Your patriotism will be used against you

[glynch]

In the coming days and weeks we will see Bush and gang who care more about international oil companies and other international corporations than the majority of the people in this or any other country use your patriotism against you.

1) As I said before I'm in favor or using force to get the perpetrators.

2) As I said before and repeated above I'm in favor of using force against the perpetrators.

3) Aside from the mission to bring the perpetrators to justice, which most Americans agree on, Bush and gang will try to accomplish their own domestic political and economic goals -- increase the profits of their oil and defense owning stock buddies, who will kick back to them in the next election cycle. Before this is over they may even put in an emir or two in Iraq to give us cheap oil. Bush and gang will promptly proclaim them democrats.

4) Their patriotism won't extend to rolling back the massive tax breaks they just gave themselves so we can finance the war. They prefer debt as they hold the bonds and it is another excuse to claim to be "compassionate conservatives" who just have to defund headstart, can't give our parents prescription durg benefits etc. because "we just don't have the money". They don't mind how much interest we have to pay them on their bonds or on our mortgages, which they hold.

5) They aren't greatly in favor of civil liberties and are already calling for restrictions beyond common sense agree upon changes in air traffice security.

6) Their sons and daughter aren't be going to get killed. Out of all of Congress only one son or daughter went to the Gulf War. I believe Ross Perot, who was against the Iraq war for oil, cited this fact. It will thus be very easy to have "mission creep" to use one of their phrases. since it ain't their kids. Some people on the board are already calling on us to occupy the whole Middle East and other parts of the world. It will just be the sons and daughters of the poor and middle class who are trying to earn college money or a life outside the ghetto or barrio.

7) The timetable of the operation and the lives of Americans will be sacrificed to fit the needs of the mid-term elections or even Bush's reelection campaign if it can possibly be done. (A history lesson: in the summer of 1972 Nixon realized to his horror the N. Vietnamese were going to agree to our conditions for peace. It would happen before the election and S. Vietnam might even fall before the election. This was viewed as bad for his reelection chances, so we backed off and 20,000 more Americans and hundreds of thousand more Asians died. ) Similarly Bush and gang desperately need to be seen flag waving when the midterm elections come. Bush sure can't win it on his command of economic policies or speaking ability.

8) They wont put into effect more just policies toward the Arab World that will help to prevent the next generation of terrorist from forming to replace the terrorist cells they will destroy. Given the Arabs a higher price for their oil or helping them develop might lower oil company profits.

In conclusion, support a carefully crafted plan to get the perpetrators, but don't let old fashioned US patriotism be used against you to accomplish goals which are mainly in the interest of Bush and gang . Insist that the root socio-political causes of hatred toward Americans be addressed not just merely eliminating current terrorist cells. After all we're the ones giving our lives, not the politicians kids. It is our children not Bush and gang's who will give our lives if they eliminate Bin Laden , but just plant the seeds for the next generation of terrorists.

[Bigman]

I can't believe that under the current circumstances you can say these things about our country's leader. You are entitled to your own point of view, but now is not the time this BS. Everything in your post is total speculation yet you present it as if this is what Bush intends to do. You sound just as fanatical as these crazies that attacked us. Hell, why not just say Bush planned these attacks? It wouldn't be that far off from what you are saying right now. I ask you to re-read you statements and reflect. I'm sure I'm not the only one disgusted.

[Isabel]

Please, this is not the time to get into politics. This is a time to come together against a common enemy.

[ROCKSS]

Well said Isabel

[Pole]

I sure hope glynch is an American male between the age of 18 and 25.

If so, please make sure you've registered with selective service.

It's your duty, and it's the law.

[Cohen]

Wow glynch,

Amazing that you can predict Bush's actions...I guess all of these YEARS that Bush has been in office really helped.

It is a shame that some pearls of wisdom that you mention are lost due to your offensive comments like 'mid-term' elections.

[DAROckets]

What an absolutely unfounded and quite disgusting post you've managed to churn out.

[HayesStreet]

Originally posted by DAROckets
What an absolutely unfounded and quite disgusting post you've managed to churn out.

There is no doubt that Bush is connected to the defense and petro lobby, but I do think it is inappropriate to suggest he'll use this act of terrorism to further the goals of that lobby. I seriously doubt that is what he's thinking of now.

[RocksMillenium]

Where the hell did this come from! :mad:

[DaDakota]

Ignore.

[moestavern19]

This is not the time to start a political debate , Please Show some respect for the people who died .

