson:
And, finally, Tony Blair has always given me fever. He is very much a hottie.

Robby<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol Robby! Just the other day I was looking at a picture in one of my Political Science textbooks and thinking hmmm he's pretty good-looking, who is he again? none other than Tony Blair himself. Of course I also get ragged for claiming that I would marry Anthony Hopkins in an instant /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif so this should be no surprise...

Oh Bush's speech, how wonderful was that? I'm not very patriotic by nature, but last night I wanted to paint my car and parade around with flags waving behind me. What a great unifying, well-written, articulate speech our president delivered. That said, I will be sure to say "terra" from now on just as I also say "strategery". Still, I loved the speech and the man.

Was anyone else upset by Ms. Clinton's behavior last night? It seemed everytime the camera panned to her she was either talking to the person next to her, or looking generally uninterested. Maybe they just caught her at the wrong times.

Jess

HeyYouNags
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:13 PM
that we lower a giant bowl of honey into the middle of Afghanistan?

Afghanis crawl in to eat, and they can't get out! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Robby Johnson
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:23 PM
InWhyCee -

Girl, I was just through Hope last weekend, en route to Benton, Louisiana! (For a horse trial.)

Never been to the watermelon festival, however.

Would love to run over joggers with you in New York one day. That is, if you can get me out of Prada! We'll discuss our stategery next week!

Robby

Jane
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Palomino19:
Was anyone else upset by Ms. Clinton's behavior last night? It seemed everytime the camera panned to her she was either talking to the person next to her, or looking generally uninterested. Maybe they just caught her at the wrong times.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LAST NIGHT?? /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Okay, I'll be nice....

Things sure have a strange way of working out...just a year ago, Rudy Giuliani withdrew from running for the senate (against H. Clinton), and is supposed to finish up his term as mayor at the end of 2001. Now it looks like New Yorkers aren't ready to let him go, and there is a big future for Rudy. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Midge
Sep. 21, 2001, 02:39 PM
Jane's is a fabulous source of military info. I remember when I first heard of them, I thought it was a 'her'. I was thrilled that some staunch Brit lady was a military genius.

Last name, Last name!!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Magnolia
Sep. 21, 2001, 03:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>So, Magnolia, would your suggestion be
that we lower a giant bowl of honey into the middle of Afghanistan?
Afghanis crawl in to eat, and they can't get out!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Noooo, but you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar darlin'.
No, my idea is to feed the Afghanis that aren't crazy terrorists so they have some strength to fight their government.
But yes, the ants crawl in and can't crawl out. You can do the same thing for slugs, but you use beer. I have no clue what you would use to catch terrorists, but I have a funny picture in my head of a bunch of guys in camo rolling around in honey....

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Pat Ness
Sep. 21, 2001, 03:02 PM
I just read the transcript and I have some problems with the following:

The terrorists' directive commands them to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans and make no distinctions among military and civilians, including women and children.

WHY ARE WOMEN AND CHILDREN ALWAYS PUT TOGETHER IN THE SAME CONTEXT? THIS DRIVES ME NUTS!!!!!

God grant us wisdom and may he watch over the United States of America

WHY IS IT ASSUMED GOD IS A MAN,
also, why would the U.S. God protect us over al Qaeda's God. This is not an issue between god's, but between humans. Why are there so many lives lost in the name of religion?

I did appreciate all other aspects of the speech though and I was ready to fight it as I am a total lefty.

Pat Ness

baymare
Sep. 21, 2001, 03:19 PM
Sorry, I just can't go here. It all just seems like hot air, political rhetoric, and "patriotism, the last refuge of scoundrels." (can't even remember the source...Voltaire??? help me out here)

Only time will tell whether there actually IS anybody home inside Dubya's brain, or if his handlers and speech writers are just doing a really good job.

I may not like him, but I sure as h*ll am willing to pray for him.

Palomino19
Sep. 21, 2001, 04:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by baymare:
Sorry, I just can't go here. It all just seems like hot air, political rhetoric, and "patriotism, the last refuge of scoundrels." (can't even remember the source...Voltaire??? help me out here)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've seen your quote credited to Dr. Samuel Johnson, but he may have "borrowed" it from Voltaire. Don't know if that was the help you were looking for /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I like him (GW), but I'm still praying for him too - what a decision to have thrust upon you.

Jess

Snowbird
Sep. 21, 2001, 05:44 PM
Allah is the same God as the God of the Hebrews and the God of all Christians. Allah is the name given to him by Mohammed and they follow Ishmael the first born son of Abraham. The Hebrews supported the second born but biological son of Abraham, i.e. Sibling rivalry problem. Mohammed taught that Moses and Jesus were part of the history of their religion because of their relationship to Abraham who was father to all, but these sociopaths believe like previous perverted groups that everyone must be in the same religion and theirs is the only religion. In that case their logic, not that of the Koran is that everyone but them are infidels and should be killed. Bush said all that much more politely and briefly.

I don't know WHY God is always thought of as a man or why Adam was created before Eve but we have always personified America, liberty and justice as women. We did have that discussion on these boards and I think resolved that God was either both or neither and had no sexual identity.

I believe the references made in the speech were because the Koran forbids even in a Jihad war that any Muslim ever kill a woman or a child for any reason. They apparently have proof that these guys violated their law because they tied the Stewardess's hands with duct tape and slit their throats before the plane crashed in Pennsylvania. Just another way to prove they do not follow Islam or the Koran.

I heard nothing that indicated we intended to bomb the people of Afghanistan, to the contrary since our military is almost 40 percent smaller than for the Gulf war it would be most unlikely. What I hear Bush say was that all means would be used including the banks (follow the money), and all the countries that have been infiltrated as we have ourselves with intelligence. I heard an emphasis that they expect good intelligence information from all countries that will cooperate and then Special Services groups will be dropped in to clean out the nests.

There is a lot of talk about a special Delta force trained for this and that the repeal against assasinations has been passed for obvious reasons.

That certainly leaves a lot of wiggle room but no reason to believe there will be no casualties. It will take time with everyone working together to build the case and the contacts for these surprise visits. He also said there will be successes so covert we won't even know that we have won a big one. We won't be able to watch the battles on TV and that makes a big difference with Viet Nam.

But, Bush has deliberately separated the Muslims from being terrorists, he spoke of how they have been the victims of these sociopaths. Let's not assume that we are not clever enough to diversify our tactics, afterall Guerilla warfare was how we got our independence in the first place while the British were marching around in bright red uniforms and nice neat little boxes we were in the woods in camouflage.

I think we don't do anyone any favors when everyone jumps to conclusions. With less than 10 divisions we are not likely to march in on foot 10 a breast guns waving.

[This message was edited by Snowbird on Sep. 21, 2001 at 09:01 PM.]

rockstar
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:22 PM
I've been itching to get at this thread all day at work but haven't had a chance until now (and so sadly, it's late on Friday night and I am still here).

First. I work in democratic politics. I can't stand Bush. I spend every moment at work (umm, except for when I check he BB's that is!) trying to unseat him and his party from the federal government.

BUT, I will say it was a very good speech. He has an excellent speechwriting shop and, though it has taken some time, I think they have finally figured out how to write strong, meaningful speeches that are easy for him to deliver with finesse. It's all about the simple sentences. Kudos to them for their mastery. Kudos to him for getting it right at last. That was the first time this staunch little dem has looked at him since last January and thought, "THAT'S MY PRESIDENT!" It's the first time I've watched him and not imagined how much better McCain or Gore would have been.

Anyway, I thought I would share the washington political gossip of the day. Word is that the appointment of Tom Ridge is an effort to push Ashcroft out and usher in Ridge as the next VP. The conservatives adore ashcroft, but the Bush admin. is apperantly not very happy. Cheney is not doing well health wise. Bush is good buddies with Ridge, and it's a way to have a moderate, pro-choice republican from a large state on the ticket without causing huge waves among hard right conservatives (the logic being that they would put aside their normal objections to a moderate, pro-choice VP because of Ridge's leadership through this saga).

Word is Bush will then appoint gulianni to be attorney general. Can't stand Gulianni myself, but there's no denying the incredible role he's played through this all. there's also no denying he stands as one of the fiercest prosecuters in american history. the only hitch in this whole thing is if he won't be up for it health-wise... many say he is really not doing well.

anyway... just wanted to share the scoop of the day! some interesting tidbits i think.

something funny...
I work with a guy who handled a lot of the Advance work in the later years of the clinton admin. and on the Gore campaign. He was telling us in this morning's staff meeting how Clinton was fanatical about this good luck charm of his... a tiny rare miniature of Lincoln. I did not know this, but Clinton apparently had a weird assasination complex and was just obsessed with making sure someone in his traveling party always had the miniature (Lincoln was also a hero to Clinton whose work Clinton often sought inspiration from). If the miniature couldn't be found, Clinton would not go on stage or do what he had to do. The guy I work with was saying how all of the advance guys and secret service guys tried to get reproductions done so that they never had to worry about loosing or not having the original. Clinton was never fooled though.

ANYWAY... the point is that the people who handle Bush are probably going to get as many copies of that badge as they can so that they don't have to worry about Bush going apeshi*t on them when the original gets lost.

DMK
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:38 PM
oh nooooo rockstar! I am getting quite fond of Real President Cheney (to quote another redheaded Texan /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )...

Still, loved the updates on that Wacky Wierd World Inside the Beltway, and even more, LOVED the little tidbits on the oddities of People In Positions of Serious Power /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

brilyntrip
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:41 PM
that it was a good rousing speech ! It was what it needed to be!I am supporting him ok , but I still cringe when he talks

Flash44
Sep. 21, 2001, 06:53 PM
You know, things have been really really good for the past few years. Basically, if you have a job and are in pretty good health, you are doing well. Interest rates have enabled people to live well, and the vast majority of American citizens have a solid roof over their heads and plenty to eat. So there really has not been a whole heck of a lot to get all fired up about, as far as "politics" is concerned. It's not like the USA was a third world oppressed country stuggling under a dictatorship. So we have been Mickey Mousing around with politicians, really nitpicking at them. However, this current crisis is letting the leaders get up and show us what they have. I think that we have been insightful enough to elect stong leaders who were burdened by "weak" platforms. Partisan lines are being erased as Americans band together to fight for and preserve what is at the core of us all - life, libety and freedom.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

Kryswyn
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brookes:
Ok, I'm totally confused here, where exactly and when exactly has Bush or anyone in his cabinet mentioned that we are going to bomb Afghanistan? Please enlighten me as I seemed to have missed this important point along the way. Yet many of you are against what you are calling "war" and attacking Afghanistan. Again I ask you, where and when did this information come to light??

All I've been hearing is for requests that Afghanistan cooperate with turning over Bin Laden. We've asked not invaded or launched an assault. They have said no, so now what should we do. Just let it slide. We did the nice nice thing, well nice nice is over now. Choke up Bin Laden or suffer the consequences. Bush has never mentioned just what those consequences would be.

Why are you assuming that this is what they have in mind? Or do you know something that I don't?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you read the non-negotiable requirements Bush made of the Taliban, you will see there is NO WAY they can achieve several of them (turning over all terrorists (Hey you, you look pretty scarey, come with us), opening the camps to inspection (TERRORIST CAMP NEXT EXIT) so by not allowing negotiation, Bush has in fact set the Taliban up to fail so we can begin the attack and say, "See, they COULD'VE done what we asked, but they didn't, so we bombed them."

It will be bombs first, then a ground force attack where many of our soldiers will die because 1) they don't know the territory (think the Red Coats vs the Revolutionary militia; and 2) because we will try to avoid killing 'civilians' who will be armed and shooting at our soldiers as snipers from the high ground.

One of the many reasons the Vietnam War did not succeed was because of the network of tunnels the Viet Cong had access to. In Afganistan, it will be hidden caves...

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

Flash44
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:13 PM
Afghanistan has been harboring terroist for 20 years. Russia couldn't get rid of them, Great Britain couldn't get rid of them. 1 million Afghan people lost their lives about in the 1980s, and the terrorists (the Mujahardin who were trained by the Americans) won.

F44 - Once a nerd, always a nerd.

Kryswyn
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:14 PM
On another thread, someone kept repeating that they would not send their loved ones to war. Well s/he got jumped on pretty good, but stuck to their beliefs. I responded by saying that s/he may not WANT to send their loved ones to war, but in the end, there's no choice, because when war is declared loved ones go anyway BY THEIR OWN CHOICE.

Just heard from my sis-in-law that my nephew, a commissioned 23 y.o 2nd Lt in the Marines is back at classes at Quantico. On 9/11 they were told "classes are cancelled. Go back to your rooms and pack your bags." They were ready to go and on alert for 3 days. Then the order came to stand down and return to class.

Cindy asked David if the guys *yes, this class is all men* were disappointed. His answer: Yes - we WERE ready; we ARE ready; and we want to GO!

I am terrified that I will lose my dear nephew, and my brother & Cindy their only child, but he believes in his country, his president, and the sanctity of American soil as a place of refuge for the poor, weary and downtrodden of the world. What better person to defend those of us sitting here at home tapping away on our keyboards debating the accent of our Leader?

I just want SOMEONE to prove that THIS TIME 'military intelligence' is NOT an oxymoron!!!

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

hobson
Sep. 21, 2001, 07:58 PM
You're right, Kryswyn, nobody is going to have to force young people into uniform and tanks and whatnot. Bunches of them are eager to get out there and help.

I must take a moment to point out that there are big differences between the ideas of "pacifism" and "nonviolence."

Most people confuse pacifism with passivity, doing absolutely nothing to make waves. Pacifism is more like the seeking of peace and accord. It in nonviolent in nature.

Nonviolence, on the other hand, as a political strategy, is NOT about passivity or about pacifism. It is about rocking the boat while preserving life as much as possible. NOnviolence cannot be equated with pacifism, because it entails struggle and challenge to authority - it often disrupts peace in order to create change. People who adhere to the idea of nonviolence want terrorists held accountable just as much as everyone else; they just want it accomplished without provoking others' death and destruction.

Nonviolence is not for the cowardly. Think Mohandas Gandhi and his supporters facing down British troops armed with NOTHING. The british massacred large numbers of nonviolent independence activists, and they had a long struggle of it, but Gandhi and his crew persisted AND THEY WON. People might immediately dismiss this strategy as being stupid, but this guy helped India achieve independence while keeping its infrastructure intact, spared from the devastation of violent war. Nonviolence takes a great deal of committment to the cause, and indeed a willingness to die for it.

Linny
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:18 PM
Anthony Hopkins yes, Tony Blair NO.
As for Dubya's accent well the poor bastard is a Maine raised Texas redneck with a Yale education. We are all lucky we don't need subtitles. Maybe someone explained that TERRA= Earth and since the terrorist operate out of caves...

elizabeth
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:25 PM
tee hee hee.
Thanks for lightening us up, Fleetie.

Those upstate NY-ers are good people.

Linny
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:29 PM
I agree Kryswyn. My dad's mom had one child survive to adulthood. He graduated from college in 1941, a respectable accomplishment for some one raised by only his mom after his dad dies in 1926. In those days there was no AFDC, no welfare no nuthin'. Gramma watched 2 children die and then proudly watched her last son off to North Africa and southern Europe.
Thankfully he came home. Many didn't.

Snowbird
Sep. 21, 2001, 08:48 PM
The USA is a corrupt power with no legitimate agencies chasing oil. We have rotten legislation and no brains because we're going to follow into an endless battle after the British and the Russians.

WHAT THEN? We roll over and spend the next 10 years buying peace by accepting that these poor guys have been abused aand persecuted by the world powers at large. They're just defending themselves right?

But what is their goal? What is that would make them happy? What is a good solution for these oppressed people? Chamberlain thought Hitler would be satisfied with Poland but he wasn't...so they gave him Czechoslovakia. That surely would make up for all our mistakes in the first World War and he would be satisfied.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>from Patrick Henry?

Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The very premise of this country has always been to preserve our rights from any threat. If we had stopped Hitler early enough there would not be a state of Israel or Palistinians. Without the need to destroy Israel and Christianity would there be this deviant branch of sociopaths who hide behind the Koran and defile it?

How far? How much are we willing to concede? Do we want to live with the threat of biological attacks on our families? More bombings and more death? How many dead is required? Do we need to lose more than 6300 children in our own home? Do we say to the pedophile OK! look we know you have been abused and misunderstood and have many problems so we will give you a ration of one child a month. Whose child will that be? Do we say to the serial killer or rapist how can we help you and make it so you are not committing a crime? Shall we all donate clones to his eccentricity? Shall we offer him plastic dollies with vibrators? Will that work do you think?

When the war was over we offered and rebuilt the world, we have sent our children to help rebuild the 3rd world countries. How many billions in loans have we voided? We have loaned and given billions to help the oppressed, we offer sanctuary to those whose lives are endangered by their opposition to aautocratic government. We have shared our wealth and our prosperity willingly even when we didn't do it for our own poor and forgotten we gave to the world. We send our children to protect the human rights of people around the world. How much more should we do?

Americans are the most generous and sharing people in this universe. Look at what they have done to help our victims from an attrocity that we didn't invent. We learn from our mistakes, we will all protect the Muslims here as Americans and we will not let happen to them what happened to the Japanese.

Please in this time of grief and pain when our children are not only not yet buried but they have not even been found. While our crown jewel New York City which has welcomed all, is in a state of collapse how can you doubt that we as a nation will invade only the camps of the perpetrators and only punish the guilty to the best of our ability.

[This message was edited by Snowbird on Sep. 21, 2001 at 11:58 PM.]

Lisi
Sep. 21, 2001, 09:21 PM
my dad told me that he thought Bush's speech was a little saber-rattling, the way Bush announced their plans to attack any country that does not immediatley hand over any members of the Alkaida (sp?) my dad was sitting there saying, 'don't give them a deadline, don't give them a deadline' to the tv screen. he thought that Bush should have made those demands in private, as it is a lot easier for one to give in when the rest of the world doesn't know that they've been forced to give in.

