"...The theory was that it would create a life of comfort and plenty, unencumbered by wicked capitalists screwing over the proletariat. The USSR instead had a system profoundly encumbered by stupid and corrupt bureaucrats who screwed over the proletariat through widespread incompetence and graft.
The one undeniable difference was that for all their faults and evilness, those wicked capitalists at least knew how to produce lots of stuff, good stuff...."
Oh come on Ogged, you think the other side is the only one to cruelly execute people? No, american soldiers never do that!
I really would agree that it's an evil that these anti-American terrorists are committing. But the situation isn't black and white, and while I still get upset reading about these things, it's nothing like righteous anger I feel. I feel we've lost the right to that.
O'Tool seems to me to be expressing a type of righteous anger. The emphasis on them being evil, and our need to finish killing the, while I acknowledge contains nothing explicitly about how we're Good, nevertheless carries that viewpoint. It's implicit therein: they=evil, us=need to kill, therefore (understood) us=good. I may be nitpicking here, but statements like this seem to me to be dangerous because they border on a carte blanche reasoning for killing. If the statement had been just a little more nuanced, say, if he had said we need to kill them for the greater sake of the Iraqi people, I wouldn't feel the way I do about it. I want there to be concrete, pragmatic reasons being discussed, not just vague and abstract moral terms.
One of the (many) tragedies of the Bush presidency is that it's given moral clarity a bad name.
Let's review the bidding, shall we?
A group that chooses to align itself with the people who purposely and with malice aforethought flew planeloads of innocent men, women and children into buildings overflowing with more of the same just chopped a guy's head off because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong passport. Oh, and then they bragged about it on the Internet.
Nuance has its place, Michael. In fact, without it, you get the Bush follies, which we see played out on our television screens just about every day. But when those of us who believe in a thoughtful and, yes, nuanced approach to policy-making get so lost in our exquisitely tended ethical gardens that we can no longer call evil by its right name, the American people consistently and with more than a little good sense tell us to go suck an egg.
Current world events (ie post 911) have made it far easier to decide which choice to make. Even if you hate W you have to admit he has been bold and successful.
The left has shown itself to be more stupid than anyone could have imagined. More blind than a Chamberlain. After WW1, Germany was supposed to disarm. Building full scale gliders was a big hobby in Germany because they were not allowed to build modern motorized planes.
Iraq after Gulf War 1 was supposed disarm too. If Saddam really had no bad weapons the sanctions would have been lifted 10 years ago.
The current Iraq war should have been fought 10 years ago. He should have been given a very accurate countdown clock. That was our error--no frikkken' laser countdown clock.
Iraq was worth it for another unintended reason...it helped sift out allies/friends vs. enemies/leeches.
France? They have not acted as allies. I was stunned when I heard that Chirac is conservative. Go figure WTF left means there.
No. American soldiers and servicemen do not behave the same. Americans are very different. A percentage might be morans but comparisons are simply dumb.
Ogged, he was killed in Saudi Arabia, our ally in the war against terrorism, not Iraq.
Posted by paperwight | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 2:50 PM
Thanks. Sorry. Fixed.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 2:53 PM
Below is sort of related, in a failed society, that produces nothing but is/were a substantial threat, way.
http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2004/06/Snapshotsoflife.shtml
Posted by abc123 | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 4:14 PM
I left this quote out (from above)
"...The theory was that it would create a life of comfort and plenty, unencumbered by wicked capitalists screwing over the proletariat. The USSR instead had a system profoundly encumbered by stupid and corrupt bureaucrats who screwed over the proletariat through widespread incompetence and graft.
The one undeniable difference was that for all their faults and evilness, those wicked capitalists at least knew how to produce lots of stuff, good stuff...."
Read the whole thing.
Posted by abc123 | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 4:15 PM
Oh come on Ogged, you think the other side is the only one to cruelly execute people? No, american soldiers never do that!
I really would agree that it's an evil that these anti-American terrorists are committing. But the situation isn't black and white, and while I still get upset reading about these things, it's nothing like righteous anger I feel. I feel we've lost the right to that.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 5:23 PM
Did you take me to be expressing righteous anger?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 5:26 PM
O'Tool seems to me to be expressing a type of righteous anger. The emphasis on them being evil, and our need to finish killing the, while I acknowledge contains nothing explicitly about how we're Good, nevertheless carries that viewpoint. It's implicit therein: they=evil, us=need to kill, therefore (understood) us=good. I may be nitpicking here, but statements like this seem to me to be dangerous because they border on a carte blanche reasoning for killing. If the statement had been just a little more nuanced, say, if he had said we need to kill them for the greater sake of the Iraqi people, I wouldn't feel the way I do about it. I want there to be concrete, pragmatic reasons being discussed, not just vague and abstract moral terms.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 06-18-04 7:36 PM
Michael--
One of the (many) tragedies of the Bush presidency is that it's given moral clarity a bad name.
Let's review the bidding, shall we?
A group that chooses to align itself with the people who purposely and with malice aforethought flew planeloads of innocent men, women and children into buildings overflowing with more of the same just chopped a guy's head off because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong passport. Oh, and then they bragged about it on the Internet.
Nuance has its place, Michael. In fact, without it, you get the Bush follies, which we see played out on our television screens just about every day. But when those of us who believe in a thoughtful and, yes, nuanced approach to policy-making get so lost in our exquisitely tended ethical gardens that we can no longer call evil by its right name, the American people consistently and with more than a little good sense tell us to go suck an egg.
Frankly, I'm kinda tired of that. Aren't you?
Posted by Jack O'Toole | Link to this comment | 06-19-04 6:01 AM
Current world events (ie post 911) have made it far easier to decide which choice to make. Even if you hate W you have to admit he has been bold and successful.
The left has shown itself to be more stupid than anyone could have imagined. More blind than a Chamberlain. After WW1, Germany was supposed to disarm. Building full scale gliders was a big hobby in Germany because they were not allowed to build modern motorized planes.
Iraq after Gulf War 1 was supposed disarm too. If Saddam really had no bad weapons the sanctions would have been lifted 10 years ago.
The current Iraq war should have been fought 10 years ago. He should have been given a very accurate countdown clock. That was our error--no frikkken' laser countdown clock.
Iraq was worth it for another unintended reason...it helped sift out allies/friends vs. enemies/leeches.
France? They have not acted as allies. I was stunned when I heard that Chirac is conservative. Go figure WTF left means there.
Germany? Here is the problem facing EUnichstan:
http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/05/Hiringandfiring.shtml
Russia? Great to have friends.
China? Oh yeah they will be polite when they have the power we now yield. Maybe they will free Taiwan.
VDH on cutting our ties with NATO.
http://victorhanson.com/Articles/NRO%20Index/Let_Europe_Be_Europe.html
We should at least debate cutting ties with the UN.
Posted by abc123 | Link to this comment | 06-19-04 4:49 PM
Michael #5
No. American soldiers and servicemen do not behave the same. Americans are very different. A percentage might be morans but comparisons are simply dumb.
(I know it's only a parody site).
:-(
Posted by abc123 | Link to this comment | 06-19-04 4:57 PM