[gr8-1]

glynch, bad time for this, really.

[Tb-Cain]

Nice to see we can put aside party politics and come together as a united nation. :confused:

[glynch]

Why is it a bad time to ask why the politicians' sons and daughters won't pay a price for this?

It is an excellent time to revelauate US foreign policy and how to really irradicate terrorism not just a few current cells..

It is an excellent time to be on guard for those who will try to gain politically and economically from these events.

It is an excellent time to be vigilant that we not get involved in a lengthy ground war in Afghanistan and the Middle East.

Once the war starts and Americans troops are being killed, will you all then agree it is finally a good time for these evluations? I doubt it.

Please try to respond with arguments rather than a crude attempt to shame me into silence. Been there, done that with the Vietnam War. It won't work.

[moestavern19]

Im not trying to "shame you into silence" Im telling you to shut your freakin trap .

[SpaceCity]

Originally posted by glynch
Why is it a bad time to ask why the politicians' sons and daughters won't pay a price for this?

It is an excellent time to revelauate US foreign policy and how to really irradicate terrorism not just a few current cells..

It is an excellent time to be on guard for those who will try to gain politically and economically from these events.

It is an excellent time to be vigilant that we not get involved in a lengthy ground war in Afghanistan and the Middle East.

Once the war starts and Americans troops are being killed, will you all then agree it is finally a good time for these evluations? I doubt it.

Please try to respond with arguments rather than a crude attempt to shame me into silence. Been there, done that with the Vietnam War. It won't work.

1) What does it matter? There will plenty of those who are more than willing to fight for and represent this country. So what is your point on this?

2) Have you been listening? The government has been saying over and over that we are waging a long and lasting war on ALL terrorism. No one has even hinted that this will be like in the past. This was the wake up call. I suppose you have a solution in mind?

3) Those who attempt to gain politically from this crisis will not be looked upon favorably by Americans. Those who attempt will surely be voted out the first chance that Americans have to do so.

4) We are not waging war on Afghanistan or the Middle East. Where have you been? We are waging war on terrorism and those who support and aide them. If these countries choose to side with terrorism then they will indeed suffer, not just by our miltary but every major country's military. Keep in mind, this is not just about us. It's about the beliefs and way of life of every free country in this world.

5) Everyone is aware of the consequences. Most would rather die fighting than die hiding and ignoring the terrorists. Are you the type that is willing to get your ass beat every day in hopes that maybe one day the bully will come to his senses and stop? Sometimes you have to defend yourself.

[Bigman]

Originally posted by glynch
Why is it a bad time to ask why the politicians' sons and daughters won't pay a price for this?

That is a question that is very valid. A question that for some reason seems to be dodged by our politicians.

[/i]It is an excellent time to be on guard for those who will try to gain politically and economically from these events.

We should always be on guard. But just because Bush is linked to the Energy corporations, I don't think it's wise to assume that he will use this tragic event for his own gain. Give the man a chance to pave his own road. You seem to have already judged him as being guilty of the deeds you've described. Isn't it a little early for judgement?

[/i]It is an excellent time to be vigilant that we not get involved in a lengthy ground war in Afghanistan and the Middle East.

Actually, it's an excellent time to ask yourself - Do you support a decisive action against nations who support and condone terrorism? I for one do support that action. We cannot sit back and 'sanction' these guys to submission. It doesn't work. This is an enemy who will openly strike against civilian populations around the world. I'm not talking about going to war with all Islam and Muslim nations. I'm talking about rooting out the people who's intent is to harm the innocent for their radical beliefs. Hopefully, each Nation will seek out terrorist groups that reside in their country and rid the problem themselves. But if they refuse, then I'm all for doing it ourselves. This may involve a lengthy ground war. It might be as easy as each nation doing their part to rid this evil. But once we commit, we have to see it through.

[Tb-Cain]

I think the reasoning for politician children not being forced into the draft is so that it won't affect their decision making when they have to make that tough decision to declare war or deploy troops.

Of course, many volunteer anyway.

[ROXRAN]

very true.

[Lynus302]

Glynch is obviously living in a hole somewhere. Apparently he's been hiding since Vietnam.

Here are some quotes from Glynch in the thread For those of you NOT hellbent on war (http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21966&perpage=20&pagenumber=1) (see page 5)

Originally posted by glynch
The whole world has not really changed that much.
-----
We are going to punish the terrorists who did this act, but that's about it.
-----
Given dubya trying to compete with Dad, and his desire for a Wag the Dog type distraction from his overrall fecklessness we might try to knock out Sadam Hussein, but I doubt it. If we do it won't change much in the way of terrorism.