Kestrel
Sep. 22, 2001, 03:41 AM
If Bush and the powers that be were as anxious to drop bombs as some are saying, then the mountains of Afganistan would just be dust in the breeze (though since the camps have been dismantaled and the terrorists have melted away into the mountains, it wouldn't accomplish much). While it takes quite awhile to move a ground force, bombs and missles are faster. Bush seems to be aware that the majority of Afganis are hostages in their own country and I bet that all possible efforts will be made to spare them.
As for turning evidence over to the Taliban, I think that would be delivering it directly to Bin Laden, who would then know what else he needed to hide and how close he is to being caught.
There is no pleasant way out of this; it will be a long, probably bloody, uphill fight. If you think that copy-cat school shootings are horrible, think of all the other terorist organizations out there who have just been inspired. That is why the strikes need to be effective militarilly, diplomatically, and economically. It is time for all nations where human life is valued to work together so that terrorism is no longer an option.

As to a President, I'm glad to follow Bush, who seems to realize that there is wisdom in putting together the best possible team of experts and not trying to make all the hard decisions by yourself. People like Colin Powell know what war is like and will not undertake it lightly.

Thanks for the oportunity to say all that.

Magnolia
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:57 AM
They had a really sad article in todays paper about the afghan refuges trying to get to Pakistan. They are utterly clueless and afraid of what might happen, they are starving and beaten down. It is really sad to see a picture of an old man with his children pushing a cart with everything they own, just wanting out. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
I hope if we do go in with guns blazing that we at least help these people overthrow their oppresive government and rebuild. I really hope we don't bomb a few caves, get our man and walk away leaving millions suffering...

Ride it Like You Stole It...

SLW
Sep. 22, 2001, 03:42 PM
<<They had a really sad article in todays paper about the afghan refuges trying to get to Pakistan. They are utterly clueless and afraid of what might happen, they are starving and beaten down. It is really sad to see a picture of an old man with his children pushing a cart with everything they own, just wanting out.>>

And this has gone on for generations which makes it possible for Bin Laden and other murderers to recruit new assistants for their army's of terror while ignoring the homeless widow and her children.

Kryswyn- I just spent the first part of the weekend at an annual "All Girls Ride"- no husbands, no kids- just food, beer and hosses. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif One gal's son is in the second group of an Air Force unit set to leave for "points east". She said he is ready and has a strong conviction about doing his job right. We should never underestimate the power of the training of our troops and leaders.

SLW

Beans
Sep. 22, 2001, 04:02 PM
Excellent speech by a true leader who has placed the most qualified people into key positions in our government. It's so interesting that individuals can't fathom the concept that superior people with more qualifications than all of you nay sayers put together were willing to serve in George Bush's Administration because he is a man they respect and believe in as a leader. I am so confident My President Bush has the courage and ability to handle this crisis and will enjoy when all of you smart A**'s with the snipey remarks will be a bit pink cheeked when it's all over.

With the number of people murdered last week and the sadness and fear running through the hearts of most Americans - (obviously not you gals)- we needed a leader to give us assurances that we are strong and steadfast in our democracy. Now - little minds with typing fingers take shots at the pronounciation. How low!

Oh and Erin!! You didn't know what he was saying with Terrorist being the main word on TV and in print for a week - nice try at being coy but it didn't work. Bad behavior for a moderator as well. JMHO

Beans
Sep. 22, 2001, 04:11 PM
Good God! If you are an example of the Democratic Party - it's disgraceful. Aren't we all tired of rumor mongers like yourself trying to find some underlying political strategy in a time of world crisis. Wait - it sounds just like a Democrat!

Let's put the credit where it lies - computers walking out of the STate Department?? Anyone and everyone in and out of the White House??? Bill Clinton fondling girls with cigars while the Taliban was amassing this horrendous army of madmen against the free world. Secrets being sold to China in exchange for money to your party???

I'm printing off your post and sending it off to Republican and Independent leaders I know to show them exactly how low your Donkeys can go!!!

I have to believe 85%++ of Americans said a prayer of thanks that Bill Clinton or Al Gore weren't President right now. And I'm equally as thrilled that McCain isn't either - he's a hot head and has had a crop up his butt since losing in the primaries - we don't need a leader with an attitude with lives of citizens and military are involved. Would we feel confident with Janet Reno and Madeline Aldrich and Cohen at the helm??? Thank you God for saving us from what would have been the demise of the western world.

If you want to see up close and personal BAD BEHAVIOR - play back the film of Hillary Clinton on Thursday night during the speech. She not only disgraced herself she was an embarassment to the people she represents in New York - where the worst terrorist action took place!!!

Snowbird
Sep. 22, 2001, 04:24 PM
Is a donkey and a jack-ass the same thing? Is the only difference that a jack-ass is sterile? I wonder if that's why they picked the donkey as their animal?

The elephant on the other hand is intelligent very strong has loyal ties to the herd and a fantastic memory. Hmm! could it just be a coincidence?

Beans
Sep. 22, 2001, 04:31 PM
Some intellectual banter at last!!! God take care of those brave men & women who serve in our government and military who will be at risk to eliminate the scurge of maniacs to protect our freedom - yes even that of those who fail to know how lucky they are and when bad behavior (including nit picking our President) is inappropriate in a crisis.

Snowbird
Sep. 22, 2001, 04:49 PM
The 6300 dead and missing, the 20,000 that survived and many of whom were seriously injured and permanently traumatized were denied their civil rights and human rights under all humanitarian laws.

I believe that voids any necessity to apply those laws to the culprits. It was their choice to ignore all restrictions ever placed on any type of war attack for every human convention. Since they all have violated their own professed religion they do not have recourse to that clergy. In my opinion their only fair recourse is a judgment by Allah and I would not be unhappy if they go there quickly without due process so that Allah can judge their treatment of all those others under the protaction of Allah through Islam who may have charges against them.

I think the only kind and fair thing is that they return to Allah as quickly and unceremoniously as possible as an act of kindness to end their state of sin against Islam. Surely it is more humanitarian to strip them of their illgotten money and give it to the Afghans who have earned it and spare the villains years of the pain of staying in a state of sin and not with Allah.

Even all of our do gooders would have to agree with this offer of kindness and quick resolution.

hobson
Sep. 22, 2001, 05:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IlonaE:
Excellent speech by a true leader who has placed the most qualified people into key positions in our government. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mmmmm. Would you be referring to the fellows Dubya has recycled from the Reagan and Bush senior administrations? The ones who did business with terrorists and traded arms for hostages, and lied about it? Ask Donald Rumsfeld about deposing democratically elected governments in Central America and how he spearheaded military training programs that taught Salvadoran and Nicaraguan operatives strategies that any outside observer would best describe as terror--disappearances, assassinations and the like. While Ronald Reagan was sound asleep at his desk. Are these the guys who fill you with so much confidence?

Sheesh. Always with Bill Clinton and his sex life. We can't get enough of it! Clinton is a sleaze for a lot of reasons way more significant than what he did with a cigar (executing a retarded guy--who wanted to save his last meal for later--to show that he was tough on crime...using his position to fleece interest groups who came to him for help...). But at least he got some work done while he...you know.

Like a lot of us here, I want the perps brought to justice. But I guess for some people, being a non-Republican at a time like this is tantamount to treason. Oh, well. But I just can't have overflowing confidence in a president who in a speech to the world, made not just one but TWO references to mounting a "crusade" against terror. Hello! Can we say "slap in the face" to the Muslim world? The scary part is that he did not appear to see any irony in his use of that term. He should have just come out and said, "I have no idea about the history of the Middle East and Central Asia, folks, and nobody ever briefed me on it!"

baymare
Sep. 22, 2001, 05:59 PM
I never knew he had a thing for girls with cigars.

All the same, I miss him. If we are lucky, as long as Dubya's speechwriters keep the sentences short and words down to two or fewer syllables, he will maintain enough plausibilty to get us through this. And if any of you are so naive that you don't believe that most of what is visible to us poor old taxpayers is pure politics, then I am truly amazed. Democrat, Republican, Independent, whatever: It's ALL politics, all the time.

Pat Ness
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:08 PM
It seems those of you on the right are not even reading that most have agreed with the speech.

My comments were the only things I disliked about the speech. Then as sweet Snowbird mentioned, the God being a man thing had all been brought up before. I guess I can't keep up with every dialogue on this board, and quite honestly, I'm glad.

I felt pretty united, until I started reading pages 6 and 7 on this board. Thanks again oh right wingers.
Pat

stephanie
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:11 PM
bad jokes about donkeys=intellectual banter?? hmmm...

thanks, hobson. you are always a voice of reason.

you don't have to be a republican, and you don't have to think that the best course of action is to bomb the hell out of afghanistan to be an patriotic American at this time. I of course want our administration to take action on as many fronts as possible to respond to these attacks, and to try to prevent them in the future. That doesn't mean that I have faith that George Bush is the best man to lead us through this very messy quagmire. I don't want a cowboy, I want a smart, thoughtful leader with a nuanced understanding of foreign policy. I don't think Bush is that leader. (in Maureen Dowd's column, she noted that during his campaign, when asked what he thought of the Taliban, he thought they were talking about a rock group. I don't know if it's true, but I wouldn't be surprised). He knows a lot about baseball and a little about business, and not a lot about the world beyond America. I thank God that he does have good advisors, and hope he listens to them.

As Hobson pointed out, his use of the word "crusade" in his speech was terrifying... either because he was unaware of the implications that he was declaring war on Islam, or because he was in fact aware of those implications.

Speaking of patriotism, I think that it is unAmerican of those of you who try to silence those who question his approach. Freedom of speech, anyone?

Jane
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And if any of you are so naive that you don't believe that most of what is visible to us poor old taxpayers is pure politics, then I am truly amazed. Democrat, Republican, Independent, whatever: It's ALL politics, all the time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I agree about the "it's ALL politics", BUT, there's politics, then there's politics, and the same goes for politicians.

If you ask me, the truely naive are the ones who ever believed a word out of the Clintons' mouths.

Kryswyn
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:49 PM
For all those of you who voted for George Bush, huzzah, you can blindly follow the leader you voted for, but please recall current history and remember almost exactly 1/2 the country did not. And up until this president-making event, George W. had approval ratings that were going DOWN despite the "tax cut". side note: you can kiss that Social Security surplus goodbye and aren't you glad Bush hadn't forced through allowing SS funds to be self-invested in the stock market?

Furthermore, IMHO, ANY person elected faced with this crisis would have the same support saying the same thing. Do you honestly believe Gore would've said in the aftermath of 9/11 "We'll have the Taliban over for a chat to discuss this."???????? Get real. You applauded a speech that WAS WRITTEN FOR DUBYA BY SPEECHWRITERS. Like ANY and EVERY speech written by a president (with I believe a partial exception of Clinton's first inaugural address) it is the speechwriter's rhetoric you hear. Yes it is blessed by the President. Yes, the writers DO write in the 'voice' of their man. MG they're professionals! If that speech hadn't been soundly endored by 86% of the listeners, the writers should've been fired.

I certainly want terrorism stamped out (I'd've said that BEFORE 9/11 if anyone had thought to ask BTW). But I don't want it to take a 10 year military action, either. At least his father got his mess cleaned up inside a month start to finish.

And finally, Snowbird, I don't know if you meant your 1st paragraph to paint with so wide a brush:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> OK! let's take your premise

The USA is a corrupt power with no legitimate agencies chasing oil. We have rotten legislation and no brains because we're going to follow into an endless battle after the British and the Russians.

WHAT THEN? We roll over and spend the next 10 years buying peace by accepting that these poor guys have been abused aand persecuted by the world powers at large. They're just defending themselves right?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is not my premise, nor do I think it is the premise of most of the people posting here. Some began reading this not knowing that who and what the Taliban is, or that many Afghani's don't recognize them as their governing bodies. Would you deny that there are innocent Afghanis who are suffering now under the Taliban, precisely because of our aid to Osama bin Laden during your precious Republican presidencys? You have an excellant grasp of world religions, but even elephants forget things from time to time.

And speaking of pachaderms, I believe the GOP chose the elephant as it's symbol because it was BIG. The democrats chose the donkey because it was the 'workhorse' of the majority of the people who didn't have the riches common to the GOP members. It wasn't called "Grand" for nothing! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

Palomino19
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IlonaE:

If you want to see up close and personal BAD BEHAVIOR - play back the film of Hillary Clinton on Thursday night during the speech. She not only disgraced herself she was an embarassment to the people she represents in New York - where the worst terrorist action took place!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whew! Glad to see I'm not the only one who thought Ms Clinton was making an arse out of herself and generally being a disgrace to the whole country. Please yes Mr Terrorists take us seriously, even though our elected officials don't?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Now - little minds with typing fingers take shots at the pronounciation. How low!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

(and I can see you're really above the pot shots? but I digress)I don't think anyone was trying to insult the president. Erin has stated so many times that she thought the speech was terrific, moderator does not mean the loss of the right to an opinion.

Some little minds normally read others' posts before being rude...It would be my guess that those who commented on the speech patterns (myself included) were trying to add a bit of levity to a very tense situation, which I personally don't see anything wrong with /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

sleepy-Jess

Kellybird
Sep. 22, 2001, 07:53 PM
...."intellectual banter" when it's former-Democratic-president bashing, but try making one tongue-in-cheek remark about a current Republican President's accent and what, it's as if someone's advertised a webcam for flag-burning.

Just trying to clarify for myself /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kestrel
Sep. 23, 2001, 03:36 AM
I have appreciated the fact that we have been allowed to discuss this non-horse related topic at length, but since it has degraded to simple name calling and nastiness, maybe it is time to close it.

baymare
Sep. 23, 2001, 04:24 AM
It's about POLITICS! It's just like what happens to politicians, and it's why we were never allowed to talk about it at the dinner table!

SpotsNChrome
Sep. 23, 2001, 04:31 AM
In a week where I didnt find humor in much of anything, thanks for the good hearty chuckle I got from your observations. it didnt occur to me til y'all brought it up. Proud to be 'merican.

horsluvr
Sep. 23, 2001, 05:00 AM
wow...excellent post....more than excellent...intelligent and insitefull....made me glad to come to the board for a change!

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:10 AM
I sit here happy that my husband returned safely from a business trip to Moscow and news that found out on the trip that many Russians he's known through business were in the WTC. We had found out last week we know three people missing and may know many more due to our having worked in NY and the fact that Building 7 was Solomon's headquarters and he previously worked for them.

I convinced a friend to go with me into NY on Wednesday night and I will relate part of the message I sent to friends....I had to go, it was like a close friend had been in a bad accident and was in terrible shape, I had heard they would be o.k. but I had to see them in person. NY is in bad shape but I came home knowing it would recover and be better than ever. My sadness and grief will never diminish but hope and resolve gives me strength. I pray for the families.

Regarding world politics and who did what. My husband served in Special Forces (Green Beret) for 7 years, SF reserves for 5 more years. "Bombing the hell" out of Afghanistan will not be necessary but some bombing will. We have tied the hands of our intelligence agencies - always caring about being politically correct or the civil rights of foreign nationals. Drive into NY and see the WTC site from a distance and talk to me about civil rights. Regarding past administrations actions in various countries. We worked hard in all countries toward various efforts - while you seem to focus on Central American you seem to have a brain lag about Europe - the Berlin Wall came down..remember??? My husband's business involves most of Eastern Europe and the "stans"....you haven't got a clue about that part of the world and the changes that have taken place and the number of people who were liberated from Communism and Socialism because you've been wrapped up in some strange Hollywierd government for the past 8 years. Where "photo ops" with bologne speaches by Mr. Clinto - who could talk for hours - Oh Sure he wrote all of his speeches!! right!

Regarding Maureen Dowd - well you can't squeeze a piece of paper between her and the far left. Her opinion reinforces my dissent from hers. She sits smugly and securely in her "freedoms" but I'd bet money she'd be the first person to sell out everyone around her to keep her butt safe.

Here in NJ we may face the reality of the largest number of residents killed in the WTC - could be over 4000. Towns with hundreds of families with a parent dead - some next door neighbors, cars abandoned at train & bus stations and a reality that the Taliban has cells in Jersey City and various other towns! BUT - you gals who feel George Bush is some puppet with strings pulled by other will perhaps come to accept the reality that warrants are out in states all over the US and your little candy butts aren't any safer than mine. You might be the ones who cannot fathom the bravery of the men who decided to over power the terrorists and bring the plane down over Pennsylvania - knowing they would die anyway but thinking only of others.

If you can't stand being the President and government at this time of history - well I question if you ever would. BUT - know this the men and women in the military and government who will deal with this scurge will act on your behalf so you can continue to make jokes about the President's speech patterns and refuse to believe he meant every word he said and he'll stand behind his word and HIS focus is on the task at hand....not the polls...not the parasites in the media....and not on placing the civil rights of animals over the rights of US Citizens - their safety and the future of our children to grow up in a safe and free socity.

This thread shouldn't end - we are debating the basic core of what this country is about. If this act didn't shake us back on track to realize what's important and right - well we are doomed. I believe it did touch the majority of people to their soul and for those of you who feel the President is less than up to the task - time will prove you wrong. JMHO.

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
and then modified by moi
I got this email from a friend the other day....

Oh No! A wormhhole! Look out it's a TIME WARP!!!
""I don't feel so badly for myself or our generation....... we'll be dead and gone. It's the properly raised children (like yours) who inherit this morass of nincompoops in charge of everything.

Imagine this Orwellian vision for the future - lots of morons (all with long hair and bell bottom pants and granny glasses), running the country. No values, no character ....... and naturally, in the future their "heroes" of olden times will be the likes of John and Jackie Kennedy, Bob Dylan, Jack Kerouac, Ralph Nader, and Alvin Tofler ....... they will never look back at the likes of FDR, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower, etc

now doesn't that make you look forward to heaven, where it will be VERY restful......? almost makes me ready to go tomorrow...LOL""
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Kryswyn speaks again I could've just as easily gone back to the 40's or 20's. Each generation rebels in their teens and 20's. Each successive generation is the dispair of their parents - well, not their children, but those "wierdos" down the street (that listen to 'colored' music, rock n' roll, heavy metal, rap, hiphop, grunge).

