I don't think anyone has ever claimed that the American electorate is not gullible or that they are knowledgeable. The extent to which they think they are though would be amusing if it was not so tragic.
Few are aware for example that the Bush policies in Iraq have have been the killer of 15,000 people. And americans cannot understand why the Iraqi people would be striking back.
Some are of course, just not very many. America will reap what it sows.
Few are aware for example that the Bush policies in Iraq have have been the killer of 15,000 people. And americans cannot understand why the Iraqi people would be striking back.
Some are of course, just not very many. America will reap what it sows.
The point is that the majority has voted bush, even more so, the college graduates voted fifty-fifty so you can't come here pledging that only the less bright ones have voted for a - so called - less bright guy. Of course we all know what that means, but that may turn against you in the end.
Since we were talking about the end, he doesn't really have a brightness problem as many of you are implying, so skip it. I can only hope for better, but it's kinda harder now...
Since we were talking about the end, he doesn't really have a brightness problem as many of you are implying, so skip it. I can only hope for better, but it's kinda harder now...
I did not say they were less bright. I indicated they are not well informed and fairly gullible. Does not make them any less dangerous though.
Of course there are many uninformed and gullible voters that voted against Bush for their particular reasons also.
Other examples:
A large percentage of new home buyers expect the value of there house will increase 50% each year. The number of people taking variable rates on long term loans is quite high. Both of these fly in the face of the available information.
I would agree that the vote indicates more of the same. Likely worse.
Of course there are many uninformed and gullible voters that voted against Bush for their particular reasons also.
Other examples:
A large percentage of new home buyers expect the value of there house will increase 50% each year. The number of people taking variable rates on long term loans is quite high. Both of these fly in the face of the available information.
I would agree that the vote indicates more of the same. Likely worse.
Slate's 5 step cure for election rage is pretty helpful and can be found at:
http://www.slate.com/id/2108859/
Pretty good at giving perspective and reducing rage from thought threads about evil doers in the Whitehouse.
http://www.slate.com/id/2108859/
Pretty good at giving perspective and reducing rage from thought threads about evil doers in the Whitehouse.
moving_electron said:I don't think anyone has ever claimed that the American electorate is not gullible or that they are knowledgeable. The extent to which they think they are though would be amusing if it was not so tragic.
Few are aware for example that the Bush policies in Iraq have have been the killer of 15,000 people. And americans cannot understand why the Iraqi people would be striking back.
Some are of course, just not very many. America will reap what it sows.
And how long do you think it would have taken Saddam to kill 15,000 people? Difference is that these people would have been raped, tourtued and then thier sons and daughters would be raped and tourtured in front of them, then just shot like a lame dog and thrown into one of the many mass unmarked graves in Iraq, as has apparently been the case for the last 2-3 decades. To compare Bush to the enemy we have now( and have had for quite a while now) is just nothing but ignorance. Islamic fascist want nothing more than to destroy this country any way they can and will stop at nothing to do so. Why would we wait even longer to strike out at these terrorists(not insurgents) and let them get ground and strike us on our soil? From my perspective, better over there than here. War on our soil would make it even more difficult for America and Osama knows this. How long would it take the rest of the world to roll over and just "accept terrorism as a part of life" if not for America? Oh wait...they already have(well most of them) True that over the next few years, expect more terrorism and death in the world, but the ends do justify the means. Do you think that the terrorist want to see an election in Iraq? Of course not and they will conduct brutal attacks on the Iraqi people to prevent them from choosing leaders that will not torture and kill them and thier children. Just think what the world would be like now if America never entered WWII? Or if we only fought the Japanese and not against Hitler? It is probably true that Hitler would have taken over all of Eroupe and in the end it would in fact have been more peaceful and lots of lives (compared to the Iraq war, unimaginable amount of blood spilled) would have been saved. What a great nation Hitler would have built.
The reality is freedom is not free by any means, and unfourtunatly, the price to be payed is blood, no matter who pays it. Always has been and probably always will be. If Osama had the power to strike this country with a major terrorist attack before yesterday do you think that he would not have? Instead we got a video tape of him threatening us once again. I thumb my nose at him. As far as I am concerned, he can just suck on my
And this stuggle will continue for many years to come. It's about time to get it out, because the more time we wast, the more the cost will be(in blood).
roibm said:The fact is(as of yet): the entire power in us is red.
Real democracy over there
There is certainly a case to be made that the bush campaign did not go after the middle but focused on satisfying the evangelical right in order to win.
This is counter to the normal path of getting going far enought to the center that you can make sure you get over 50% but not disallusion your base.
So Carl Rove will be out touting that he has done this and that this is the way to go.
Probably special issues at work "wartime" presidentcy and all.
Does not bode well for the center and left of center.
The US democracy is fairly flawed is structure. 50% of the senate votes come from 16% of the population. Electoral college accents the major regional differences in thinking and puts great emphasis on a few with votes by many being worthless.
Not really a very good structural model for democracy.
cunningham said:
Why?
If you are in one of the countries we attacked the question "why do you say a person with a bomb but no air force a terrorist , but a person with a bomb and an airforce is not" would be pretty apt.