Stay in your hole, Glynch.

[Rokkit]

Though I'm no fan of his, putting that kind of claim on Bush I think is simply wrong. I don't think he would be capable of allowing this type of brutality to occur for political advancement. Though I do feel strongly that there are people in government who are tightly clinging to their own ideals and belief of how the gov't should be.

However, this does somewhat touch on a few things I do worry about and have mentioned in other threads.

Namely, we will be given a figurehead in someone like Bin Laden - who still should have been taken care of long ago - to appease us and will never know the whole story. I want EVERYONE involved in this punished. But the country is so eager to take action, and the governemtn will be happy to meet those needs, that we instead be given a nice, way too simple picture of good defeating evil, end of story.

And let's face it - doing so would boost the image of our government among the population so high that they would have every reason to simplify the whole story. I guess I'm like SmeggySmeg - I have a hard time putting full trust in the government.

[Sonny]

Grinch,


I cant see why you would say something like that at a time like this?

This isnt some X-Files conspiracy, we have been attacked.

We are going to wipe out Terrorism and all who condone it.

I do know that you go by glynch, grinch just sounds more approiate after your last post.

[RichRocket]

glynch: way too cynical.

[Manny Ramirez]

Originally posted by glynch
Why is it a bad time to ask why the politicians' sons and daughters won't pay a price for this?




Now is not the time for a political diatribe!

Or look at it this way:

Let's pretend that I am killed in a car wreck today. Let's also pretend that you know that I probably drive a little fast yet I have only had one accident with another vehicle in 12 years that was deemed my fault. Now what do you say to my parents? Do you say:

"I am so sorry for your loss. My family and me will keep yours in our prayers."

Or

"We all know that your son tended to drive a little too fast. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a factor or even worse, I wouldn't be surprised if this accident was all his fault."

Now, Glynch, I think your choice here would be obvious. So, what's the difference between my example and the people who were tragically killed by these heinous acts? For you to say something like you did shows me that you would pick Choice B in my example.

Show some respect for the people that died and their families on this day of mourning. This type of attitude is what made me so upset last night. Yes, our government is not perfect. Yes, we have pissed some people off in the world. No, we don't need "expert analysis" on how bad our govt is. At least not now. Not when we need to become united as a nation.

If you didn't get anything out of this post, at least realize my 3 sentences before this one, okay?

[Rokkit]

Originally posted by Manny Ramirez


Show some respect for the people that died and their families on this day of mourning. This type of attitude is what made me so upset last night. Yes, our government is not perfect. Yes, we have pissed some people off in the world. No, we don't need "expert analysis" on how bad our govt is. At least not now. Not when we need to become united as a nation.

If you didn't get anything out of this post, at least realize my 3 sentences before this one, okay?

Manny, I think you are absolutely right. But while I don't agree with glynch, I have to point out that revenge/justice, military acts and war are all debated quite easily right now, so it's hard for me to balance your chastisement of him on these points and your own participation in the other factors.

For some, war and government go hand in hand. I don't agree with his points, but at the same time there are many who don't agree with the points of others of us about military actions.

This isn't meant to be a slam, but it's hard to justify your metaphor.

[Rockets2K]

glynch, comsidering your responses in the other thread mentioned before and your topic here,I feel constrained to ask:

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party??

and also, are you even an American??

even our pacifist brothers know better than to start spouting bs theories like yours in this time of tragedy.

Question the government?

Every Americans responsibility.

But realize that spouting off such inane bs is a disrespect to those who died and their families.

Try to at least act human when in the presence of other humans ok??

[glynch]

Manny Ramirez, an apology of sorts. No you shouldn't say to the grieving family "it was probably all his fault, he drives too fast.

RichRocket, probably too cynical, but Nixon did prolong the Vietnam War for his own reelection chances. The US originally marketed the Iraq War as war for oil, until focus groups showed that the only way to get a strong majority for the war was to emphasize Iraq's chemical and biological weapons and make them out as a military threat to the United States.

Dakota , Treeman,HayesStreet, RocksMillenium and others, all your talk about essentially indiscriminate killing or cavalier references to "collateral damage" to people from the Middle East is in similarly bad taste, though somewhat excused by your anger. I'm not going to look for them, but posts refer to "piss ant nations" and say things like "kill, kill, kill" etc. "spend a trillion on assassination squads"

Similarly those of us who feel strongly that the hundreds of thousands of Iraq children and millions of Vietnamese who have died needlessly because of US policies are prone to lapses in style or taste,when provoked by your rhetorical excesses.