Each generation mellows with time, adapting to the world as it changes. As we grow older and our priorities change. And once your children arrive, it's MUCH easier to espouse peace and appeasment than to rally round the flag and shout "Death to the tyrants!" when it's YOUR kid who maybe called up. However, when a nation is attacked (as we were) there is never a shortage of patriotism (even the French resisted - some of them /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

All this name calling of Democrats by Republicans on this thread is truly purile. But while you're pointing out Clinton's foibles, let me just say two words: RICHARD NIXON

Now be quiet and realize that EVERY party has its poopers and and while Dem's pooper was *almost* impeached, the Republican's had to RESIGN IN DISGRACE and was followed by a man who couldn't walk and chew gum at the same time or walk down a simple flight of stairs, followed by a great leader whose wife was a little too dependant on medications. That's why it's called the NANCY REAGAN REHABILTATION CLINIC not the Lady Bird Johnson, or Mrs. Carter, or even Hillary Clinton Rehab clinic. So before you start slammin the Dem's Ilona,et al look to your own party.

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

DMK
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Palomino19:

(and I can see you're really above the pot shots? but I digress) I don't think anyone was trying to insult the president. Erin has stated so many times that _she thought the speech was terrific_, moderator does not mean the loss of the right to an opinion. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said Palomino!

I wonder why it appears that the people on this thread who didn't vote for our president seem to be quite open in supporting him in this terrible time, while the group who voted for him is still foaming at the mouth, spewing hatred and insults at anyone who so much as thinks about the democratic party, much less opens their mouth about it...

The part that really scares me is that I wonder what these people would do if we ended up in these circumstances with the "other party" in charge? Based on the level of venom I see here, I can't believe that they would be anywhere near as supportive of the current president as all the yellow dog democrats are being right now. I just envision a horrible divisiveness that would do nothing good for our country.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I have seen little evidence of graciousness so far. So mostly I am glad we have a republican president because if there are lots more out there like you guys, I don't think we could wage war on 2 fronts... against external terrorist forces AND those in our own country that couldn't seem to support the president that was NOT of their choice if their very life (or someone elses) depended on it.

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:37 AM
I didn't see the speech, but I will accept that Hillary Clinton was stiff, unenthusiastic, however you want to describe her.

But have you stopped to consider that of EVERYONE in that room, she is the ONLY ONE who has been where George W Bush is now? She knows the briefings he's had, she knows the price of what actions he's proposing. She knows what is likely to happen from intelligence reports that she was privy to as 1st Lady, that the current crop of senators and congressment weren't. Furthermore, she's a senator from the state likely to be the target of future retaliations. One might excuse her from being less than "Oh YEAH! Let's go kill some ragheads!" Out of curiousity, what was the physical reaction of New York's OTHER senator? Was it shown???

BTW no one has mentioned Laura Bush's reactions (on camera) to her husband's speech. Are Mrs. Bush and the girls still under wraps at the secure location they were whisked to on 9/11? Just curious, haven't seen or read anything about them since the attack.

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

hobson
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:42 AM
So, Jumphigh, you're in the Falwell/Robertson camp, then? We were attacked because the characterless feminists and *whispers* homosexual communist satan-worshippers have taken over the nation!

Oh, if only we could turn back the clock to that grand generation! White kids wouldn't have to attend school with black kids, we could still use DDT, we wouldn't have those pesky labor laws that make us have weekends off, and we'd be allowed to put people in jail for disagreeing with conservatives. *wistful sigh*

Kellybird
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:56 AM
/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ...not to mention no computers so this discussion would have never begun....although as women, I'm not sure that it would be ladylike to have said any of this in the first place. Can you imagine....females with opinions! And I certainly hope you don't ride *gasp* .astride... /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Pardon me girls, I'm going calling so need to find my white gloves and good Sunday hat.

~KBird

Lily
Sep. 23, 2001, 07:33 AM
Let's all try to get along! We've had many democrat vs. republican debates here that ended badly, and I don't want this thread to turn out to be one of them.

hobson
Sep. 23, 2001, 07:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hobson:
Oh, if only we could turn back the clock to that grand generation! White kids wouldn't have to attend school with black kids, we could still use DDT, we wouldn't have those pesky labor laws that make us have weekends off, and we'd be allowed to put people in jail for disagreeing with conservatives. *wistful sigh*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whoops. Just remembered that it was the same generation who changed those things. Darn it, it's so complex, being alive.

Kellybird, the ideas you have. You probably have pierced ears, too. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kryswyn - you're right--we haven't really heard anything at all from the rest of the Bush family. Mrs Bush tends to steer clear of letting her opinions be known anyway, so I'd guess she'd want to be even more reticent now.

pssst! How did such a fine, honest, moral president manage to raise a daughter who gets arrested for using a fake id to drink illegally in a bar?

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 07:46 AM
Well you've climbed out on the limb so I'll start up the saw. Hillary Clinton was standing next to Senator Schumer of NY - the contrast in behavior and reaction was astounding. Also if Hillary Clinton was privy to national security issues it was a violation of national security but not a surprise to those of us who believed she was one of Bill Clinton's directors. The "raghead" comment is yours - and stays where it lies - in the gutter.

Laura Bush was there and her concern and serious focus was without question. It was evident even to anyone watching that she was holding back tears at the end of the speech.

Also Richard Nixon DID resign for the good of the country. Bill Clinton DID not and his legacy is the overwhelming increase in oral sex among 10 year olds and above ....defending their behavior under the banner that "oral sex isn't sex". Richard Nixon erred in judgement, was outed and LEFT. Bill Clinton erred in just about every way he could, debated the definition of what "is" is and STAYED. Interesting that he had to call Bush to send a plane for him in Australia - probably because he was afraid for his own butt. We put a plane in the air to Australia with government employees at taxpayer cost at a time when we couldn't get family members whose relatives were killed to NY or WASH. He could have waited in Australia under protection - that is always with him - and returned at an appropriate time. Sorry I believe the guy is an empty suit.

Hillary Clinton doesn't have a clue what to do. She talks the talk but has never walked the walk and now she has to show true leadership for the people of NY and be SELFLESS - a concept foreign to her - and on national television when even nay sayers were showing genuine support for the President she acted like the sour pussed runner up for Homecoming Queen. I'm sure you can find someone who has the tape - the faked hand clapping was perhaps the worst part of it.

You can debate R vs D as long as you want. I want to see when you will focus on the reality that this is a war of freedom vs. terrorism, leadership vs. posturing and right vs. wrong.

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 07:48 AM
Laura Bush was on OPRAH ..no less to speak to Americans regarding how they must devote time and attention to their children at this time. I haven't spoken to any parent, regardless of political affilitation, who didn't laud her sincerety, her genuine concern and her strength. Her concern for where her children were on 9/11 was the same reaction ANYONE with children had on that day. Trying to diminish her concern for others over herself has no basis in truth.

DMK
Sep. 23, 2001, 08:04 AM
IlonaE, I think we are all pretty clear on the fact that you have declared jihad on the democratic party, and all us dems accept the fact that you cannot accept us in your world.

In my self appointed role of the "Middle Ground Spokesperson", we are cool with that. We think it's just dandy that we live in a country where you are free to speak your mind. Free to change it too. Of course true believers never do change their minds, and generally scare the hell out of all the people in the middle. Of course we understand Left Leaning True Believers scare the hell out of us too.

So mostly we worry about what would happen if the Middle lost ground to the Fringe Element. It scares us. Some days more than others. Like today.

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 08:13 AM
How DARE you use the word Jihad in a context with me. I demand you apologize. Do you know the meaning of this word? I am furious that you would make this statement at and about my posts on this BB. To make light of such a horrible concept relative to debate that involves political leanings is inexcusable. How dare you insult me and my character in a such a horrid and extreme use of this word.

Magnolia
Sep. 23, 2001, 08:49 AM
Actually, Jihad can be a positive thing. Many muslims are on a "jihad of the heart" with themselves to better follow the teachings of the Koran.
Jihad is not just about violence.
Anyhow, not a fan of Bush, but Hillary looked ill throughout his speech. Maybe she was really sick or something?

Ride it Like You Stole It...

DMK
Sep. 23, 2001, 08:54 AM
ji-had also je-had (j-had)
n.
1. A Muslim holy war or spiritual struggle against infidels.
2. A crusade or struggle: "The war against smoking is turning into a jihad against people who smoke" (Fortune).

If it makes you feel better I could substitute "crusade" for "jihad"...

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 09:34 AM
I feel better when I see the good people of this country standing behind the leaders and military and those rescuers and volunteers who stepped forward. I know they are the heart and soul of this country and not the likes of someone like yourself - self ordained as middle ground....I think not.

You can dance around the various definitions but your intent was clear and after 9/11 the use of the word has an obvious meaning.

baymare
Sep. 23, 2001, 09:42 AM
I for one don't think of democrats as anti-christs, and I thank you for the clarification on "Jihad." I read in an interview with a Muslim leader here in VT that even motherhood can be considered a form of jihad. Can it ever!

In real life, issues this big and complex just cannot be broken down into black and white, right and wrong. It's not good guys, bad guys, Republicans, Democrats, terrorists, innocents. Morally speaking, it's all grey area, and we have to be so careful and so clear in how we respond. We are all the same species, after all. Time to go back and read Shylock's famous speech in Merchant of Venice.

Snowbird
Sep. 23, 2001, 10:09 AM
Good Heavens! How depressing it must be to see nothing good in anyone who has a different opinion. How sad that on this BB so much time is wasted arguing and demeaning each other.

In fact there must be a Democratic Party if we are to have a two party system. No one I have ever known in the Republican Party has ever wished for the elimination of the any democrat from any party. Dwight Eisenhower ran as a Republican to save the two party system which is what makes us great. It creates the checks and balances needed to keep this country on a centrous route.

A little levity and the ability to laugh at ourselves has always been one of the best characteristics of America. These extremist views of all or nothing are simple examples of the far right and the far left which of course are never going to agree as to economics or perspective. But, certainly, as Americans we can agree that our children were murdered in our home by sociopaths who must be removed from the society of the world.

I find the only real reason for sadness is that people who are charismatic and glib make use of the weakness and fears of the people who they attempt to lead. This country has always be able to rise above that and find the very best that people can offer. Our Presidents whenever we were in a time of need were able with the strength they get from people to rise to whatever crisis was required. Not all were "Great" and none had impeccable reputations except where it counted.

It is fine to propose a hypothesis for any point of view but to properly defend that hypothesis you have to take it to it's full conclusion.

Yes! there are innocent Afghans who were not able to defend themselves against the Taliban and are abused. So, then do we not do anything to dispossess the Taliban because innocent people might be hurt and die?

There are thousands who have escaped and are no longer willing to defend themselves against the Taliban, many are Americans.

So then who and how will we defend those innocent and defenseless people?

America is the donor of the most money in welfare aid to the Afghans with the premise that it would trickle down. How can we make sure that the "right" people get that money? How should we manage the affairs of Afghanistan so that the "wrong" people don't take that money and send it to Switzerland.

Solutions, alternate proposals and constructive plans are more valuable than this devisive attacking of each other.

What the **** does it matter whether Hillary looked as if she was in approval of anything? What difference does it make if Laura Bush did or didn't live up to your personal ideas of what a wife should do? You might as well be arguing about the fact that you didn't think any one in the Congress should be wearing anything but all black, or obviously our President did not have on a red/white and blue necktie. He has a corrupted speach pattern because he has dual heritage from New England and Texas.

What does that matter in the big scheme of things? Is the fact that he is not a polished performer going to discredit the fact he is surrounded by some of the most experienced and capable people we have available.

We are our government, we have made decisions and picked our leaders and we have a big problem that is world-wide. The fact that the world has realized that the chains and links of these "cells" are in every country and each will clean their own house is to me a sign that the right choices have been made to save humanity.

If a sociopath breaks into your house to kill your family and the babies will you sit down and have an esoteric discussion with him and explain to him in between his murders of your family that he is suffering from some psychosis or are you going to try and stop him him first and then talk later? Will you cook him a lovely dinner because hunger drove him to your house to kill you because you had food and he didn't? And, will you do that after he has murderd you mother or your wife or only before he has murdered.

Will you say to that murderer who really believes that he is entitled to murder you because you have so much and he has so little, you're right! and you are entitled to kill us because we have been too fortunate and here is the combination to the safe and the keys to my car so you now can have money and a new car?

Magnolia
Sep. 23, 2001, 10:49 AM
Julie Montgomery,
I think the Bush vs Gore thread was the longest thread ever on the BB, mainly discussed by the same people posting here.
I think we are just a bunch of politicky horsey people who enjoy sharing our opinions!

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 12:00 PM
I don't give a hoot about Hillary Clinton but the reality is she REPRESENTS & SERVES the people of NY and the calls coming in from people of all political persuasions to NY talk radios programs was overwhelmingly disappointment in her behavior. Fatigue? Rudy Giulliani should be flat out on the ground by now but he was as commanding in his strength and support as he was from day one and he's been at the scene far more times than Hill has. I've been most impressed with those in office who have taken off the political gloves and put on the work gloves. It's irrelevant which lever people pull - when America is attacked - all Americans must be defended.

This thread started with a sophomoric comment on how the president pronounces words - in the final analysis such a sad commentary on what an individual feels we need to focus or comment on at a time of such grave issues challenging our freedom and democracy.

For those who felt this was just a political debate - I would argue this has been a philosophical debate.

Kellybird
Sep. 23, 2001, 12:27 PM
I agree it was philosophical....although I think it was more of a discussion of how to criticize than anything else. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ilona~jihad is not a 'bad' word. DMK probably used it because she guessed it would get your attention. And it did. I find your reaction to her choice in vocabulary very contradictory to your [and JumpHigh's] critical message regarding everyone else's good-natured nit-picking of President Bush's speech. If you are going to criticize her use of a word, please don't turn around and snap at others for making similar comments.

Thanks. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I'm done...my favorite tree needs a hug. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

~KBird

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 12:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kryswyn:
One might excuse her from being less than "Oh YEAH! Let's go kill some ragheads!"
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

and some people with BIG opinions should READ the thread and others like it. Several times that sentiment (NOT MINE if you've read the attack related threads) has been ascribed to young people (which I am not) who have commited senseless hate crimes, or dropped whatever they were doing on 9/11 and raced to the recruiter's office. It was an *example* of what *might* have characterized the 34 (or so) standing ovations the President got. Sort of like the title of *this thread* Bush opens up can of whoop a$$. Clear on that now??

Then your statement that Bill Clinton is responsible for the increase in oral sex in kids had me ROTFLMAO. So kids are having more oral sex now? Trust me, it's only cause somebody thought to ask the question! People didn't TALK about it prior to the 70's. BTW no girl (who told the truth!) ever got pregnant and no boy (who told the truth) ever sired a child while having oral sex. So, for me, better oral sex than sorry! Come to think of it (pun intended) neither did MONICA LEWINSKI who was just having a nice romantic affair until her republican friend with a vengence decided to break the law and rat on her.

As for Laura being on Oprah...Sorry none of my friends watch it. We were all working, where a majority of mothers are these days. And if you don't think Laura acts as a sounding board for her husband, you should think again. I understand your husband was in Special Forces and may have been prohibited from telling you the details of his missions, and if he complied, mazel tov for him. Of course it's nothing you'd have really wanted to know either. But it takes a rare person a) not to tell his/her spouse something of such import that is disturbing to them; or b) a person with a really good therapist. Since we really frown on having our elected officials see therapists, I guess we should be glad they can confide in their heavily protected spouses.

As for your remarks about the apparently soon-to-be sainted Richard Nixon, the point here is that he abused the government, and used its powers to break the law for personal reasons. Bill Clinton was having a consensual affair.

Whether you think he is an empty suit or not, Bill Clinton is an ex-president of this country and due all the respect and decorum of that position. I take exception to your remark "probably because he was afraid for his own butt". If that had been the case, he'd have STAYED in Australia. One plane in the sky (even w/ fighter escorts - if he had them) is a far better/easier target than "somewhere in the Outback".

Finally you said: "You can debate R vs D as long as you want. I want to see when you will focus on the reality that this is a war of freedom vs. terrorism, leadership vs. posturing and right vs. wrong."

Of course it's freedom vs. terrorism. Duh. Leadership vs Posturing? All politicians posture, all are leaders of some degree and ability. Presidents are made by events beyond their control and their reaction to them. George is doing very well so far. Ask me in 10 years when inflation has skyrocketed, US casualties are counted in the tens of thousands, and we are living in a state of seige because terrorism is like Medusa. Cut off one snake's head and another grows. Right vs. wrong? That is really too big an issue for a beautiful Sunday afternoon. There have been so many "rights" that have been "wronged": the innocents killed in the attacks; the starving, homeless Afghani's who are in this mess in part because we put bin Laden on the payroll sometime back.

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

N&B&T
Sep. 23, 2001, 12:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by magnolia:

I think the Bush vs Gore thread was the longest thread ever on the BB, mainly discussed by the same people posting here<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just knew there was some reason not to open the Bush vs. Gore thread when it appeared...
/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 12:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>If a sociopath breaks into your house to kill your family and the babies will you sit down and have an esoteric discussion with him and explain to him in between his murders of your family that he is suffering from some psychosis or are you going to try and stop him him first and then talk later? Will you cook him a lovely dinner because hunger drove him to your house to kill you because you had food and he didn't? And, will you do that after he has murderd you mother or your wife or only before he has murdered.

Will you say to that murderer who really believes that he is entitled to murder you because you have so much and he has so little, you're right! and you are entitled to kill us because we have been too fortunate and here is the combination to the safe and the keys to my car so you now can have money and a new car? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The beautiful part about us humans still having some of our "animal" instincts is that when we are attacked we automatically fight back. If the sociopath in your example broke into any of our homes he'd likely be beaten to death with heavy bits swung on their reins (headstalls removed, please) while we were screaming, "You want MY rig? You want MY TRAILER?? Then you work your sorry butt off to make the payments! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

It is only afterwards that our humanistic nature comes forth wondering if there was anyway we could've prevented such carnage, maybe by donating to the food bank, or giving up a week to help Habitat for Humanity.

There is no arguing with terrorists, and no use reasoning with a sociopath. They are like rabid animals. They didn't ask to contract the disease, but once afflicted, they must be put down for the sake of society. The hard part is catching them, and then being able to prove your case against them.

