Huge ups, glynch. Maybe some of you guys that give him a hard time to this day might consider that there's nothing wrong with being a radical if you're right. Repped.
What I noticed was that most of the people who lambasted him in that thread aren't even around anymore...
I wish I were around at that time, because I totally would have had your back, glynch! On 9/12 I called into a conservative talk radio station on my way home from school to express my disagreement with the jingoistic sentiment expressed by the host. I ended up getting on air and talked with the host for a good 20 minutes, voicing many of the same concerns that glynch did in his 9/14 post. As soon as I hung up,= the host began berating me for being unpatriotic and whatnot, and he took several callers who acted in a simlar manner to those who responded in glynch's thread.
Major props for standing up and speaking your opinion, which was unfortunately incredibly accurate, at a time when you probably knew the responses you would receive would be negative for the most part. It is really saddening that an event such as 9/11, which had the ability to unite our entire country, was used as nothing more than an excuse to advance an extreme partisan agenda. And the even more saddening part is that there are still people who try to defend that agenda.
More impressive to me is his subsequent post in the thread: He addresses those of you who questioned then and question now the timing of his thread. And, again, I find no fault in his reasoning or his predictions. Well done, sir.
I think the majority of Americans were not saying they did this because "they hate us for our freedoms"...but rather, "Why do they hate us?". The right wing nuts will always be the right wing nuts. But I remember the week after 9/11, there wasn't anyone talking about invading anyone. It was only about the rescue operation, and a nation that was shocked. We didn't go crazy about anything at first, even Bush was focused on Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, and the world (except the Muslim world) was with us. The turn happened months after 9/11. Glynch was 85% right in his points, I disagree with some of it, but it was a great post. Had it been made on 10/14 instead of 9/14 - I think he would have had more impact. and that's all I am saying, not that his post was inappropriate to me, but that it was poorly timed from a PR standpoint if we are to look at it from that lense. He made a tactical error, nothing more. Kudos for his foresight. But really, a lot of blame lies with the Dems. They cowered when it came to opposing Iraq because they feared their ability to get re-elected was at stake. They cowered to the right-wing. They could have stood against this mad invasion of Iraq. Up until that moment, I considered myself a die-hard Republican. But the invasion of Iraq was the first step to my disillusionment with conservative thinking. I was shocked that we were invading Iraq when Bin Laden was at large. I thought to myself, why are we sending so few troops into afganistan???? And so many to Iraq. Our enemy is Bin Laden, not Saddam Hussein. Even when I made statements like that to my republican friends, they accused me of buying into liberal media b.s. Wow. That was the wake-up call that made me reject both parties...but even with that, speaking as a non-partisan today - I say glynch's remarks were poorly timed. On 9/14...believe me, I remember each and every of those days clearly being a New Yorker. No one, not on TV, not on the street, was talking about the political moves. It was a nation shocked.
In hindsight, the timing of these comments didn't matter. People who spoke up were shouted down as traitors and crazies. It took a lot of fortitude and organization to counter the spin machine the Bush Admin built up.
None of that happened on 9/14. There was no spin machine at that point. The Bush admin on 9/14 was just as confused as the entire nation.
The spin machine was not necessary at that point. The anger was already suitably shouting down those who brought up some concerns or issues. This thread is proof of that. Not really.
Gah! And it was never discussed or answered!! That's the point. If you started down that path you ended up being lamblasted for "blaming america". "we will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them." Bush said that (a primary component of the Bush doctrine) on the evening of 9/11. Debateable, but water long under the bridge, so whatever. I don't think it would have been any better recieved, my humble opinion. There was not much they could really do until post the 2006 midterms, but you are totally correct in that they never took a stand. Ever. Even after 2006.
Our democracy is a perpetual giant douche/turd sandwich conundrum between immoral anti-intellectualism and spineless incompetence. Politics is so douche.
I will make a general reply. Because i think we'd get into a quagmire if i got into each response...it's clear we disagree. My position was merely the timing. You are right that he would have encountered resistence no matter what because of the mentality at that time. But at least he could have been critical later on. Those first few days was a time of pain, and that's not the right time to bring up politics. Bush's comments on 9/11 were meant to console, not start a march to war. People needed to know those who did this would be brought to justice. That's a security issue. Iraq was not part of the Bush plan at that time. Bush was convinced later on by Dick. Lots of famous commentary on the internal debates and battles that happened later on. My point is not just about America by the way, it's a general one that is this: When something shocking happens, to any nation, person, or community - calling for reason is one thing, but criticizing leadership is a recipe for failure. People band together in adversity - if you appear to be against that in any way you will not shape people's minds but only turn them against you...even if later on people realize you were right...many of them will still hold a grudge. I am only speaking from a practical standpoint. If you really want to get your message through, timing is critical - that is all.
There is also plenty of "famous commentary" that shows that Iraq war planning was going on immediately upon Bush's inauguration. The planning did not start later, it was already well underway on 9/11. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/ http://www.nuclearfreenz.org.nz/before9-11.htm
I have no doubt on this. But I think the process by which the Administration because the public planning for a war on Iraq did not because until late Nov when they began to start building the case. I remember it well because I was horrified when it was first mentioned and I thought to myself - Bush is an idiot. Man, my heart sank when Iraq was brought up. It was such B.S. So obvious.
I must be missing something. Other then the prediction of interference in Iraq (which wasn't so 'out there' at the time) I don't see anything Notradamus-like in the post. Just standard fair rhetoric about government selling out to vested and self interests to further the goals of the 'elite' at the expense of the 'people.' Yada yada yada. All true, to an extent -- but nothing we hadn't seen from glynch, and others, a thousand times before -- though usually said with more tact. To quote the glynch mindset later in the thread: Bush's difference, however, was significant (IMO). Mismanagement! Incompetence? Arrogance? Those factors played a bigger role (again IMO) in the following clusterfck then anything noted in the post from 09-14-01. I would have been offended by the post at the time, and see little insight in it now. Self-congratulatory bump notwithstanding. I tend to agree more with many of the responses at the time. Sorry.
Glynch's post may have hit the nail on the head but if I remember correctly there was a LOT more rhertoric that was pretty inflammitory coming from him around that time period. I'm not gonna search for it, but I remember being pretty bitter about some of the things that Glynch in particular said........I guess I'm numb to it now though.