Not to say there are no differences but it is easy to see how the populations killed would view it. How did we so completely turn the populations fear of Sadam into hatered for the US? How did we so completely turn the support of the US after 9/11 into distain?
Awesome gift to Iranian hardliners.
Or perhaps they want the US to stop trying to control and destroying there lives. Not to say we are trying to do this is but it iss easy to see why they would think that. There is a definite history of imperialism in the area. Support of dictitorial brutal regimes by the US I think cannot be disputed though. Bush actual said he was on a crusade.cunningham said:
cunningham said:
It would be helpful to your argument if Iraq actually had a true terrorism link.
The real problem now is that since the after war period was done so unbelievably imcompetently it created a much bigger problem for the US and the world. Probably would have been pretty bad anyway but this is really bad. Cutting out the knowledgable experts from the State Department and turning it over to Rumsfield and the Army was catastrophic arrogance at work. many lives are paying the price.
Remember when it was deemed critical to win the hearts and minds in IRAQ in the first 3 months? The folks on the ground now are just trying to establish intimidation.
Also keep in mind how long revenge memories are in some parts of the world.
Now tell me that things are safer by killing another 15,000-100,00 people in a rush.
Why do travel recommendations state that you should not wear anything that makes you look American, and that you may want to be able to claim you are Canadian?
cunningham,
If you intend to go to war it is generally a good idea to know what you are fighting against. Iraq was Baathist state. Baathism is secular movement and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria can attest to just how serious they are about being secular.
In invading Iraq, you opened a door, by providing a grievance, through which the Sunni extremists cheerfully rushed. The plain fact is you went after a stable, if unpleasant, regime for dubious reasons and now the extremists are going after you. Look on the bright side though, the Kurds are quiet and you haven't really annoyed the Shia's yet. So it stands to reason the next logical thing to do is invade Iran.
If you intend to go to war it is generally a good idea to know what you are fighting against. Iraq was Baathist state. Baathism is secular movement and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria can attest to just how serious they are about being secular.
In invading Iraq, you opened a door, by providing a grievance, through which the Sunni extremists cheerfully rushed. The plain fact is you went after a stable, if unpleasant, regime for dubious reasons and now the extremists are going after you. Look on the bright side though, the Kurds are quiet and you haven't really annoyed the Shia's yet. So it stands to reason the next logical thing to do is invade Iran.
You have a link to support this ? Just curious, I browsed both the ICRC and AI websites and both are too cautious to give estimates without enough staff on the ground to be credible. The only study giving me 100 000 deaths is the highly controversial statistical study published by the Lancet recently.Geek said:
Frankly, the extreamists have been coming after us for years. Now that the nest has been ruptured, expect them to try to spread around the world. When you destroy a nest of bees, of course they are going to come after you, excuses or not. You can't get rid of the bees until you deal with the nest first.
cunningham said:
Do really believe such nonsense? There has never been some mystical horde of Islamic extremists about to appear over the horizon anymore than the Red Army was going to come rampaging up the Fulda Gap while the Strategic Rocket Forces lobbed missiles over the pole. It seems to me too many Americans just like to be scared be it of crime, unemployment or some evil bogeyman, something the current bunch running the US understand only too well.
cunningham said:
I can see your analogy and how it is an interesting mental model to ponder for Afghanistan.
I do not see the applicability to Iraq. The analogy does tend to embody the notion that Al Queida is a organization rather than a movement. Lin Laden is a particular funder of particular activities through a particular loose organization. Bu Al Queida is a movement and philosophy. It is hard to attach a philosophy with an army. The analogy also neglects to take into account the increase in new bees and other nests triggered by the eradication effort.
rfbrw said:
In fairness though the original World Trade Center bombing was a number of years back. The Army barracks bombing in Lebanon was in the mid 80s?
So attacks do go back many years although they have been few in number and far between.
The homegrown ones such as the Oklahoma City bombing were pretty significant as well. The Unibomber captured headlines for well over a year.
rfbrw said:
One thing I do agree with GW, is that when people are free enough to choose thier own leaders fairly, and said people are represented, society will progress and terrorist tactics are no longer advantageous to use. No matter what culture. In order for this to work though, terrorism must be made not to accomplish the goals of those who employ it. Countries that allow this behavior and the groups that contribute to this behavior, or just turn a blind eye to it, without making any 'real' effort to suppress it just encourage the murderers. This is what he meant by "you are either with us or against us". When someone deliberately kills women and children, or cuts off the head of someone who is tied down, it is just murder. It doesn't take much bravery or guile to cut the head off of someone who is tied down or to shoot women and children.
The violent tactics that these people are using now doesn't work in the long run, it just isolates them even further. Look how far Yasser Arab-rat and his terrorism has advanced the Palestinian cause. They still have no hope of ever creating a soverign state any time soon regardless of Isreal. The hatred these people have will not allow it. Maybe not all people in the world want to bow to Mecca and a god that allows the killing of women and childred regarless of race or ethnic background deliberately as these people's "Allah" does. You know it is sad that throughout history Arab people don't seem to know what peace is... or maybe it is just thousands of years of hatred and unrepresentitive governments telling them how to think.
Freedom of thought IS the most important freedom.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.