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

baymare
Sep. 23, 2001, 12:56 PM
"The thread started with a sophomoric comment on how the President pronounces words-in the final analysis such a sad commentary on what an individual feels we need to focus or comment on at a time of such grave issues challenging our freedom and democracy."

The day we lose the privilege and freedom to make sophomoric comments will be a day even more tragic than September 11. I am a firm believer in disrespect as a maker of democracy; if we are afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes, then America has lost far more than lives in the attack. Dubya is Dubya; he is making a heroic effort under incredibly difficult circumstances to rise to the occassion. Only time will tell if he is up to the task, and if he is, God bless him. Even if he isn't, God bless him. He is doing the best he can and probably better than anyone ever expected. But don't ask us to pretend he is without fault, because to do so would be downright un-American.

baymare
Sep. 23, 2001, 01:04 PM
Q: What's the difference between a terrorist and a Dressage Queen?

A: You can negotiate with a terrorist!

Magnolia
Sep. 23, 2001, 01:14 PM
Ya know, (I'm just gonna do it, totally UN-PC)... We need to send in baymare's dressage queens, the welfare queens, the Jerry Springer white trash ho's that fight over the pug-ugly creep, and the soccer mommy caravan insane driver club instead of our armed forces. The Taliban would deliver us our enemies if we would just take our isane women posse home.
Then, we could force Bin Laden to watch the Rosie O'Donnell show, interspersed with clips from Big Brother and Jim Carrey movies, until he was a dribbling brain dead shell of a human.

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Beans
Sep. 23, 2001, 01:33 PM
Sorry can't follow that remark at all. But then again if we look at that Independent Vermont rep...well I'm sorry I can't see how you can put George W. Bush down as someone not up to the task!!! Criticize away - but he flew a jets that take more than parents in the right places to fly and while his heritage might have gotten him into an Ivy League Business School - it didn't help him graduate. I did too and believe me NOONE gets through on connections. I look at the people who surround him and attest to respecting him - it's the measure of the man.

I can't sign on to your disrespect philosophy - the lack of any level of respect in our society has been it's demise. Young children lipping off to strangers has become the norm, not the exception and goes hand in hand with lack of discipline and self-disclipine. We've bottomed out and I'm not some holy roller right wing conservative. I'm a social moderate and a fiscal conservative.

I believe RESPECT is an absolute necessity for a succesful Republic. The US is a Republic and not a Democracy. Nation of laws??? Remember.

Erin
Sep. 23, 2001, 01:39 PM
Hey, IlonaE, look back on page 6 or so... there was actually a pretty good discussion of the "grave issues" going on before *someone* showed up and decided we needed to focus on how the President pronounces words. And here's a hint... it wasn't me. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BTW, I'm glad your thesaurus got a good workout while you came up with a bevy of insults to lob my way. Sorry to disappoint you, but I have better things to do than lob them back. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must spent the remainder of this beautiful Sunday afternoon returning to my appointed duties of destroying the free world.

Let's see, first, I must go exercise my right to free speech and say that I hope the US can find some way to deal with this that does not involve bombing the bejeezus out of Afghanistan. Oh yes, expressing that sentiment most certainly will lead to the end of the free world as we know it.

Secondly, I must attempt to find humor in a serious situation. We ALL know that is TOTALLY unacceptable! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Third, I must be willing to recognize that our President is human, and as such, he has faults... surely a harbinger of the end of civilization. After all, those guys in the powdered wigs who invented this government only put in those checks and balances for fun. All politicians are perfect, so we don't really need them.

Fourth... hmm. Well, I'm not sure what's left. Oral sex?

Seriously, folks, I was enjoying the discussion for a while here before it went into a righteous tailspin. How about we go back to issues? If Congress can unite across the aisle these days, certainly the BB can.

For starters... I flew from Baltimore to Chicago and back this weekend. (On United 757s, no less.) Airports and airplanes are strange places to be these days. We hit some rough air leaving Chicago this morning, and I swear, the woman sitting behind me was hyperventilating she was so scared. Just from some little old bumpy clouds. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Did anyone hear the accounts in the news of people who "looked Middle Eastern" being asked to leave flights for which they had purchased tickets, because the crew or passengers were "uncomfortable" with them being there?

While I admit I'd probably be uncomfortable as hell sitting next to a young man speaking Arabic on an airplane these days, I like to think I'd suck it up, reaffirm my faith in this country and in human nature, and say hello to the fellow and offer him my peanuts. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But I think I'd be in the vast minority...

I really feel for the Middle Eastern citizens of this country right now. Talk about out of the frying pan, into the fire...

Erin
Sep. 23, 2001, 01:48 PM
Gross how, Jumphigh? The Clinton critics here have absolutely no problem bringing up oral sex repeatedly. So why is it gross when I mention it?

Midge
Sep. 23, 2001, 01:53 PM
I think the point of the disrespecting is meant to imply if we didn't have some disrespect now and then, we might be having high tea instead of Happy hour.

Erin
Sep. 23, 2001, 02:00 PM
News? Hmm... Lewinskygate was at least a few years ago. That's awfully old news... and has very little to do with terrorists and Afghanistan, yet it's been mentioned an awful lot on this thread.

Whatever. Sure, just chalk it up to my bad taste. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

So does anyone actually want to talk about issues? Or are we going to go back to nitpicking again? We all know how everyone feels about nitpicking... /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 02:13 PM
should anyone feel like picking them. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Listen Ilona, if you think people don't get through Ivy League schools on connections, you just don't have the right connections! They're called 'endowments'. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Anyway, Dubya is the President, and what he says goes for the next four years anyway. And for the record, it's not his accent, or even the fact that his eyes are too close together that bother me about him and keeps me from supporting him, it's his stand (and the Republican stand) on abortion. Perhaps that's why I'm in favor of OS? It makes abortion a non-issue.

Finally, any insults against certain Democrat 'characters' from Vermont will be taken personally by me. That's my camp counselor you're talking about. So /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif to you! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

Magnolia
Sep. 23, 2001, 02:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I really feel for the Middle Eastern citizens of this country right now. Talk about out of the frying pan, into the fire...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I thought that was what Jumphigh was talking about being gross...I had slightly more disturbing image in my head than Mr. Clinton and his honeys in the sugar shack!
Why do we find sex so offensive? I read in a poll that people would rather have their kids watch the Soprano's than Sex in the City. Personally, I find violence way sicker than a couple of people getting hot and heavy...
My bad, back to Multiple Regression right this second for me....

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Erin
Sep. 23, 2001, 02:24 PM
Frying pan? Where's Suzy? /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

What I was trying to say is that I think it's tragic that immigrants from the Middle East came here looking for the freedoms that this country affords... and now many of them are going home to countries full of violence and civil unrest because they fear for their safety HERE. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 02:37 PM
Had I the means and time to travel right now I would. I would book international flights on American carriers. You know why? Because I think they would be safer.

Reasoning?

El Quadah has targeted America, and they've roused us. We will go after them, of course, they expected us to. However, what they cannot afford to do is get the whole world emotionally commited. Emotionally is the operative word. Right now, while few non-Americans have been killed, other countries can SAY they'll support us, and most will. But if the op takes longer than expected; if clear objectives aren't met, that support may be withdrawn.

However, if too many British citizens are killed, or Italian or German or French, those countries now have an emotional debt of blood that will ensure money and military resources will flow for as long as needs be.

For me, it's moot since I don't have the disposible income this week to see a movie /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

Palomino19
Sep. 23, 2001, 02:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IlonaE:
Young children lipping off to strangers has become the norm, not the exception and goes hand in hand with lack of discipline and self-disclipine. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm Ilona, how about strangers lipping off to strangers? I'm sorry, I forgot only us youngen's need to show respect, when adults act like children and spout rude insults as though they're going out of style it's all right /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Of course I do have piercings so ya never know...

Back to hopefully intelligent conversation - how soon are we planning to bomb (provided that we do bomb)? I saw our local air base had called in the reserves this saturday. Anyone have any thoughts as too how long it will be before we go?

I'm hoping we can (if we have to) go as soon as possible so as not to lose the support of other countries and strike while the iron is hot. Get rid of the terrorists, or at least try, while we have the support and our country united - or at least more united than this thread at the moment!

Jess

baymare
Sep. 23, 2001, 03:17 PM
You know, stuff like flinging tea into Boston Harbor, declaring independence without making nice to the king first.

And, you guessed it, of COURSE Jim Jeffords is a personal hero of mine!

But let's celebrate our differences instead of carp over them-- we are all flesh and blood, after all.

Now what I REALLY want to know is, who is more likely to use a crest release, a Republican or a Democrat???? /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Snowbird
Sep. 23, 2001, 03:29 PM
I must throw my two cents into the gore (no pun intended). While doing an interview with an activist from the militant Arabs when asked by a reporter why this happened, he said they did for "Monica Lewinsky." on the telly no first hand information. Perhaps they were referring her right to have safe sex.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I am sending this document to you..it was my pastor's sermon..I think
you will get much from this.

Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 12:37 PM
Subject: A Time for War

> > Attached is the document "A Time for War" that is from Pastor Dykstra's
> sermon last Sunday morning.
> > > A Time
> for War
> > A sermon preached on September 16, 2001
> at the Reformed Baptist Church of Lafayette
> > by Pastor David Dykstra
> > > > One hundred and eighty seven years ago, the district attorney of
> Washington was sent on a mission of mercy. His name was Francis Scott

Key.

> He was a well-known lawyer, poet, and Christian. He was also a hymn
> writer and one of his hymns is found in our hymnal (#69, Trinity Hymnal).
> In the company of John S. Skinner, Mr. Key made his way under a flag of
> truce, to a British ship anchored in Baltimore Harbor. They were
> attempting to secure the release of a man that British forces (then at war
> with America) had taken prisoner. The prisoner, a Dr. Beanes, was a
> well-known and much loved physician from Baltimore.
> Admiral Cochrane agreed to Dr. Beanes' release, but since an attack on
> Baltimore was imminent, Key and his two friends were not allowed to leave.
> They were put on board the Minden, and from her deck the three friends
> watched the night-long bombardment of Fort McHenry in Baltimore Harbor.
> Two weeks earlier on August 24, 1814, the Capitol building in Washington
> had been burned by British soldiers. Now, on this sad night, as the men
> watched the attack, they could not help but wonder if Baltimore, too,

would

> fall.
> All night long the concussion of naval gunfire, the flight of hard shot

and

> shell continued. They were treated well by their hosts, but they paced

the

> deck in anxiety.
> The new day brought great encouragement. Six thousand British solders,
> veterans who had earlier served under Wellington, rowed back to their
> ships. Baltimore's defensive positions had proven to be too formidable to
> penetrate. In addition, the British general in command of the assault,
> General Ross, had been killed.
> Most encouragingly, the flag, The Stars and Stripes, still flew over Fort
> McHenry! A Reformed Baptist soldier who served in the American militia
> wrote about that new day. Here is what he said: "At the first dawn, every
> eye was directed towards the Fort, to see whether the American banner

still

> waved there: and when the morning mists had sufficiently dispersed, we

were

> filled with exultation at beholding The Stars and Stripes still floating

in

> the breeze."
> Imagine the cheers as they welled up from the American army and carried
> over the water to the British ships! Imagine the silence in the long

boats

> as the once proud veterans of Wellington rowed back to their ships with
> their dead and wounded, having been repulsed yet again, by American

militia!

> On board the Minden, Francis Scott Key found a letter in his pocket, and
> on the back of the letter he gave vent to the love of country that filled
> his heart. He scribbled the verses that over a century later were adopted
> as our national anthem. Here is what he wrote that day (note the slight
> difference with what became the official version, and remember that this

is

> only the first stanza):
> > "O, say can you see
> by the dawn's early light
> What so proudly we hailed
> at the twilight's last gleaming
> Whose broad stripes and bright stars
> through the clouds of the fight,
> O'er the ramparts we watched
> were so gallantly streaming?
> And the rockets red glare,
> the bombs bursting in air
> Gave proof through the night
> that our flag was still there.
> Oh, say, does that star-spangled
> banner yet wave,
> O'er the land of the free,
> and the home of the brave?"
> > On Tuesday, September 11, 2001 we, too, saw symbols of American commerce
> and American military power in flames. For the first time since the War

of

> 1812 foreign enemies have reached our shores and attacked our homeland.

We

> now know how our forefathers felt in 1814 when the Capitol burned and

enemy

> soldiers seemed to be triumphant.
> Our President, who professes to be a Christian man, is using strong and
> clear language. He has informed us that we are now involved in yet

another

> "war". High government officials in Washington now speak clearly and
> openly of "ending States" that have sponsored these attacks.
> What should be our response to these events? How does a Christian, guided
> by the Holy Scriptures, evaluate both the events and our response to the
> events?
> This morning I want to give you some Biblical directives to guide you in
> these dark days in our nation's history.
> > > Observe in the first place that the Scriptures reveal that there is a time
> for war.
> > Consider Ecclesiastes 3:1-8
> There is an appointed time for everything.
> And there is a time for every event under heaven -
> A time to give birth, and a time to die;
> A time to plant, and a time to uproot what is planted.
> A time to kill, and a time to heal;
> A time to tear down, and a time to build up.
> A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
> A time to mourn, and a time to dance.
> A time to throw stones, and a time to gather stones;
> A time to embrace, and a time to shun embracing.
> A time to search, and a time to give up as lost;
> A time to keep, and a time to throw away.
> A time to tear apart, and a time to sew together;
> A time to be silent, and a time to speak.
> A time to love, and a time to hate;
> A time for war, and a time for peace.
> > The passage consists of a series of pairs, pairs of opposites. The whole
> point is that for each of these things, there is a time when they are
> appropriate. And one of the things that is appropriate at certain times,
> and under certain conditions, is war.
> > Consider 1 Samuel 30:1-8:
> Then it happened when David and his men came to Ziklag on the third day,
> that the Amalekites had made a raid on the Negrev and on Ziklag, and had
> overthrown Ziklag and burned it with fire; and they took captive the women
> and all who were in it, both small and great, without killing anyone, and
> carried them off and went their way. And when David and his men came to
> the city, behold, it was burned with fire, and their wives and their sons
> and their daughters had been taken captive. Then David and the people who
> were with him lifted their voices and wept until there was no strength in
> them to weep. Now David's two wives had been taken captive, Ahinoam, the
> Jezreelitess and Abigail the widow of Nabal the Carmelite. Moreover David
> was greatly distressed because the people spoke of stoning him, for all

the

> people were embittered, each one because of his sons and his daughters.
> But David strengthened himself in the Lord his God. Then David said to
> Abiathar the priest, the son of Ahimelech, 'Please bring me the ephod.'

So

> Abiathar brought the ephod to David. And David inquired of the Lord,
> saying, "Shall I pursue this band? Shall I overtake them?' And He said

to

> him, 'Pursue, for you shall surely overtake them, and you shall surely
> rescue all.'"
> > Herein, King David has returned to the city of Ziklag to learn the
> distressing news that Amalekites had made a raid against it, and the

people

> had all been taken captive. David, and all his men, had lost their
> families to this raid.
> The question was: Do we pursue them? Do we go after them, and rescue our
> loved ones? The Lord's unambiguous answer was "pursue"! Here was a time
> for armed conflict. Here too, was a time for war. It is appropriate to
> use armed might to rescue the innocent.
> > > > Consider Exodus 15:1-3:
> "Then Moses and the sons of Israel sang this song to the Lord, and said,

'I

> will sing to the Lord, for He is highly exalted; The horse and its rider

He

> has hurled into the sea. The Lord is my strength and song, and He has
> become my salvation; This is my God, and I will praise Him; My father's
> God, and I will extol Him. The Lord is a warrior; the Lord is His name.'"
> > This is the song of Moses after the utter defeat of Egyptian forces led by
> Pharaoh. Not a single Hebrew had taken any action and yet the Egyptians
> had been slain. How was this possible? The answer is plain. The Lord

was

> the warrior! The Lord is called a warrior. He is deemed to be a warrior
> because He killed the enemy. He allied Himself with Israel and fought for
> them. Here, too, was a time for war and a helpless and weak nation had a
> powerful ally, the Lord Himself.
> > Consider Psalm 144:1:
> "Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers
> for battle."
> > This is a Psalm of David. David was a warrior. Here he is thanking God,
> blessing God, for the martial skills with which he had been blessed. He
> viewed the Lord as the ultimate source of his gifts, and one of the gifts
> with which he was endowed was his skill as a warrior.
> Do you recall the movie Saving Private Ryan? One of the characters in the
> squad carried a sniper's rifle, and before each of his shots he quoted a
> verse from the Bible. One of the verses he quoted was Psalm 144:1. No
> Christian should have any difficulty with that. There, on the screen, was
> portrayed American soldiers at their best. The Christian soldier ought to
> be able to say as he goes into battle, "Blessed be the Lord, my Rock, who
> trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle."
> If there is a time for war, there is also a time for warriors, men whose
> skill, men whose vocational calling is martial in nature.
> > Consider Proverbs 20:18 & 24:6
> "Prepare plans by consultation, and make war by wise guidance."
> "For by wise guidance you will wage war, and in abundance of counselors
> there is victory."
> > It is assumed that at times war must be waged. What is required before

war

> is waged, is wise counsel, wise guidance. Clearly, here too we see that
> there is a time for war. What is forbidden herein is a knee-jerk

reaction,

> a hasty reaction. Before war is waged, wise, cool heads must give great
> thought to the issues and then make policy based on their accumulated

wisdom.

> > Observe in the second place that the Scriptures reveal various causes of

war.

