« Fun with gas.... | Main | JoeJob, part... ARGH! »

I want my name back...

Our government seems to think it is unaccountable. Despite laws on torture, we still torture people. I never said this was ok, not I nor most of the population, which happens to agree with me. And for good reason - the idea pushed forth last week that discussing what we're doing and admitting it's wrong is the cause of the recent backlashs is, well, naive. Had we never done such horrible things, horrible things that the military refuses to document success in using, then there'd also have been no backlash.

I want my name back.

What's really sick about all this, is that it's all happened before. Very bad men have done this in world history, and world wars were the result, to try to stop them. Only, this time, our administration has learned from the past. We're not torturing and killing people on our own soil. We're doing it in marginal, confusing-ly legal places not on our soil. Which makes it much harder for the opposing forces to invade us to stop it. And Guantanamo is much smaller, and easier to protect. Even more evil, if no one's going to invade us, they're certainly not going to invade Uzbekistan to try to stop the tortures going on there, also in our names.

I recently commented on an extremist's blog. He responded. He starts off wrong to begin with: “All I did was agree with Ann Coulter”. Hello? Has he done any critical thinking at all about what Ann Coulter says? Let's just say that she's misinformed and alarmist. Bringing the level of discourse one level lower (She thinks the best way to talk to liberals is with a baseball bat). Uh huh. Thanks for participating in the discussion.

Let's continue. QC suggests that I'm a pacifist, and that I think we should all just sit down and take it. I don't. I agree that we should fight for just causes, but torturing people doesn't fall into that list. Wide-spread acts of violence don't solve the problem, either. Not only do neither solve the problem, it makes people angry -- making the problem we're trying to solve, worse. If we want to do something constructive, we need to follow our own laws, or else those against us (and there are a lot more of them than there are of us) will prevail, as purely a matter of numbers.

More should be said on this subject, and if QC or anyone else wants to continue the discussion, please do. I'm moving this week, so I've put less into this post than I'd like to, but I will pick up the baton if it gets passed back to me.


" Wide-spread acts of violence solve the problem, either. "

I think you lost a negative in there somewhere.

Thanks! I fixed it. I guess this post sort of turned into a ramble. sigh

First of all, "we" did not start this war. It was started islamo-fascists long before 9/11, we only began to take it seriously after that cowardly attack. And we will finish it no matter what the cost.

So BP, you think we should fight back, but not with force because that would piss off the people who started this war. I don't follow. The use of force in our defense is acceptable and necessary. The tolerance of intolerance is intolerable. Defending ourselves is not adopting a "culture of death." We abhor violence; force must be used when called for. We aren't committing "wide spread acts of violence", we're engaging in a military operation against terrorist targets.

Just out of curiosity, how would you fight the terrorists, a couple of valium and nice long chat about their distant fathers and domineering mothers? While you're trying to understand them, they are trying to kill you. You cannot reason with the unreasonable.

I have news for you. The theo-fascists aren't pissed off because we've invaded them - they're pissed off because we are a free and democratic society. In their view-and all you need do is read their websites-our very existence threatens them and justifies their attacks on us. It isn't our response that brings their aggression, itís our existence.

As Irshad Manji (a liberal Muslim woman working to reform Islam) says: As Westerners bow down before multiculturalism, we anesthetize ourselves into believing that anything goes. We see our readiness to accommodate as strength - even a form of cultural superiority (though few will admit that). Radical Muslims, on the other hand, see our inclusive instincts as a form of corruption that makes us soft and rudderless. They believe the weak deserve to be vanquished.

As for the myth of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians being killed by the Coalition, please head on over the very un-conservative, hardly pro-American website iraqbodycount.com. They disagree with you. According the Iraq Body Count website, and as shown daily on the Irish Anti-War Movement's website, the actual count of non-combatant civilians killed in Iraq is under 20,000, most killed by insurgents' car bombs, suicide attacks, beheadings, kidnappings, and executions. Not the Coalition.

As for the "extremists" as you call them, I'm sure they hate us, and that is a good thing. But according to the Pew Global Attitudes Project, most Muslim publics are expressing less support for terrorism than in the past. Confidence in Osama bin Laden has declined markedly in some countries, and fewer believe suicide bombings that target civilians are justified in the defense of Islam. You can check out the poll results first hand at http://pewglobal.org/

Said Augustus Richard Norton, a Middle East specialist at Boston University: "Muslims, like non-Muslims, are plugged into the world. . . . It is one thing to be caught up in the supposed glamour of attacking the superpower or global bully, but it is quite another to have to pay the consequences economically, politically -- not to mention personally. This is what has happened in places like Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan and Turkey, where many people now see extremist Islam as a threat to their lives, not a fantasy game of kick Uncle Sam."

By the way, the Pew Global Attitudes Project is co-chaired by Madeleine Albright and John Danforth-neither of whom could be described as neo-cons.

War sucks, its hell, its never desirable. It is unfortunately a necessary evil.

Post a comment

Verification (needed to reduce spam):