Many of you guys don't even give lip service to the humanity of Iraqi children enough to even inform yourselves. You don't accept full responsibility for the CIA's murdeous practices throughout the Thirld War, the death squads we trained, the drugs we ran, the democratically elected govenments we've overthrown. When someone shares an article from a UT professor about this, you attack all college professors and learn nothing. "I'm aware of some excesses in the past" is not enough of a repsonse.

Iraq's and people in the Middle East are human beings, too. They grieve just like the folks in NYC when they are bombed. It is always a good time to remind ourselves of that --even at the funerals of dear friends.

[glynch]

Rockets2k, I laughed out loud in my office when I saw your post.

I'm a native born white guy from St. Louis. Sorry to disappoint you.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party.

All my life I've waited for someone to ask me that. I thought it only happened in old movies. How exciting!!

It's good we can maintain a sense of humor in these trying times.
I refer you to "is it too early for a joke?" post.

[Rockets2K]

yeah..it was a joke kinda...at least the part about being a communist anyway...Ive always had the sometimes inappropriate tendency to try to joke in times of stress..

[dylan]

Originally posted by Tb-Cain
I think the reasoning for politician children not being forced into the draft is so that it won't affect their decision making when they have to make that tough decision to declare war or deploy troops.

Of course, many volunteer anyway.


Please tell me you realize the ridiculousness of your statement. You're telling me that politicans can make the difficult decision to send our sons to war but not theirs? That they might find a cause for which they are willing to sacrifice our sons but not theirs? Man, nice racket. Sign me up for that ****.

[Bigman]

Glynch, this is the first I've heard that Nixon prolonged the war and that N. Vietnam was willing to back down. Maybe this is something that is widely known and you might think I'm a fool for not knowing this but could you please point me in some direction to confirm this? Nevermind, I'll look myself. You don't owe me anything and I expect nothing from you except possibly a good debate. You keep infering that the U.S. is responsible for the suffering of the children in Iraq. Can't you see that their leader is the one responsible? Are you that blinded by your unflappable liberalism? You act as if the US bombs the innocent just to bomb something. We bomb militarytargets. People get in the way. We try to keep civilian casualties to a minimum but unfortunately losses occur. Keep in mind that a Democratic President has also ordered these bombings and embargos that you so despise. Your dislike for President Bush is noted, however you've yet to offer anything remotely resembling a solution to the situation in Iraq or this current mess we're in.

Obviously, you do not love your country enough to fight for it, so I ask you this: Why don't you just move? Pretty soon the borders will open and you'll be free to go. That's what makes this country so great...........FREEDOM!!

[Lynus302]

Originally posted by glynch
Many of you guys don't even give lip service to the humanity of Iraqi children enough to even inform yourselves. You don't accept full responsibility for the CIA's murdeous practices throughout the Thirld War, the death squads we trained, the drugs we ran, the democratically elected govenments we've overthrown. When someone shares an article from a UT professor about this, you attack all college professors and learn nothing. "I'm aware of some excesses in the past" is not enough of a repsonse.

Iraq's and people in the Middle East are human beings, too. They grieve just like the folks in NYC when they are bombed. It is always a good time to remind ourselves of that --even at the funerals of dear friends.

I've been waiting for you to respond to several posts of my own. I talked about the above directly in another thread, and you failed to respond. I was going to post what I said again here, but Bigman beat me to it with You keep infering that the U.S. is responsible for the suffering of the children in Iraq. Can't you see that their leader is the one responsible? Are you that blinded by your unflappable liberalism?

You and others keep telling us to ask why all this happened. What I said, and what Bigman said, is WHY this happened. You and others refuse to take into account that people like Hussein are murderous tyrants, and THAT is why we have the restrictions on Iraq that we have.

[glynch]

The Iraq War was initially sold to the American people as "we can't let Iraq control the Kuwaiti oil fields." Practically half the American people didn't buy into the need for a ground war for oil against what was then billed as "the 7th largest army in the world, composed of grizzled combat veterans from the Iran -Iraq war." They shifted to Iraq's supposed military threat to the US when a focus group showed overwhelming suport for a ground war "if Iraq posed a serious nuclear threat to America." This was bs. We did, however, know he had biological and chmeical weapons becasue we had given them to him ourselves when he was our ally.