> > Consider James 4:1-2:
> "What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the

source

> your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have;

so

> you commit murder. And you are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight

and

> quarrel. You do not have because you do not ask."
> > James links together human conflict and a violation of the tenth
> commandment. The tenth commandment forbids coveting and requires
> contentment with what we have.
> We have all known of sad cases where families have been ripped apart after
> the death of a loved one because of disputes over the distribution of
> family assets. Herein, James reveals that envy and discontent are chief
> causes of conflict and war.
> History is full of illustrations of this fact. The nations we fought in
> World War II all viewed themselves as the "have not" nations. They coveted
> the resources and riches that others had. This, combined with their

racist

> attitudes and policies, led them to believe that they had a right to take
> from others.
> This explains Japan's invasion of Manchuria in 1931-1932. This explains
> Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935. This explains Japan's invasion of
> China in 1937. This explains Germany's invasion of Austria, and
> Czechoslovakia in 1938, and the invasion of Poland and Denmark in 1939,

and

> the invasion of Norway, France, Holland, and Belgium in 1940. Sadly, this
> explains, in part, the seizure of native American lands in the 19th

century

> when gold was discovered therein.
> Failure to be content with what you have, combined with coveting what
> others have, is a source of interpersonal conflict and even war. We need
> to emphasize this because the idea is abroad in our land that when a
> teenager kills another teen to steal his jacket or his shoes - society is
> at fault. Manufacturers and advertisers are often blamed instead of the
> perpetrator himself.
> James corrects us. One commentator put it well when he said, "The

ultimate

> causes of war are not to be found in the social and economic circumstances
> external to man, but within man himself."
> With this, the Lord Jesus would agree: "For out of the heart come evil
> thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness,
> slanders" (Matthew 15:19).
> > Consider Esther 3:5-6:
> "When Haman saw that Mordecai neither bowed down nor paid homage to him,
> Haman was filled with rage. But he disdained to lay hands on Mordecai
> alone, for they had told him who the people of Mordecai were; therefore
> Haman sought to destroy all the Jews, the people of Mordecai, who were
> throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus."
> > Herein, in Israel's post-exile history, when they were under Persian rule,
> Haman, a Persian official hated a Jewish official who worked in the
> government. His hatred for Mordecai led to hatred for all of Mordecai's
> people, all the Jews. This hatred led to plans for war, plans for
> violence, plans for the extermination of a whole people.
> Hatred, pure and simple, is what we now know motivated the terrorists who
> attacked us last week. Their hatred is directed against all our people
> wherever they are found, on whatever continent. A few years ago my wife
> and I were at a mall in Capetown, South Africa. The week after we left, a
> bomb went off there. It had been planted at an American business. It was
> intended as an attack on America and those who support America. Bombs

also

> went off in Kenya and Tanzania at American Embassies. The fact is that we
> are hated, and we are considered targets of opportunity around the world.
> It is always open season on Americans to these people.
> Of great concern to all of us is to learn that Osama bin Laden is one of
> the most popular figures in much of the Mid-east and beyond. He is the
> role model for many adolescent and adult males throughout much of that
> region. This reality is ominous indeed.
> > Observe lastly that the Scriptures reveal the responsibility of national
> governments.
> > Consider Romans 13:1-7:
> "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For

there

> is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by
> God. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God;
> and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For
> rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you
> want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have
> praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if
> you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for

nothing;

> for it is a minister of God, and avenger who brings wrath upon the one who
> practices evil. Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only
> because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake. For because of this you
> also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to

this

> very thing. Render to all what is due them; tax to whom tax is due;

custom

> to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor."
> > Here in Romans 13, the Apostle Paul gave directives to early Christians
> (and to us), about the kinds of government to which people are to be
> submissive. The governments (whether on family, vocational,
> ecclesiastical, state, or national level) to which we are required to
> submit, are those which are ministers of God to their people "for good".
> > Consider the right of those under authority as revealed herein. People
> have a basic right to live without fear. The most basic liberty of all,
> whether in the family, church, or state, is to be able to go about your
> business in peace and security. This is one of the reasons why we are
> required to pray for those in authority over us.
> > Consider 1 Timothy 2:1-2:
> "First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and
> thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in
> authority, in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all
> godliness and dignity."
> > Consider the responsibility of those in authority as revealed herein.
> The Apostle Paul makes it clear that it is a responsibility of government
> to instill fear in those who contemplate evil actions. We all know how
> this occurs. If you go through a speed trap and see that you have been
> caught, you might develop sweaty palms, and start to fear the possibility
> of points going on your record. If enough points were accumulated, you
> might lose your privilege to drive. The government instills fear to
> safeguard the roads. This is right and proper. It is also biblical.
> At this hour in our land our government is required to instill enough fear
> in the hearts of our enemies that they will not dare to repeat their
> action. Previous administrations have not instilled adequate fear and in
> that, they have failed us and failed in God's directive about human
> government. When human governments are working well, evildoers are afraid
> to execute evil actions. The safety of a city, the safety of a country,

is

> an indication of the quality of its government. If a city or a country is
> not safe, it is an indication that the government is not fulfilling its
> God-ordained task of protecting citizens and punishing offenders.
> Another responsibility of human government is to avenge evil acts. Romans
> 13:4 is clear. God requires nations to avenge wrongs perpetrated against
> its people.
> We need to remember that while private vengeance is prohibited (Romans
> 12:19), official, governmental vengeance is required when law-abiding
> citizens become the victims of evildoers.
> In this capacity, Paul calls the government and its agencies "a minister

of

> God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil" (Romans
> 13:4). God has granted to the State the right and responsibility to use
> "the sword", and swords are not used for spankings.
> St. Paul, in keeping with God's holy law, was a proponent of capital
> punishment. Herein, he recognizes that the state is empowered by God to
> use the sword to punish offenders. The judge who sentenced Timothy

McVeigh

> to death, was no more guilty of murder himself than a judge who sentences
> an offender to pay a fine is guilty of theft.
> Most people think of men like me as ministers of God. Our vocation is to
> study, to pray, to preach, to counsel, to help people. Have you ever
> thought that Romans 13 requires us to have a wider concept of those who

are

> "ministers of God"?
> The reality is that the F-15 pilot who drops a bomb load on those who are
> clearly implicated as enemies, is also a "minister of God, an avenger who
> brings wrath on the one who practices evil" (Romans 13:4). So, too, is

the

> Navy Seal, who kicks in a door, and quickly and efficiently dispatches the
> enemy. State initiated punishment, if visited upon evildoers, is a
> responsibility that has been given to the State by God.
> Listen to the reasoning of a great Southern Presbyterian, namely Robert
> Louis Dabney: "It would be strange indeed if the ruler who is armed by God
> with the power of capital punishment against the domestic murderer, could
> not justly inflict the same doom on the foreign criminal who invades our
> soil unprovoked for the purpose of shedding blood. The security of life
> and property which the magistrate is intended to provide by his power of
> punishing would be illusory indeed, if it could only be used against
> individual criminals, while the more mischievous and widespread crimes of
> organized multitudes must go unpunished."
> > Is this a time for war? Indeed it is. Thousands of peace-loving,

innocent

> people from over 60 nations went to work on Tuesday threatening no one.
> Wicked men, who make no distinction between civilians and the military,
> attacked them and took their lives. It is now the responsibility of our
> government to avenge their deaths, not by targeting other innocent people,
> but by identifying and then attacking the people and the States that
> sponsor them. It is the responsibility of our government to cause others
> to be afraid of ever repeating acts like this.
> May God help our leaders to so govern and act, that the right of all the
> people to live, travel, and work in peace is secured.
> > Amen.
> > > > > For further reading:
> > > > 1. Why Does God Allow War?, D. Martyn-Lloyd Jones, Evangelical Press of

Wales

> > 2. When Is It Right To Fight?, Robert A. Morey, Presbyterian & Reformed
> Publishing Company
> > 3. The Christian Attitude Toward War, Lorraine Boettner, Presbyterian & > Reformed Publishing Company
> > 4. Trusting God, Jerry Bridges, NavPress<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can we not take a higher road in this exercise in philosophy and discuss our great moments in history and what is so wonderful that we have been blessed to live our lives in peace, freedom and liberty and at what cost to others from the past.

If they could sacrifice to get us here can we not openly do the same today without fear of retribution?

hobson
Sep. 23, 2001, 03:31 PM
What would Captain Picard do?

Stuff we agree on:
EVERYODY is mourning for the victims and their families.
EVERYBODY feels for the rescue workers and the people of New York, DC and PA.
EVERYBODY is horrified at this catastrophe.
EVERYBODY wants the organization responsible to be held accountable.
EVERYBODY hopes for a timely resolution to the anti-terrorist effort, while realistically expecting it to be a difficult struggle.
NOBODY wants more innocent people to die as a result of our retaliation.
NOBODY envies George Bush his job right now.

People naturally DISAGREE on stuff like:

*What we perceive as reasonable options for response.
*Acceptable costs of response (as in, how many dead Americans, Afghanis, Iraqis, Brits, etc will we be willing to brush aside as necessary sacrifices)
*The current administration's grasp on the complexity of the events and ramifications of how we choose to retaliate.
*To what extent we are willing to forego certain civil liberties for a greater sense of security.
*How much we can trust fellow Americans of middle eastern descent, or who are wearing turbans or burqa.
*The meaning of national unity, the meaning of patriotism, what a flag signifies, how the world perceives the US.
*Why it happened. Garden-variety anti-americanism? Payback time for the marginalized victims of globalization? Fundamentalism gone berzerk? Megalomania? Somewhere in between?

Well, color me a raving lunatic lefty, but from where I stand, there are a zillion different angles to this event. The US's next move will be a bit like knocking the next domino over and trying to guess at which way the rest of the tiles are going to fall among several different possibilities. Will the line come to a neat, elegant conclusion, will it come back to kick us in the ass, or will it putter around somewhere in between?

Kellybird
Sep. 23, 2001, 03:38 PM
I dunno JumpHigh, I think it is much "GROSS"-er to joke about KKK meetings than jke about oral sex. And under 16? someone said something about 10-year-olds having oral sex...none of this surprises me of course, being the misguided youth of America, raised by two Democrats and allowed to freely converse with the outside world....and *shhh* I thought Clinton was a good Pres.--NOT however for the reason that I'm sure you will suggest. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

People honestly believe that oral sex has increased do to: an intern with an affinity for older men and an older man with an affinity for interns who wear bad lipstick colors??

Trust me, Clinton didn't make [*slang for oral sex removed because being 22 days under 16, I shouldn't know such things*] cool...ask anyone in my highschool, and I doubt they'd say that they're trying to be like Bill. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

OK, I'm done for now. That whale looks like it needs saving!

~KBird

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 04:42 PM
You have an amazing grasp of world religions. Thanks for posting the history of the Star Spangled Banner and a wonderful sermon. Clearly Christians have God on their side and His permission to make war at this time is clear.

Unfortunately, whether it's true or not (per your earlier posts on Islam), I'm still afraid the terrorists believe Allah supports them regardless.

Those for whom a diety is not a cornerstone of daily life sometimes feel that without religion the world would be a better place ("Imagine" by John Lennon "Imagine no religion/ It's easy if you try/ No hell below us/ Above us only sky/ Imagine all the people living for today). While great things have been accomplished by Religion some great wrongs have been done (the Inquisition, the Crusades).

I'm much more comfortable leaving God out of it and saying, You attacked us; we choose not to let you live to do it again; prepare to die.

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

Kryswyn
Sep. 23, 2001, 04:50 PM
beam down to Afghanistan with a small unit of red shirted Security Guards (who would all die); home in on bin Ladin using Spock's coordinates from the bridge and after trading banter, cause bin Ladin to go for his sword. After an exciting sword fight and a last moment of philosophical dialog, JTK would be forced to run bin Ladin through. Saddened by the loss of life, he'd bring McCoy down to begin overseeing the care of the displaced starving Afghanis. Leaving Bones in charge, he'd beam back up. There, Spock would ask him when humans would realize that being so emotional would always result in conflict. To which he'd reply, "It's what makes us strong, Spock. To fight for the underdog, to kill if necessary, but always to regret having to do it." Turning in for the evening, he'd find his quarters already occupied, by MONICA LEWINSKY!!!!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

~Kryswyn~
"Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo"

jparkes
Sep. 23, 2001, 04:56 PM
We round up all the pacifists and send them over to negotiate with the terrrorists and each one we send a bag of groceries!
/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

hobson
Sep. 23, 2001, 05:22 PM
I like your reminder to us that no matter what religion it hails from, fundamentalist totalitarianism rules with fear as its number-one tactic.

The experience of people in countries crippled by religious fundamentalist rule is exhibit #1 in the importance of being vigilant against this sort of fanaticism at home.

The Taleban has managed to keep a stranglehold on the Afghani populace using fear - weekly public executions and mutilations, with compulsory attendance - to keep those poor people terrified and powerless. Girls, did your shoes make noise just now as you walked down the street? Well, we shall just relieve you of those feet and solve the problem.

The Christian right has similarly seen its fringe element morph into a terrorist movement, using clinic bombing and the execution of abortion-clinic workers as a tool to strike fear into Americans.

Using fear and terror and a twisted notion of "What God Wants" to keep citizens cowed is cowardly and evil, not to mention un-Christian, un-Islam and un-everything-else-that-is-civilized.

Snowbird
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:29 PM
That's my point exactly. We can justify and we can rationalize but in essence the battle is between the extremes we must keep in balance like lady Justice with her scale.

Kryswyn exactly...<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I'm much more comfortable leaving God out of it and saying, You attacked us; we choose not to let you live to do it again; prepare to die.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is when we become engaged in excuses, alibis and extentuating circumstances that we get into trouble. It is a simple fact which both you and Hobson stated they killed our children in our house and there is no excuse that is permitted.

As those in the "center position" we need only to look at the facts. Now, we must also demand the proof that in reality the proposed action satisfies the crime. And, that the action is properly justified, then we must live with the results.

There is literal justification for almost anything and there are excuses and extenuating circumstances to avoid the truth. We still have the right to make the choices. In today's climate because of "security" we may not be informed as much as we would like but at some point we must have faith in the "government" and the people.

My point is that when we were the guerillas it was a victory for freedom of religion, among other freedoms and what we face is the loss of that freedom already won by many lives. Do we have the right to concede now? Should we let our desire for total equality defeat us against those who would insist that we be their kind of Muslim.

Our forefathers left England because they wanted the right to be Protestant. It was not accepted in Europe or England. Can we disappoint our forefathers?

Allah is the same God who gives them some justification as well as us. We have free choice and if this person or persons comes to our place and kills 6300 of our children, there is no excuse or alibi. By every code of humanity that is wrong. If the perpetrators are the heroes and martyers of a people then those people are also perpetrators.

So we can mitigate the circumstances but if there is no choice we must come down on what we all agree.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Using fear and terror and a twisted notion of "What God Wants" to keep citizens cowed is cowardly and evil, not to mention un-Christian, un-Islam and un-everything-else-that-is-civilized.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SLW
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:46 PM
Snowbird, thank you for sharing the sermon. I really enjoyed reading it.

SLW

Palomino19
Sep. 23, 2001, 06:59 PM
Thank you snowbird! What a wonderfully articulate, well-versed minister. I enjoyed reading it very much.

Jess

Snowbird
Sep. 23, 2001, 09:20 PM
It made me cry for the first time. I felt the heart and soul that went into this country and the good intentions and love that have kept it going.

It does seem very unfair that so many had to die for us to remember how much we should love this country. But the good is here with us and we have an obligation to keep it alive.

Our little town is going to have a parade on October 6 and for the first time we will submit a fully mounted group. I have always been afraid of our horses on asphalt but we will show that horse people are in the heartland of this wonderful country.

I understand from my farrier we will be ok if we use some road plugs in the shoes. Painted horses and walking children will be with us. A little small town America will do everyone a lot of good to get through all this.

hobson
Sep. 24, 2001, 06:34 AM
Oh, I guess I read that long, long passage a lot differently than you guys did. I took Mr Loose Cannon Pastor as an example of why one must tread very carefully when invoking God on our side.

"God requires nations to avenge wrongs perpetrated against its people."

Does God really? Which God would this be? Our attackers probably thought they had God's high sign when killing thousands of people. God's payback time. Yet Pastor Holy War did not appear to see the irony in claiming God's blessings to wage war in return.

"The reality is that the F-15 pilot who drops a bomb load on those who are clearly implicated as enemies, is also a 'minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil'"

Yikes. Surely I'm not the only person who sees something sick and twisted about that statement.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: strident militaristic fundamentalism is a dangerous thing whether its Christian, Islam or Jewish in origin.

SLW
Sep. 24, 2001, 07:57 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by hobson:
"The reality is that the F-15 pilot who drops a bomb load on those who are clearly implicated as enemies, is also a 'minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil'"

Yikes. Surely I'm not the only person who sees something sick and twisted about that statement.>

What part "clearly implicated as enemies" is unclear to you, seriously? From all the stories I have read since the attack on America I understand that most Afganistans would be thrilled to have Bin Laden/Talisban done away with.

SLW

Magnolia
Sep. 24, 2001, 08:39 AM
There is a line from the bible -
"Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"
10 commandments:
"Thou Shalt not Kill"
and so forth and so on......

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Policy of Truth
Sep. 24, 2001, 08:42 AM
As for you, Hobson, I'm sorry that you cannot understand what Christians believe.

Unlike agnostics and atheists, people who believe in God have to acknowledge that we are not a god. In other words, we believe there exists something much larger and more powerful that deserves our respect, love, devotion and worship. We recognize our weaknes as humans and choose to follow our creator instead of trying to make it on our own.
Also, those of us who believe in God KNOW that peace is not the natural state of human affairs. This does NOT mean we hate peace, but that we recognize the reality of humanity.


It's ok that you choose to believe differently, but I admit I am sad for you. I also feel that you are the "pot calling the kettle black" in that you want freedom to believe or not to believe in whatever you want, but you resist the idea of fighting for that freedom.

And maybe I'm wrong, but putting down religious beliefs doesn't indicate to me that you truly like your freedom...or do you only like freedoms deemed appropriate by you and any other folks that share your sentiments on the far left?

Hobson, although I disagree with you a lot, I do admire you for your willingness to be honest. No matter how poular or unpoular your statements, you never waiver.

DMK
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:04 AM
I think maybe the part about nations and F-15s being agents of God bothers hobson.

I personally would like to think that one could be religious and a have a deep respect for one's god, without believing that said god might sanction a nation's or a machine's actions. I mean F-15s are not perfect. They can kill the innocent along with the guilty. Maybe it's tough for some people to reconcile that the god they believe in would sanction such a thing.

