Originally Posted By jonvn "But what an ugly place we would have become..." Yes, but I think that's the way it is going, if we have not already have gone there.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Well, yes and no. After 9/11 there was that perhaps two-month window of time where people seemed to be a little bit kinder to each other, generally speaking. There was that shared grief and loss that seemed to be everywhere in the country. Of course, in the time since then, the event has been made so maudlin by some and over-used by politicians to justify anything and everything they dream up that sadly, it has become mostly a buzzword now. But I still remember my feelings at the moments back in 2001, watching it unfold. I think the assassination of a president would definitely have that sort of impact, though perhaps the mourning period would be much shorter than in the past.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I also think the event would impact us differently if it was a homegrown nutjob as oppossed to a terrorist from another country. The outrage would intensify if it were someone from another country that did it.
Originally Posted By jonvn "the event has been made so maudlin" I think this is a great difference between Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Pearl Harbor energized the nation into action into taking care of a problem. 9/11, we have sat and mewled over it, and have developed a firm resolve -- to shop. If the nation had the sense it did in the 1940s, we'd have gone into Pakistan and done whatever it was that it'd take to fix the situation. But since then, we've gotten so bound up in our own rhetoric, that we are now unable to do anything at all.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Did you dose off right after 9/11? We were out for blood but our leadership didn't aim the guns in the right direction. It is easy to lose interest when efforts are directed the wrong way and there doesn't seem to be much you can do about it without being labeled as non-patriotic.
Originally Posted By jonvn We may have been out for blood, but the country did not respond with any sense at all. Making a partner out of Pakistan? Banning nail clippers? Scrutinizing old ladies at airports? Ridiculous.
Originally Posted By gadzuux You can peg all of that on our leadership. And the people that supported these leaders would never question anything they said or did. Those that did question it were immediately labeled as unpatriotic - or "liberals" in their vernacular. Now, with seven years of hindsight, we see that we were led in the wrong direction - not just by accident or incompetence, but by design. And we're still fighting the wrong battles, but the intended result is working just fine - those well connected defense contractors are growing ever more wealthy and powerful - at the expense of the american public. And yes - there are still those people out there who believe that our military in iraq are fighting and dying for our defense and freedom. They never bother to stop and think about it because they might not like the conclusions they reach. It's so much simpler to just "support the troops".
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>It's so much simpler to just "support the troops".<<< That statement is a little misleading. Don't misunderstand me, I support the troops and I always will. I know what it is like to be in a position that you neither asked for or planned. One that might very well cost you your life. What I do not support and will never support is the idiot or idiots that continue to sacrifice our soldiers to save their own face. And you know what, those same idiots will probably win a peace prize. If we had continued to go after Bin Laden I would still be supporting the cause but we only gave that lip service and went after a non threat instead. It really has to stop! Support our troops, get rid of their present policy maker, Mr. Bush.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>What does "Support our troops" even mean?<< Good question. I think it likely means many different things to different people. To some, it means don't question the ethical or moral question of what we're doing in Iraq because to do so "weakens resolve" or "emboldens the enemy." "Supporting the troops" means loving America, freedom, liberty. To others, it means don't blame the troops themselves for Iraq, they're just following the comander in chief's orders. Direct your anger or displeasure at elected officials.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>To others, it means don't blame the troops themselves for Iraq, they're just following the commander in chief's orders. Direct your anger or displeasure at elected officials.<<< That would be my definition. There are many ways to "support our troops". One of the ways would be to find a way to stop them from getting killed for nothing. Iraq, long ago, stopped being a cause worth dying over. You don't have to believe me if you don't want too, but, there is nothing that will make a soldier happier than someone telling them they can go home and see their families and maybe live to see their grandchildren. The war has reached a point were we are no longer "fighting" one lone dictator. The best thing we could do for the people of Iraq would be to arm everyone of them and then leave. A population cannot be oppressed if they can defend themselves. Ever wonder why we are faced with so much hostility. Imagine Washington DC taken over by an invading army. In spite of everything that army says about turning over the reigns to the people, they just don't leave. How would we feel? Do we think ourselves so superior to other cultures that we think they don't want to govern themselves. Will they be successful in establishing a "democracy"? Chances are that the answer to that is a resounding NO! We can never seem to acknowledge that their culture is different than ours. What works for us will not necessarily work for everyone. It is time to stop using our young people as backstops for land mines. They have done what was the original intent, Saddam is gone and no WMD's were found. Time to come home.
Originally Posted By jonvn I am sorry for the plight of the soldiers in Iraq, but they are volunteers. People seemed to think that joining the army was just a beefed up version of the boy scouts with a college tuition plan. This is what happens. Now, I don't want any of them hurt or killed, of course, and I would love for each of them to be able to come home, but I don't support what they are doing, and I don't support us being there. I realize it is not their fault they are there, so I do not blame them for being there. So while it is unfortunate for them to be there, if they didn't expect this sort of thing to be a potential outcome of their enlistment, then I have little sympathy. People like Cindy Sheehan get absolutely no respect from me, because she encouraged her son to get involved in the army, whose job it is to fight and die if need be. The only unfortunate thing is that there is no need for them to be dying. So while I may support them as individuals who are doing what they feel their patriotic duty is, I don't support their mission or feel they are doing a thing for this country or its security.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>I realize it is not their fault they are there, so I do not blame them for being there. So while it is unfortunate for them to be there, if they didn't expect this sort of thing to be a potential outcome of their enlistment, then I have little sympathy. People like Cindy Sheehan get absolutely no respect from me, because she encouraged her son to get involved in the army, whose job it is to fight and die if need be.<<< I think that it should be reasonably expected that if you volunteer to help defend your country for whatever reason, the people in charge would make decisions based on solid fact, especially when your life may be involved. You volunteer to defend your country not someone elses. If there is a good cause then it is OK. You cannot say it is a good cause so why is it OK for them to be placed in the position of danger for nothing. They are powerless to do anything about it once the idiots decide that they have a reason to send you there.