Bush let Saddam Hussein remain in power and even permitted a good part of the Republican Guard who were trapped out on the open road trying to flee back to Iraq from Kuwait to survive. Commentary at the time said Hussain should retain power because either Iran would take over . or alternatively a civil war could destabilize Iraq and their neighbors Saudi and Kuwait.

Afterwards it was soon evident that our bombing of public health infrastructure and postwar economic boycott had led to the death of hundreds of thousands Iraqis, primarily children, due to malnutrition. Saddam Hussein was unwilling to agree to the conditions that we wanted before allowing him to sell oil. To be fair, we were only partners in the children's starvation, as Hussein could have used other scarce resources to feed the children. Eventually we allowed them to sell limited quantities of oil so he could buy some food and medicine.

For those who only get their news from the corporate dominated media or right wing talk radio, I cite: [URL=www.TheNation.com]

Alternatively you could try google.com and try "Iraq sanction" and "children" or some such for more information.

I was asked for a cite to Nixon's decision to prolong the war. It might have been written in The Nation. I remember it being brough up most recently in comments when Robert McNamara wrote his book on his role in the Vietnam war about 6? years ago.

[Bigman]

1.) The Gulf War was sold to me as a war against aggression. A multi-nation coalition was formed to stop and repel the attack on an ally. Granted this country was our ally because of their oil, buy they were still our ally. Our other allies responded with us in this fight.

2.) We could not push further into Iraq or assisinate Hussein. The coalitions goal was to secure Kuwait and destroy Iraq's large army in the process.

3.) The man ignored the coalition's 'no fly' zones and challenged allied pilots. He was also trying to make chemical weapons. The children and civilians killed by the bombings were an unfortunate casualty of this conflict. Had Saddam agreed to the conditions presented to him, the economic sanctions would have been eased.

I realize that what I'm stating is what the 'corporate media' has presented to me and that there is probably a lot more than you or I know about. But you act as if it was America vs. the Iraqi people when in fact it was many nations vs. an aggressive military. I'd have to question where you're getting your info. As you ask me to seek other news sources, I ask you not to believe everything you read on the internet. There's a bunch of misinformation out there.

ps. I'm sorry about the moving out of the country comments. These are emotional times and I didn't mean what I wrote. Peace.

[glynch]

Bigman et al I'm sorry about some of my more extreme speculations, though I firmly believe, tough as it is to believe at first, that most of our presidents have put such petty affairs as relections and party politics above the lives of their own troops and innocent people of other nations. I have no reason to believe Bush Jr. will be diferent than Bush Sr., Clinton (who I largely supported), Johnson, Nixon, Reagan and others.


I really should have kept posting that professor's article. I agree 100% with it and it is less inflammatory than some of my posts.
To paraphrase Manny Ramirez, I spent hours of reading posts till 2;30 am and all I seemed to see was hate and kill, kill. leading to take my beliefs to their most extreme.

I believe in arguing with facts, though key facts with highly political implications such as Nixon's prolonging the war, or Japan supposedly desperately trying to surrender in between atomic bombs are highly hidden and often never totally resoved.

[CriscoKidd]

Originally posted by glynch
most of our presidents have put such petty affairs as relections and party politics above the lives of their own troops and innocent people of other nations..

I don't know about "most", but I would not doubt at all that this has happened before.

Now is not really the time to second-guess the president though. Right now it is time to unite, not worry about whether the president is trying to make himself look good(which he is doing a good job of so far anyway).

[grummett]

A thread started by a parodic troll amidst all this tragedy. Disgraceful.

[Cohen]

glynch,

It's all so easy for you. You have perfect knowledge.

Have you spoken to any Vietnamese who lived in Vietnam after the war? Have you heard them say that maybe the US was right and, communism was bad for them?

How about South Korea? I guess that you would have ignored their plight, just as you would have ignored the plight of Vietnamese. Asked any South Koreans whether they would like to move North?

Oh, its so easy to see now. Nations did not topple to communism like dominos, we all know that NOW. How the h*ll did you know that THEN?

Oh, and what great leadership you could provide this country. Embargos are created to help weaken wacko regimes like Iraq's, and is generally agreed to be a more humane way to topple such governments w/o invading and killing innocent civilians. But what do you do when that country's leaders would rather use those deaths to their own political advantage? What is YOUR superior approach to this dilemma? Just stop the embargo, so it will NEVER be used in the future and the only option will be the military.

Again, you previously mentioned some things that we should all be aware of. But overall, any country that you lead would not last long.