Maybe they support this action fully, and to the bottom of their patriotic heart. Maybe they are deeply hurt, outraged, grief struck and angered at this horrific action against innocent people and our nation. And maybe, as we, the United States and our allies in this effort go forth and do what must be done, they think that just maybe, their god is deeply disappointed that it has come to this point. Maybe they think their god mourns the loss of all life killed by another human being, not just those that died on September 11.

I can't speak for others, but that is how I feel about it...

As for a Nation, Nations are different. According to Hans Morganthau, one of the "fathers of international policy" and someone I place a deep amount of respect in (this will shock all those who think I am a total tree hugging liberal, since ole Hans is somewhere to the right of Henry Kissinger /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ).

Morganthau establishes that Nations are not moral, in the accepted sense. They may act morally, but they do that for pragmatic reasons (i.e., they will follow a moral course if it is also the pragmatic course). Nations have ONE guiding principle, and that is that they act in their best interests, and to the extent their power allows. Of course this is an incredible simplification of about 400 pages of brilliant doctrine, but it gets the point across.

hobson
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:10 AM
God is nice and all, but to use God to justify politically-motivated killing...not good!

Snowbird's pastor-dude was advocating the use of fear and executions as a God-based methodology of governing. Read it carefully - he is very blunt about it. He also stated that killing in God's name is a good thing.

This makes him sound eerily like the very regime we want to crush, and who deserve any crushing that comes their way.

Pacificsolo, getting the guys who did this is one thing. Smashing Afghanistan in order to get them, and destroying a lot of innocent people, and creating new support for the Taleban as a result, is quite another. Thank you for your concern that I live in a pathetic morass of moral turpitude.

I would expect that most politically-to-the-right fundamentalist Christians do not have a problem with the idea of a holy Christian war against the infidels. This is, after all, one of the defining features of fundamentalism. I do wish they would notice the irony therein, though.

I also have a great number of Christian friends who believe that violence begets violence. Sure, some amount of destruction and death is going to happen and is richly deserved by those responsible for the attacks. I just don't personally know any Christians who still ascribe to the Crusades tactic of "kill them ALL and God will recognize his own."

So sue me - I want to avoid the further devastation of an already desperately poor region, and I don't want more innocent people to die in my name, or in some vengeful God's name.

jparkes
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:45 AM
How many American buildings need to be destroyed before we do something?
How many American lives need to be lost before we declare war?
Or, would you rather just sit back and watch until it affects you personally?
Or, would you rather give into these terrorists and let them do with us as they please?
Geez people, get real. Let's start thinking about your future, your children's future and the future of the free world!!!

HeyYouNags
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:46 AM
Aye yi yi, as if the Gore vs. Bush rehash weren't bad enough, now we've returned to the "Are Equestrians Christian" thread...

Here is my counterpoint to some of those
incredibly long posts above.

Me Democrat. Me atheist/agnostic. Me think Bush talk funny. Me no want cans of whoop-ass opened.

That will probably do as much to change the opinions of those in the Republican, religious, a**-kicking camp as those loooooong posts do to change mine!

HYN, a firm believer in brevity as the soul of wit...

Erin
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:52 AM
JParkes, I can't speak for anyone else, but my big fear is that declaring war will cause MORE buildings and innocent lives to be lost. And I'm not talking about in Afghanistan...

Personally speaking, I am NOT advocating sitting back and doing nothing, or letting terrorists do as they please. I am just wondering out loud if the "something" we should be doing is declaring war.

When someone hits you, hitting them back is the first gut instinct. But it isn't always the right instinct.

Snowbird
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:55 AM
The point is that it is not acceptable if it is pointless revenge,(agreement with your point Hobson) which is what these terrorists are doing. They are breaking their own commandments of "Thou shall not covet". They are only revenging themselves for our property and because of jealousy for what we have and they have not! Thieves rationalize their right to steal the same way as these terrorists rationalize their right to kill.

Look the farmers in Israel turned the desert into food producing farms with financial help sure, but they did the work. They offered the Palestinians the opportunity to share their knowledge and experience and avoid their mistakes. But, instead the enemy wants to take the farm, but not do the work. How long would it be before the farm is gone and the desert is back. So the farmers have a right to defend themselves and it is not just pointless revenge.

I think Hobson you need to look at the context. The God of Islam and the Commandments belong to Islam, the Hebrews and the Christians because they are one family all descended from Abraham. Moses and Jesus are recognized by Allah. The same rules apply to all.

Just as you see the ways that Christianity can use these statements from the Bible as a way for abuse so you have to see that is the way that these sociopaths use the same words. So yes! they really believe that Allah is on their side because they leave out a little thing like the "revenge" motive. They ignore the sins of avarice, greed, envy and false pride in that same Koran.

Yes! it's true David Koresh and his Branch Dividians believed they would have a special place with their twists on theology, he put himself at the right hand of God and the only one capable of truly interpreting the laws of God, that was vanity and being a false prophet. In Jonestown they used the Bible but overlooked the little part about suicide and murder.

Is their God on their side? In an esoteric debate of strict interpretation I believe they would also lose any debate. But they prey on the downtrodden and the hopeless, offering them hope here on earth. Just like Falwell who says we are being punished for what he imagines are sins in God's eyes. In all these cases war is a defensive thing when approved by a Diety and the terrorists are impatient with God so they have taken offensive actions, these are not approved by any theology or even those without a theology.

Of all the major religions there are none that approve the killing of innocent children and women, the old and infirmed for any reason. Remember these words were written in a day when only healthy males could even be considered as infidels.

I watched an interview where they discussed the martyr complex and it was interesting because I know of no God who would promise these martyrs 17 young virgins for themselves when they go to paradise as a martyr. Yet, this is what the martyrs are told will be their reward.

My guess is that is the dream of young men in that society, I personally can concieve of no way that "sex" is part of paradise since it is a pleasure seeking choice for the body and not for the soul. I don't know of a single theology that promises a paradise for the body after death.

I was most interested to have read the sermon because we all were having a debate about the justification for war and I thought these specific quotes were valuable. Somewhere and I'm no scholar it does say "Vengeance is Mine saith the Lord" which confirms the difference.

I think the President has once again proved his capacity to understand those quotes by using the banks as his first line of attack. If our partners will support us and those bank accounts in Europe are frozen, the money supply to support these terrorists will drive them out into the open where they can be trapped and tried in the world courts. I especially liked it when he said if those Banks refuse then they will not be able to do business in this country. Because it is unlikely they want to help the terrorists enough to sacrifice their own well being.

The lines of battle are being drawn in the right place. If Bin Laden can't pay his people then will he have any people? So our President is actually using the best tool to satify even the most adamant bleeding heart liberal.

[This message was edited by Snowbird on Sep. 24, 2001 at 01:08 PM.]

Dementia 13
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:57 AM
HYN -- you are the best.
DMK - you are too.

I agree with you both.


MargaretF, who also believes in brevity.

Heidi
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:00 AM
Among the best speeches, in response to the terrorist attacks, that I've yet to hear has been from Preston Manning, former leader of the Canadian Alliance, a party not known for its liberal-leanings, situated about 500 yards to the right of center.

Egads people, if I, an agnostic liberal can find inspiration in the words of a right wing politician (whose voice, BTW, ranks among the most annoying of any politician imaginable) those of you who've expressed such intolerance for the views of others (and y'all know to whom I'm referring), can surely find a way to debate without such mean-spirited virtiol. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


Excerpt from Preston Manning's Speech

We have promised our American friends that �our prayers are with them.� But what should be the content of those prayers, for this promise to be more than idle words?

Historically our nations, particularly in times of war and disaster, have sought deliverance from evil and the strength to do good through faith in the justice and grace of God.

My prayer is that the tragedy of September 11, 2001, will lead us to do so again; that our spiritual leaders will speak the truth in love or not at all; and that our political leaders will be given the wisdom to fashion our response to terrorism and its roots in the light of the moral imperatives which this tragedy illuminates.

May we be delivered from the evils of false religion and indiscriminate revenge, inspired to new heights and depths of compassion for all those who suffer, while relentlessly pursuing justice for those who practice terror � so help us God.

HeyYouNags
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:17 AM
I mean, the sentences contain semi-colons, and are longer than 8 words...

Ooops, did I just throw gasoline on the fire? /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Heidi
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:24 AM
It's UnAmerican - cause it's Canadian! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Whistlejacket
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:29 AM
While the tragedy of the events of Sept. 11th are overwhelming, there is the part of me that sees that those horrible events also offer the world an incredible opportunity.

To erradicate terrorism, the many different nations of the world will need to work together as a global community with this as a common goal. The critical importance of this common goal far outweighs the cultural and religious differences between countries.

As all or some of us may have experienced at our jobs or schools, once people of apparent differences work together towards a common goal, often times understanding, acceptance, tolerance and respect for each other are reached. The differences seem, well, less different. As such, civilization and humanity are advanced...on a small scale, such as at our places of work/school, or on a large scale such as the current opportunity offers.

Of the many layers, types and facets of fear that I have experienced since the events of Sept. 11th, my greatest fear is that in our efforts to end terrorism, we will not act as a member of the global community.

While our cultures/religions/etc. may be different, our common goal of liberty and peace are shared. We must put aside our differences for this greater common good.

rockstar
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:33 AM
Whoa! I am such a dummie... I definitely should have learned during the great election debate threads that I shouldn't post and then not check the boards for a few days! Goodness gracious!

Talk about single out and attack IlonE!

I think, perhaps, you did not read my post a)carefully enough, and b)in the light tone I intended to write it in. Rumour monger? Heaven help me... what a sin! I think I made it clear that what I was writing was just the latest inside buzz (and nothing else). I wrote it precisely because I know most of the people out there aren't in the same working environment and are not subject to the same kind of news as a result.

I certainly don't apologize for sharing the latest political buzz on current matters. If we were debating the stock market here I would expect someone working in financial services to share the latest spin on the stock market from his/her industry perspective. I simply related what was being said in the Washington political world Thursday night and Friday after the speech. And, GASP, much of the information I related came from 1) conversations with Republican staffers I am friends with (don't fall over in your chair now!) who work in the offices of some of our (oh, I mean your) most prominent Republican leaders, and 2) reliable political reports that quoted top republican sources (Roll Call newspaper and the National Journal�s �Hotline�).

It's D.C. for crying out loud! Nothing is done here without people considering the political results. And nothing happens here without people looking at it from a political perspective. Don't go acting like it's only democrats who spin things politically... turning everything into politics is something both republicans and democrats here (and everywhere) have a very fine mastery of. The "scoop" I gave could have just as easily been written by a republican (minus the statements of dislike for Bush and Gulianni of course!).

It may come as a huge shock to you, but some of us CAN manage to be thoroughly partisan AND friendly and nice all at the same time! It's what some call "agreeing to disagree". SOME of us CAN thoroughly disagree with one another but still have the ability to recognize that our ties as countrymen will always unite us in the end.

Duh... Republicans are Republicans and Dems are Dems... all of us see through different eyes and the different visions we all own aren't going to change any time soon. America is not about agreeing as you seem (?) to think... America is about embracing diverse viewpoints and coming together (especially in times like these) to work our differences (such as they are) out and reach meaningful and practical compromises. You seem to be saying that all of us "naysayers" (those who hesitate to throw our whole hearted support behind the republican leadership) are horrible deviants. I am very sorry to hear that from you.

I find it very sad to see you so openly filled with contempt and disrespect (and from your posts, I would venture to say hatred) for those who fail to see things the way you do. I don�t understand people like you who, to quote the movie The American President, �Claim they love America but clearly can�t stand Americans.� What do you think makes so many middle eastern terrorists carry out their gross crimes against the western world? They come from cultures that have grown to hate the West, especially or country, for whatever various reasons. Hatred has bred blindness. Blindness has, in turn, bred evil.

All of us in this country are simply different people who think differently, even in great times of crisis and tragedy. As Americans, that is our privilege . And we are all lucky enough to live in a democracy where we are able to question our leaders and have a chance to remove them from office if we so desire. I would bet everything I had that President Bush would agree with me. For while I don't understand his policies and views most of the time and I don't particularly wish him to be my president, I don't doubt for a SECOND that President Bush loves this country and its people (even people like me, who don't agree with him)in an incredible and very admirable way, and subsequently, I also don't doubt at all that he will do whatever he believes is best for all of us who live in this great nation.

All right, that's enough for now. There is just too much to say. I find myself doubting so much of what's around me these days. What I do know is that I love this country more than I ever, ever knew and I hope against all hope that our elected leaders (both democrat AND republican) carry us through this horrible time without making mistakes that can't be taken back or fixed or causing too much bloodshed.

May justice be sought for vengeful hearts and peace prevail at the same time.

-rockstar

N&B&T
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:53 AM
I couldn't agree with you more! And not only for the idealistic reasons you have mentioned, but for more practical ones: I don't think we will succeed if we proceed unilaterally, and not only that, we stand a very good chance of making things much worse.

Policy of Truth
Sep. 24, 2001, 11:09 AM
Hobson, please do not assume that I want to carpet bomb Afghanistan. I never said it and after re-reading my post, I never implied it.

I do not like killing. I hope special forces can "smoke them out of their holes" so that no Afghanis have to suffer for one radical group's beliefs.

Personally, I'd like for the world to empower the Afghani resistance so that they can resume living peacfully among each other without the Taliban's rule. I also want the terrorists to get the message that we will not tolorate their crimes against humanity...ANYWHERE! That, however, does not mean I want these people to die! On first instinct, I want to rip these people to shreds. Once that anger disperses, I want these a$$holes captured and kept prisoner for the rest of their miserable lives.

As much as I hate what they did, I still hate the death penalty more. (I know...I'm not living up to the standards of my party).

Trust me, many Christians struggle with what God wants us to do. However, that doesn't mean we should do nothing while terrorists instill fear of freedom in our hearts and minds.

Just curious, Hobson, what would you do if you had the power to make the policy? Please understand, I'm not being sarcastic...I honestly want to know.

Whistlejacket
Sep. 24, 2001, 11:18 AM
NP Fisher

You summarized wonderfully what I was trying to say! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Midge
Sep. 24, 2001, 11:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pacificsolo:

Personally, I'd like for the world to empower the Afghani resistance so that they can resume living peacfully among each other without the Taliban's rule. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, supporting Afghan rebels is what brought us to this sorry state.

jl
Sep. 24, 2001, 11:38 AM
I have been struggling with the following question since 9/11/01 and have not been able to come up with an answer.
If one purports to be a good christian, how does one ever justify breaking the commandment - thou shall not kill?
If you agree that it's o.k. to kill in self-defense-is it a given that you will be forgiven by God or must you repent your actions?
Not trying to incite a riot just very curious

hobson
Sep. 24, 2001, 11:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pacificsolo:
As for you, Hobson, I'm sorry that you cannot understand what Christians believe. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There are millions of Christians, all of whom believe something different. I understand and like a lot of Christians, others are mystifying to me, and some Christians make me want to run the other way. I have little in common with people who go on and on about how much they love God, condemn others who use God's name to kill, and in the same breath declare that God wants them to kill in return, and come up with endless rationalizations about how in CERTAIN cases, particularly when we don't like those other people, killing for God is a good thing.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>...you resist the idea of fighting for that freedom. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Beg your pardon? The Taliban is not about to become our government, but the way we choose to react may certainly curtail many of the freedoms we take for granted. In any case, are you suggesting, despite my many statements to the contrary, that I believe we ought to do nothing in response to the attacks?

Based on other points in your post, pacificsolo, I don't think we're really that far apart in our respective approaches to this particular event.

hobson
Sep. 24, 2001, 12:20 PM
To answer your question, pacificsolo, what would I do if I could make policy?

I'd round up all the middle east/central asia area specialists I could get on short notice, along with experts on terrorism and American foreign policy. I'd get them in a room with the US military guys, and we'd discuss options and potential ramifications. We'd talk about why it happened, who we think did it, what we already know about them. Then we talk about the different ways we could respond, and ask of each option - would it make the problem worse, ultimately? What would it do to existing infrastructure? Would the degree of devastation create the social conditions to strengthen the taleban and the terrorist network? What does it mean to "smoke 'em out of their holes" in terms of the loss of American life? What about the millions of land mines sitting in Afghanistan? How many US soldiers are going to get blown up by them? Could a small group of special operatives realistically find this organization? If so, how? How long would it take?...and so on. I would work with this crew to develop a plan that would minimize destruction and death, maximize international cooperation, and maximize the prospects for democracy in Afghanistan. I would urge Americans to get educated about our role in the world, a paradox of peacemaker and lumbering hungry giant. I would further want to re-evaluate US foreign policy and ask what kind of role it's played in the intensification of anti-US terrorist attacks. Then take a bunch of heat from the multinationals who have benefitted from said policy. Then a painful debate on the merits of protecting financial interests abroad vs protecting Americans at home. Then I get a huge headache, and wish I didn't have to make so many difficult decisions, and take off for a long trail ride.

Does that answer the question?

M. O'Connor
Sep. 24, 2001, 12:50 PM
teach me to go away from the boards for a few days--there is so much intelligent conversation going on here that I can't even begin to catch up, let alone keep up.

And to think that in some corners, horse people are accused of being one-dimensional....not this corner, obviously!

Policy of Truth
Sep. 24, 2001, 01:26 PM
I was under the impression that the Afghani resistance to the Taliban is who we want to be in power...I must have missed something.

I admit I have not been keeping up with that country's issues for some time, but after watching a very interesting report on MSNBC by the daughter of an Afghani man, I just believed we were on the same side as the resistance against the Taliban.

Obviously, you know something different, and I am eager to learn, so please help me out!

Hobson, I am beyond words...we aren't as far apart as I thought /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

hobson
Sep. 24, 2001, 01:46 PM
Pacificsolo, stranger things have happened. Once pt and I agreed about something.

The reason people are leery of aiding resistance groups is that this is precisely the strategy that helped bring the Taleban to power in the first place. This is a quote from a Pentagon employee friend of David Corn's, and I think this military guy sums it up nicely:

"The night of the attacks I saw Bud McFarland [who was a national security adviser to President Reagan] being interviewed. I wanted to reach through the TV and choke the living [censored by hobson] out of that [censored by hobson], after his Afghan mujahadeen buddies tried to blow up my ass that day. Whatever weenie was interviewing him asked for his expert views on international terrorism, but never had the balls to ask what his evaluation was now of the 1980s policy of supporting those psychos in order to stick it to the Soviets. I knew that idiocy would produce a blowback, but I never dreamed it would be this monstrous."

(hobson again) In the 80's who thought to ask whether helping a band of right-wing lunatics would lead to the loss of thousands of lives in 2001? I mean, they were right-wing and that's what was important. I think it's appropriate now to be careful of supporting resistance movements for the same reason: will these guys come to power, mature as leaders and blow up 15,000 americans in 2019?

Midge
Sep. 24, 2001, 01:51 PM
Pacificsolo, we assisted Afghan rebels against The Soviet Union when they invaded Afghanistan. One of those rebel leaders was Osama Bin Laden. Almost all of Al-Qaeda were participants in the rebellion. Essentially, we created terrorists who became 'unemployed' when the rebellion succeeded, which sent them looking for other fights and created the vaccuum into which the Taliban stepped.

DMK
Sep. 24, 2001, 01:57 PM
Afghan Recent History in 60 words or less...

Once upon a time there was a country that was a little pile of rock that abutted a BIG communist country (USSR). This was back during the Cold War (a different type of war altogether) when all the countries took sides. Occasionally when one of them didn't choose a side, either the USSR or the big capitalist country (USA) would throw large sums of aid and/or weapons at the country to woo them to their side. They usually did this when it would really irritate the other country.

For various reasons, none very clear to most Russian citizens today, the Soviet Government decided to invade the little rock country. Apparently someone felt this would more clearly show them the virtues of communism. Apparently the little rock people felt differently. The USA was righteously indignant. So indignant we chose to not go to the 1980 Olympics in Moscow, as a show of our support how we would not stand for the invasion of the little rock country and its plucky rock people.

In a further show of support for the indignant rock people the USA funded and trained the insurgent rebel forces that were trying to overthrow the Evil Communist Invaders. One of the people that received that money and helped train the Rock Rebels was a certain wealthy Saudi citizen who might be on the FBI's most wanted list.

After 10 years of bombing the little rock country back into the stone ages (although it hadn't actually progressed very far out of the stone ages before that), the USSR gave up trying to show the rock people the virtues of communism and decided that it better spend some time telling it's own citizens why communism was a good thing (too little, too late, as it turned out).

As they left the country, there was no infrastructure, no government and no system of order. There still isn't today. What there was, was a bunch of well trained fighting forces and a strong desire to not be invaded by any country or force that seeks to bomb you or take your right to your religion away from you.

In the aftermath, the Taliban (which basically means "religious clerics") became more or less the only power around. Their power derives from these original rebel forces, trained and supported by Osama bin Laden, funded by the USA.

And that, my children, is the last 30 years of Afghan History and Warfare in 60 (or more) words...

Ann
Sep. 24, 2001, 02:11 PM
After skimming through this thread(I just didn't have time for some of the really long ones), what Hobson, DMK and Hey You Nags have to say makes the most sense to me (also liked some of the responses from Kellybird and Palomino19.)

It seems that those with opposing viewpoints insist on painting them as being ridiculous, foolish peaceniks. But one of the things I hear them repeatedly say is simply that military action should be tempered with the use of more humanitarian methods to deal with the situation.

I guess it's easier to think of points of view in shades of black and white (Democrat/Republican, for President Bush/Against President Bush (if you say anything against his speech patterns it must mean you don't support the President), for the Afghanis/Against the Afghanis) but only the extremists who are most fanatical think in those terms.

The opinions of most reasonable people fall within a spectrum of shades of gray. If we respect this perhaps we can find some kind of middle ground for agreement.

Magnolia
Sep. 24, 2001, 02:20 PM
I read in the paper that in exchange for Bin Laden, Afghanistan wants troops out of the Middle East, and for us to stop giving Isreal $ to persecute Palestinians. Until we do this, terror will continue.
Why do we support Isreal and give them 3 billion dollars a year? Why do we have troops in the Middle East anyhow? It is a volatile region, made even more so by our presence.
I move we get our man, stop sending tax $$$ to Isreal, bring our troops home, and vote against them with our pocketbooks. Heck, I'd be willing to drill the ANWR if it meant none of our men and women had to die.
And, to the person that suggested us pacifists go over with a bag of groceries, well, I'd be first in line to go if I was given a few billion dollars worth of groceries, medicine, and technology to help improve these people's lives.

Ride it Like You Stole It...

N&B&T
Sep. 24, 2001, 02:56 PM
The Taleban today seized 1400 tons of food from the UN World Food Program.

(www.google.com (http://www.google.com) to news source list to yahoo.com or bbc)

Beans
Sep. 24, 2001, 03:02 PM
Nice tirade but I wouldn't waste the emotion to hate those of the likes who criticize the pronounciation of words in what was one of the best speeches, political or otherwise, delivered in a long long time.

Sad but speaks to your life that it took the WTC, Pentagon and downed plane in PA to make your realize that you love this country very, very much.

Regarding what goes on in WASH DC - well the majority of the people in this country feel we would all be better off if we cleaned house their, took you egomaniacs OUT OF THE BELTWAY and told you to get a REAL JOB for a couple of years. POLITICIANS AND THEIR LITTLE PILOT FISH MAKE THE WORST LEADERS!!! JMHO - but then again I've had to make a living the old fashioned way - in the PRIVATE SECTOR!!!

Midge
Sep. 24, 2001, 03:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by magnolia:
Why do we support Isreal and give them 3 billion dollars a year? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because without us, there would not be an Israel.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Why do we have troops in the Middle East anyhow? It is a volatile region, made even more so by our presence.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, made less so by our presence. Not that I think we should be sticking our secular noses into everyone else's business, but it would certainly be likely the entire region would become fundementalist, to the detriment of most of the people who live there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I move we get our man, stop sending tax $$$ to Isreal, bring our troops home, and vote against them with our pocketbooks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Life the way we know it would be so amazingly different for average Americans if we left the Mid-east, it would be astonishing to think about. And not that the 'capture' of one man would change anything in the region or bring to justice all of those responsible.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Heck, I'd be willing to drill the ANWR if it meant none of our men and women had to die.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not enough oil there to really even get hepped up about, which is why I am always surprised people actually want to drill there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And, to the person that suggested us pacifists go over with a bag of groceries, well, I'd be first in line to go if I was given a few billion dollars worth of groceries, medicine, and technology to help improve these people's lives.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, we cannot look at such a completely different culture through American eyes. Many of the hijackers lived amongst us for years, made a great living off the American economy and left behind many of their Muslim tenets while blending with us. However, when the call came to kill themselves and take 6000 innocent people with them, they answered the call. That type of mentality will not be changed by a couple loaves of bread and a laptop (lack of electricity being another issue).

N&B&T
Sep. 24, 2001, 03:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IlonaE:

Regarding what goes on in WASH DC - well the majority of the people in this country feel we would all be better off if we cleaned house their, took you egomaniacs OUT OF THE BELTWAY and told you to get a REAL JOB for a couple of years. POLITICIANS AND THEIR LITTLE PILOT FISH MAKE THE WORST LEADERS!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IlonaE, wasn't the president elected through our political system?

HeyYouNags
Sep. 24, 2001, 03:50 PM
Lordy, IlonaE, every time I read one of your posts, I find myself blinking my eyes, lest some spittle fly out of the screen and into my face. Settle down, will ya? We were having such a nice discussion here... And please don't take it upon yourself to speak for the majority of the country.

I live outside the Beltway (umm, not "out of the Beltway", since that's a highway!) I have worked for the federal government. I can't begin to tell you how tiresome the bashing of government employees sounds. Government employees are such a convenient target for people like you. Having seen the stuff the private sector would like to foist off on the unsuspecting public during my tenure at the FDA, I sure as heck wouldn't want to see it privatized. (Of course, I didn't hold a "real job", huh?) And having worked in the private sector as well, I honestly don't see any difference between federal and private employees. Some are good, some are not, and in roughly equal proportions.

And silly me for following your very tangential tangent. You started ragging on Rockstar for working for the govt., and I suspect she actually works for a non-profit! (Uhh, that would be a non-government job...)

Oh, and have you noticed that both sides of the political aisle are now saying that airport security needs to be a federal responsibility, to the tune of about 3 billion dollars? The private sector pays airline security personnel so badly that they can't train and retain employees. And the privatized airline industry can't afford to upgrade the program. What's up with that?

Heidi
Sep. 24, 2001, 03:57 PM
Go out and get a real job, willya?

I understand the frustration HYN, I myself have resorted to swaddling my head in gauze lest I injure my fragile and unpatriotic brain when I hit it against the computer screen in bafflement.

SLW
Sep. 24, 2001, 05:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NP Fisher:
The Taleban today seized 1400 tons of food from the UN World Food Program.

(http://www.google.com to news source list to yahoo.com or bbc)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>>>

And the *precious Taliban Clerics* aren't done yet.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34992,00.html

I have just read this thread from start to finish. I don't see how the murders of over 6,000 unarmed American citizens is a "gray" area. <<Baymare wrote: In real life, issues this big and complex just cannot be broken down into black and white, right and wrong. It's not good guys, bad guys, Republicans, Democrats, terrorists, innocents. Morally speaking, it's all grey area, and we have to be so careful and so clear in how we respond. We are all the same species, after all.>> To call it less than premeditated murder is like saying 14.2 hand "Stroller" could *kinda jump big fences*.

I hope GWB gets all our military forces in place and stops the Taliban dead in their tracks. Bless our troops, their families and our country.

SLW

Heidi
Sep. 24, 2001, 05:48 PM
SLW, I am certain that Baymare did not intend her observations to be interpreted as support for the Talibans and the murder of 6,000 innocent Americans. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

If I may be explicit on her behalf, no one is denying that the murderous terrorist attack on Americans is anything but horrific and worthy of some sort of retaliatory response. There hasn't been a singular post on this thread which advocates otherwise.

DMK
Sep. 24, 2001, 06:03 PM
To me there are still grey areas...

For me, this whole issue of Pakistan is a grey area. I worry that if/when we use Pakistan military bases (or any place in the country) to launch strikes/operations against the Taliban, Al Qa'edah and bin Laden, we run the risk of destabilizing the current Pakistan government. I worry that the Pakistan pro-Taliban insurgents could seize control of the government - by all accounts they are well entrenched in the military and intelligence sectors. A violently anti-american group, who would happily fund anti-american terrorist activities and would control a country that has nuclear weapons. This would raise the stakes considerably, in my opinion.

Another grey area for me is Syria, Saudia Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. All of these countries are allies or at least non-hostile to America. All have terrorist cells (non-sanctioned) within their countries. All battle a strongly anti-american fundamentalist faction within their country. But to get at these terroris cells, we will need the aid and information of local law officials. We will run the risk of creating an enviroment rife for coup and power struggles if we handle it less than perfectly. The room for error on our part is miniscule. Again, I worry about the repercussions if we fail.

It's not that I don't think our government is keenly aware of these issues. In fact Colin Powell is probably one of the best people to be Secretary of State at this time. It's just that we are on a very shaky and tenuous path at this moment in our history. We have no choice but to be on this path - the events of September 11 have clearly shown us that, but that makes it no less dangerous...

So those are the "grey" things that keep me up at night. But yes, I would lead the pack in wishing it was as simple as going in and getting our man, and knowing that after we did, all was right in our world.

And Heidi - I do like your idea of swathing your head. It would certainly cut down on the advil /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Snowbird
Sep. 24, 2001, 07:24 PM
If you are afraid that the bully next door will damage your property or hurt you and you make excuses to try an be sympathetic is it because you really care or because you hope that if he thinks you care he will skip your house and take on a neighbor.

There will always be excuses and reasons for evil behavior. That is so long as we are not held responsible for our actions. Blame the economy, blame a cruel father, blame an indifferent mother, blame the weather, blame the twinkies suger reaction, blame everyone and everything that caused the bad behavior but the person and you don't help them, you encourage them that they have no control. Remember the wife beaters who say it was the wife's fault because she got them angry.

The truth is that all these "grey" tone excuses are just that and it doesn't change the facts. Lots of people came from bad backgrounds and didn't become serial killers. Many believe and practice their religion under Islam and are good neighbors. If I remember correctly Mohammed Ali refused to be a soldier in the army because Islam made him a pacifist. So how do we then blame Islam for murderers?

When people have been left uneducated, when they have been pummeled and stripped of their own humanity yes! they are victims and defenseless. Would they be willing to die so their children can be free, I'll bet on it.

The fact is there is no moral excuse for sociopathic behavior. This BB has gone off into abstract tangents totally unrelated to the issue or the possible solutions.

No one is suggesting that we bomb Afghanistan into oblivion our President has taken the first step, follow the money trail. We'll see if we can dry up the money and how will they survive. Will we drive them out of their holes?

If it doesn't work we take the next steps. Our President said this war would be like no other war. No reason yet not to believe him, no reason to suspect Christians will have a war with Islam.

The simple fact is that those fundamentalists who follow Bin Laden really believe that our life style defiles the earth so that Allah will not look kindly on their world. They really believe that women must not be educated. They really believe that women should never be seen by anyone.

They believe that our mere existence is a polution of the world Allah wants them to provide. They really believe that in order for Allah to be satisifed and bless their lives they are obligated to remove all life styles but theirs from the face of the earth.

In order to comply with what they believe they will sterilze the earth with bacterial warfare. They will sterilize the world with atomic warfare and Allah will save them because they are pure.

Adolph Hitler felt the same way. Except in his case it was the Aryan nation and not Islam. Hitler believed that we are all mongrels of the world that we are pollution of the world. Anyone who was not pure Aryan was an insult to God.

At that time we could not believe that someone could persuade enough people of such nonsense and then he owned Europe. Even then we took the blame we said we had been too harsh after the first World War so we appeased and we collaborated and we capitulated until we saw all the final horror.

We did not create the state of Israel, it was Great Britain who owned Palestine and after their experience with Adolph and the exposure of the extermination camps the world knew there had to be a place where Jews would always be safe. We owed them that because of the 6 million who had died in an attempt to exterminate them from this world.

My goodness, sssurely we owed the Jews that much, we do more for the endangered species of animals and flora. We let Califormia burn to save some dumb little desert rat. We prevent construction here to save a mud turtle. We spend millions to repopulate the world with other species of animal and surely we owed at least that to the Jews who died for no reason except Hitler decided they were a pollutant.

Do not ever be tricked into believing that if there was no Isreal we would all be safe. These people would still consider us the infidels and the reason that Allah does not bless them. Isreal has proved that the desert can bloom again. We have proved that people thrive on freedom and justice. We are both equally guilty of demeaning their personal view of Allah.

[This message was edited by Snowbird on Sep. 24, 2001 at 10:33 PM.]

M. O'Connor
Sep. 24, 2001, 07:33 PM
DMK, you have hit the nail on the head with that one.

It is all very well to want to fix things, and quite virtuous to be aware that we are likely in a predicament that we share historical responsibility for creating...but on the other hand, we can't very well sit back and wait till they [insert next most unimaginable heinous act of violence here]. In the larger scheme of things they have upped the ante to a point where we have more to gain by going after them than by sitting back and waiting for the next shoe to drop. It would be great if we could avoid the "us or them" scenario in some way...but they have already declared thier intentions. Now we must follow through, wherever that course may take us.

DMK
Sep. 24, 2001, 07:54 PM
No, Snowbird, insofar as you may be referring to my post, I do not believe those grey things are called fear. I believe most informed people would call them "prudence". Nor are they "excuses". They are an understanding of the laws of unintended consequences. They are everything that sits outside the blinkers.

Foreign policy that is made with blinkers on can and will cost lives. Such foreign policy is referred to as "folly" (try Barbara Tuchman sometime - she has this "folly" thing down pat).

As M.O'Connor said, not acting when the ante is so high is also not an option, and is its own sort of folly. But this does not mean that you engage without full knowledge, planning, and options.

And it would behoove people in this country to understand that actions (and the failure to act) have consequences. Some of these consequences may gravely affect us in the future. If we are extraordinarily clever, gifted and lucky, we will limit the number of such consequences.

How can facing reality be called fear? How could one think that by understanding and accepting the possible ramifications of our actions we are looking for excuses? That defies logic, in my mind. Have I somehow failed to understand what you are trying to say, or is that what you meant?

SLW
Sep. 24, 2001, 08:13 PM
DMK- Thanks for sharing your gray areas. Your thoughts have prompted me to go read more about Pakistan.

Heidi- I am also certain I did not imply Baymare supported the Taliban.

Happy riding,
SLW

Duffy
Sep. 24, 2001, 08:30 PM
OMG, DMK is so d###ed insightful! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I am pleased and proud to call you my friend. Isn't this kumbaya thing great now...This from a NOT tree-hugging liberal...

What can I say...It's late and I'm punchy.

Heidi
Sep. 24, 2001, 08:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>This from a NOT tree-hugging liberal... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't know about that Duffy, I saw you eye-ing the cherry tree in my front yard. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Forget the presidency, DMK for Prime Minister!

I hadn't equated the 'grey area' as fear, either. Rather the understanding, historical perspective, context, and honesty that I hope Dubya, and Chretien by 'fraternal' association, exercises when determining the best course of action.

The black and white: I wouldn't hesitate to cheer should Osama bin Laden and his terrorist henchmen be dragged through the streets of Kabul to their deaths. The grey: the Taliban were trained and propped up by the American government; the majority of the Afghani people are utterly powerless and struggle daily to feed themselves and their children.

The Afghani people supported the Taliban in the mistaken belief that their lives, post war with Russia, would improve. They are now destitute and hopeless; and the Taliban wouldn't hesitate to sacrifice the entirety of the Afghani population in the jihad against the American people.

Let's absolutely rid the world of the terrorists responsible - let's not take out a continent in the process under the mistaken conceit that we in the west are right and everyone else wrong.

Snowbird
Sep. 24, 2001, 09:38 PM
There is no plan to destroy anyone but the terrorists. We don't want to occupy Afghanistan and the plans so far on the table are not only intelligent but with luck can effectively be the whole mission.

Our army isn't large enough anymore for an old fashioned war. There is little doubt we will when we get the proper intelligence information drop our Delta troops from a plaane they will go in and clean out wherever the terrorists are hiding.

But, to blame this all on economics and our previous indescretions is futile and unnecessary at this point in time. I just finished listening to interviews from Afghanistan the confirm what I said earlier.

All the rest is from our perspective but from the perspective of the so-called terrorists they really believe the we are a pollutant because of our life style and belief. They really believe that Allah will bless them all with an end to their problems and prosperity if we are all dead.

Bin Laden really believes that Saudi Arabia is corrupted just because we are there, we do not follow his laws so we are infidels poisoning his world.

It's not about money or food or even power and politics. To them exterminating us is not different than exterminating your house from roaches.

That is reality! The people in their grip are pawns in a game confused because they want to be good and earn the love of Allah.

starlady
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:28 PM
I honestly tried to stay out of this one, but...

Forget the history of the Middle East, there's a
simpler reason that the US should not drop its
support of Israel. It would simply be a be a lousy rotten lowdown thing to do. Israel has been a loyal friend and ally to the US for our entire history. There has never been a time when
Americans were not welcome in Israel--and when
the 6th Fleet was not welcome in Haifa!. We have
gone along with American efforts on the peace
process--it was Arafat who walked out. In the Gulf War we sat patiently and let the Iraqis shoot missles at us and didn't retaliate, because Bush Sr. asked us to (and that was no fun at all!).

We're your friends. It's as simple as that. And
you don't turn your back on your friends to please
you enemies. Or at least we didn't used to in
Virginia.....

--s.

jparkes
Sep. 24, 2001, 10:54 PM
It would be nice to read how things are going over there.
Could you shed some light on the situation since you are over there?
What do the people of your region think should be done? How's your country handling this?

starlady
Sep. 25, 2001, 12:30 AM
Israel was hit pretty hard by the attacks,
because so many Israelis have connections in NY.
I know about 8 to 10 people here who lost
relatives or close friends in the WTC or on the
planes. So there is great grief and anger.
No one knows what is going to happen, and on
the "always fighting the last war" principle
people are running to get their gas masks
updated (for the benefit of the youngsters, in
the last Gulf War everyone had gas masks for
fear of SoDamn Insane's chemical weapons. Gas
masks are disgusting).

What do we think should be done? Lordy, we've been trying to find a way of stopping terrorists
without killing innocent bystanders for years! It
is not that easy! But I gotta confess that we
(or at least a lot of people I know, I'm not
talking for the foreign office here) are a little
cynical about this big coalition that's getting
put together. I mean Syria and Iran are going to
fight terrorism? When my horse guards the carrot
sack, guys.

So that's the postcard from the middle east. we
now return to the usually scheduled squabbling.

--s.

M. O'Connor
Sep. 25, 2001, 03:48 AM
Snowbird, just one problem resulting from the creation of the state of Israel is the generations of displaced Palestinians that the British failed to consult or to consider.

Stubborn problems persist with our friend Israel, such as the propensity of groups of its "settlers" to continue to develop areas of the West Bank that have been designated as Palestinian without consulting or even considering the Palestinians, and then to protest loudly when these are threatened...after the fact, of course they are reluctant to give up these settlements...at the moment, it is Sharon who is walking away, much to the consternation of his American "friends."

Yes, starlady is quite likely to be able to give us a firsthand look at what our lives are about to become--gas masks, fear of attack, mistrust of our global neighbors, a period of non-optional national service for every citizen, and no alternative but to arm up and lash out at any percieved threat before it strikes at us.

N&B&T
Sep. 25, 2001, 04:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:

I worry that if/when we use Pakistan military bases (or any place in the country) to launch strikes/operations against the Taliban, Al Qa'edah and bin Laden, we run the risk of destabilizing the current Pakistan government. I worry that the Pakistan pro-Taliban insurgents could seize control of the government - by all accounts they are well entrenched in the military and intelligence sectors. A violently anti-american group, who would happily fund anti-american terrorist activities and would control a country that has nuclear weapons. This would raise the stakes considerably, in my opinion.

Another grey area for me is Syria, Saudia Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. All of these countries are allies or at least non-hostile to America. All have terrorist cells (non-sanctioned) within their countries. All battle a strongly anti-american fundamentalist faction within their country. But to get at these terroris cells, we will need the aid and information of local law officials. We will run the risk of creating an enviroment rife for coup and power struggles if we handle it less than perfectly. The room for error on our part is miniscule. Again, I worry about the repercussions if we fail.

It's not that I don't think our government is keenly aware of these issues. In fact Colin Powell is probably one of the best people to be Secretary of State at this time. It's just that we are on a very shaky and tenuous path at this moment in our history. We have no choice but to be on this path - the events of September 11 have clearly shown us that, but that makes it no less dangerous...

So those are the ... things that keep me up at night. But yes, I would lead the pack in wishing it was as simple as going in and getting our man, and knowing that after we did, all was right in our world...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

BINGO!!! And that's just the beginning, or could be...

N&B&T
Sep. 25, 2001, 04:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:
...I do not believe those grey things are called fear. I believe most informed people would call them "prudence". Nor are they "excuses". They are an understanding of the laws of unintended consequences...

Foreign policy that is made with blinkers on can and will cost lives. Such foreign policy is referred to as "folly"...

As M.O'Connor said, not acting when the ante is so high is also not an option, and is its own sort of folly. But this does not mean that you engage without full knowledge, planning, and options.

And it would behoove people in this country to understand that actions (and the failure to act) have consequences. Some of these consequences may gravely affect us in the future. If we are extraordinarily clever, gifted and lucky, we will limit the number of such consequences.

How can facing reality be called fear? How could one think that by understanding and accepting the possible ramifications of our actions we are looking for excuses?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Double bingo!!!

Louise
Sep. 25, 2001, 04:46 AM
that DMK has not already said better? So, I won't even try. Thank you DMK.

N&B&T
Sep. 25, 2001, 04:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SLW:
DMK- Thanks for sharing your gray areas. Your thoughts have prompted me to go read more about Pakistan.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

With all due respect for DMK's knowledge of many topics, and her ability to concisely and calmly explain her thinking--the information leading to her posts is available to all of us via the internet. Destabilization of the Pakistani government and its potentially dire consequences was mentioned VERY early on, and it's not too difficult to extrapolate from there.

OF COURSE we must respond! OF COURSE bombing Afghanistan to smithereens is not the correct response! It has been pretty clear for a while that the majority of people posting here share these two views. So, why in the world has it taken thirteen pages of "dialog", including several of non-substantive, irrelevant, personal attacks, to BEGIN to explore what we all agree on? We are far better served spending our energy educating ourselves about the history and issues surrounding the tragedy (I know many of you already are--I am speaking for those, including myself, who were woefully ignorant before the attack.)

If people need to get excited about something, I suggest they think about the grounding of crop-dusting planes and the reason for it. That's if the prospect of a MAJOR world conflict doesn't upset you more than party politics.

M. O'Connor
Sep. 25, 2001, 05:20 AM
Sept 24 NY Times-Networks Move to Revive Foreign News (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/24/business/media/24TUBE.html)

Seems we Americans have been more interested in entertainment news than foreign policy--in this case ignorance has not proven to be bliss, and networks along with the rest of us have been scrambling in recent days to catch up on our world politics....

Canter
Sep. 25, 2001, 05:27 AM
Yet another interesting article - I had never realized this ...

Magnolia
Sep. 25, 2001, 05:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Let's absolutely rid the world of the terrorists responsible - let's not take out a continent in the process under the mistaken conceit that we in the west are right and everyone else wrong.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you Heidi, well said. We in the west do have a conceit and it is often times very wrong. In all honesty, the terrorists are probably acting out not so much in an attempt to "save Islam from infidels", but to save their culture from slowly being Americanized (I believe americanization brings both good and bad to societies). Which, this still does not make the killing of 6000 people acceptable, but it is almost like a desperate attempt in the last hours to save their culture from becoming like the America that they find morally deplorable. I can honestly understand why these people did what they did. However, they should have brought their concerns to the table in a less violent way, but then again, would we have even listened?

Ride it Like You Stole It...

Beans
Sep. 25, 2001, 06:24 AM
What was the point of your post? I don't spit at the screen - what a rude comment and then you step back and say how wonderful you are. The good people in public service don't have to defend themselves and are the FIRST to step forward and point out the fact that our government is TOO FAT. To defend the fact that we TWICE as many people employed in the Public sector than we need to get the job done?? Some efforts aren't just duplicated, triplicated, etc. etc. etc.

If we should have government oversight it SHOULD be for security at airports - as we've come to realize our airspace is critical to OUR SAFETY.

This thread started - and I repeat myself - with sophomoric comments on Bush's accent. I suppose these are the type of people who start laughing when they hear a horrible story - a reaction I've never understood. In the comment about accents - these people making a sweeping insult to those who live in the south or southwest but why argue details. I'm sure these gals have perfect diction and superior oratory skills - RIGHT!

N&B&T
Sep. 25, 2001, 06:25 AM
The following article deals with the "Islamic" regime instituted by the Taleban.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,7-2001325483,00.html

And from what I have read, this article has omitted a few things.

I'm not sure what grievance against Buddhist culture the Taleban has.

I'm not sure American/Western policies have anything to do with the actions outlined in the above article.

Edited to be sure to mention that I do NOT believe this reflects Islam or Islamic culture in general.

[This message was edited by NP Fisher on Sep. 25, 2001 at 09:35 AM.]

jparkes
Sep. 25, 2001, 06:50 AM
"SoDamn Insane"... I love it! True to those words indeed!
As for you, I hope you are in a safe area where you can find shelter and peace if all hell breaks loose.
As for what I've been reading on other boards, it appears that there is action already taking place. Not by the US, but by groups not supported by anyone.
Peace be with you...and your horse!

DMK
Sep. 25, 2001, 06:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
There is no plan to destroy anyone but the terrorists. We don't want to occupy Afghanistan and the plans so far on the table are not only intelligent but with luck can effectively be the whole mission.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can only surmise that you did not read what I wrote. I am not now, nor have I in the past, wasted a moment's worth of brain cells on the possibility of our impending invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. It has never been an option we have considered. To sum up concisely... No duh... That is NOT where the danger lies.

And quite frankly, I am less worried about killing innocent citizens in countries sponsoring terrorism than I am in creating a set of foreign policy circumstances that could lead to more loss of lives in THIS country. However, please don't interpret this to mean that I want to go forth like Rambo, with a complete disregard for these lives, it's just that I am human, and my family, friends, countrymen and allies are instinctively who I want to protect first.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>But, to blame this all on economics and our previous indescretions is futile and unnecessary at this point in time. I just finished listening to interviews from Afghanistan the confirm what I said earlier.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If by some incredible feat you thought we could jump in our little time machine, and somehow change things, may I take this moment to say that is not a delusion I shared. But to not heed the lessons of the past... Is this what you were trying to say? I confess to total shock, if for no other reason than you spend a lot of time on this board telling us how grand and glorious the past used to be.

No, we cannot change that which has already happened. Whoever is to blame, what has come to pass, has come to pass. But it is not overstating the obvious to say that those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.

starlady, I agree - we cannot abandon our friends and allies - that is simply not an option. And, I have to say I have a whole new appreciation of the predicament Israel is in, as it relates to making a necessary concession, and worrying that it may be misinterpreted as a concession wrung out of a terrorist attack. I thought I understood that tricky path before, but I have a much more personal appreciation for it today.

That being said, I would honestly hope that Arafat and Sharon would spend 30 minutes together every week, even if the topic was no more enlightening than how incredibly "weather-like" the weather was today. And I wish that development on the West Bank would stop. I can see where any other actions would appear to be dangerous precedent to unworthy concessions, but these two actions would be a small slap in the face of terrorism. And they would have to come from Israel and Arafat. If any dictate came from the US or the UN, it would not serve the same purpose.

NP Fisher - yes, the thing is, that I was not particularly well-versed in the foreign policy of Pakistan. I have a pretty good base of knowledge about some of the older events (partition, Kashmir, etc.), but most of what I have written here has been learned in the last few weeks. It doesn't get spoon fed to you by the media (to M.O'C's point about a declining foreign desk), but there are sources that have invested in foreign correspondents - you just have to know where to find them.

And I also recommend www.janes.com (http://www.janes.com) - another great source of information, and not from an american perspective, which provides some balance.

DMK
Sep. 25, 2001, 07:04 AM
NP Fisher, I believe when I was listening to reports about the impending destruction of the buddhas (earlier this year?), that the Taliban had no specific issues with buddhism, merely with ANY religion that was not theirs.

hobson
Sep. 25, 2001, 07:35 AM
I suspect that even as we argue, debate, discuss and lob insults about how the US should proceed in this situation, things are already happening that we will never know about. I would bet that there are already military guys swarming in and around Afghanistan hunting for Bin Laden and his lackeys.

The Washintgon Post just ran a story about the Bush Administration's plans to keep information about the retaliation effort firmly under wraps. Deliberate disinformation will be a part of the strategy.

I can see the point of it, but it already feels a little disorienting. There will be no way of knowing whether the news we hear about retaliatory developments is true or not, and we can further assume that a great many of the press releases from the State Department will be deliberate lies (this is not me "bashing" the Bush administration -it's information from the administration itself).

So, whatever happens - freezing terrorists' assets, covert military operations, discreet bombing, assassinations...it will be quite some years before we hear the full story.

Jair
Sep. 25, 2001, 08:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hobson:
The Washintgon Post just ran a story about the Bush Administration's plans to keep information about the retaliation effort firmly under wraps. Deliberate disinformation will be a part of the strategy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is something I find interesting and which has bothered me a bit since the start.

Why has so much information about the size/location/distribution of American troops been broadcast through the media? Same with interviews with high-ranking intelligence officers? IMO that sort of stuff should have been kept as confidential as possible - obviously there is always some "need to know" information for the general public, and of course there are always spies from the other side to find out the rest, but really, should so much of this been broadcast on CNN which just about anyone in any country can recieve?

Anyone else think this? I know there really is top secret stuff we don't know about, but should the rest of the plans been broadcast on TV? /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

DMK
Sep. 25, 2001, 08:56 AM
Well Jair, it's pretty hard to hide an aircraft carrier, even in the Atlantic /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But one thing to consider is that by giving a lot of attention to these basically "unhideable" actions (given the global reach of communications), is that they may (mis)direct attention away from other activities that the military may not wish to focus on too closely.

InWhyCee
Sep. 25, 2001, 09:01 AM
I can show you where to broadside joggers in NYC anytime, but you're on your own as far as the Prada boutique, because my J.Lo-booty wasn't designed for Prada... but my roommate would probably be more than willing to give you a tour of the menswear floor at Barneys. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

That said, Back to politics... This week's TIME has some very good background articles on the nature of Islam in the U.S. and abroad, also on Middle Eastern politics, FYI.

Sadly, I get the feeling their international journos have been saving up these stories for years, while Time, Newsweek, CNN et al plied us with "happy" news and so-called service articles (e.g. "Can Soccer Moms Save Social Security?" "How to Get Your Four-Year-Old Into College Now!" "Baby Boomers Bustin' Out!") /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[This message was edited by InWhyCee on Sep. 25, 2001 at 12:53 PM.]

pt
Sep. 25, 2001, 10:01 AM
What a thread!

I'm just back after 4 days at a horsemanship clinic. Got back on the big guy after 18 months of illness and accidents - no-one was discussing news or world terrorism, we were all more interesting in getting a "soft feel" (nothing to do with sex) and learning more about selves and horses and the interrelationship.

It was a lovely time out of time.

The world and its problems are still here, of course, but the mental and emotional break has left me feeling much more able to live in it without the depression of the prior week.

I recommend such a break highly.

Ann
Sep. 25, 2001, 10:09 AM
I have a confession to make--I too pronounce "terrorists" as "terra-ists". I think Bush and I are saying it correctly---it's the rest of you that have got it wrong... /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

AMom
Sep. 25, 2001, 10:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pt:
What a thread!

I'm just back after 4 days at a horsemanship clinic. Got back on the big guy after 18 months of illness and accidents - no-one was discussing news or world terrorism, we were all more interesting in getting a "soft feel" (nothing to do with sex) and learning more about selves and horses and the interrelationship.

It was a lovely time out of time.

The world and its problems are still here, of course, but the mental and emotional break has left me feeling much more able to live in it without the depression of the prior week.

I recommend such a break highly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

pt--I have been following this thread closely, and, I think, learning a lot in the process. But I haven't been moved to respond until now when your post really struck a chord with me. I know some people who are consumed to the point of near paralysis by the events of 9/11--I'm talking beyond the point of where I think the majority of the posters here are right now of contemplating, discussing, even arguing about this. The people I know are hardly able to function and deeply depressed... Your words about trying to get out and get some other perspectives whether it be by spending time with our horses or even just going to dinner are timely and I appreciate them!! Thank you!

(This is NOT to say I advocate going the other route and pretending nothing has happened! Also, this is not directed at the posters here AT ALL...I am sure we all know of someone out there who is taking this exceptionally hard and needs our help to cope.)

Brookes
Sep. 25, 2001, 10:51 AM
Pt and CWP, there's just something about the outside of a horse that's good for the inside of a woman!

Lions and Tigers and Bears, oh my!!

vineyridge
Sep. 25, 2001, 11:31 AM
But did it occur to y'all how much the Saudis could do to defuse the situation. The King is, after all, a descendant of Mohammed, and the hereditary Shariff of Islam's holiest sites.

If the Saudi gov't were to declare that the sort of terrorism that is being practiced is totally against the teachings of Mohammed and were to cut off access to the Haj sites to Afghanis and suspected terrorists (Papal Bull/excommunication equivalent), Islamic fundamentalists of the Taliban/Osama ben Laden stripe would be seriously affected, one would think. And it might also make the Pakistani street people think as well.

The Saudis won't do that, but they have today or yesterday withdrawn diplomatic recognition from the Taliban.

I've found that working with my horses, even if it's just hand grazing them, gives the only mental relief from the current world situation. They bring peace. They are peace.