Based on at least one overly emotional post I am not the ideal messenger on this board for this, but...... At this critical hour, the USA needs liberals more than ever. The moment we first attacked in the Gulf War,in 1990 or 1991? I personally felt with gut jarring ,100% certainty, that huge numbers of Arabs would hate us for a very long time. Many Liberals publicly argued at the time that it would lead to terroristic attacks on the USA itself. Liberals could see this, while conservatives either could not, or just didn't care. They tend to underestimate what they view as inferior peoples. The reason why liberals are critical in this regard is is because many on an instinctive level view the Arabs and other people regarldless of nationality or immigration status as human beings, with all the rights and talents that implies. We empathize with their suffering as well as that of the NYC victims. In fact , enraging as it is for some, we make little distinction between human beings within or without our own borders. Most anyone practically can pick up a gun and kill. Hoever, the skills to actually defeat terrorism, as opposed to wiping out some present day terrorist cells, are more sophisticated. This set of skills is almost impossible, if you view the terrorists and the countries and groups that support them as subhuman. To suceed we must win over them or at least their families hearts and minds. Aside from Liberals being necessary to reduce terrorists at home and abroad, they are necessary to keep the damage from terrorism under control in at least two ways that I can think of. First, articles from media such as the New York Times and general xenophobia can convince many that any Arab or Muslim American, no matter how settled, no matter how soccer mommish, is a potential terrorist to be feared. This will destroy this country . Liberals with their sophisticated empathy for all humanity are well equipped to stop the spread of this potential time bomb. Second, the terrorism in the Middle East, and also the unsophisticated often selfdefeating response on our part are often rooted to a certain extent in religious fundamentalism and religious bigotry. Liberals tendimg to be tolerant of various religions and are useful in combatting religious fundamentalism. Please feel free to add any other ways in which liberals can help win the war and not just the current battle against terrorism Liberals, your country needs you most at this time. Don't hold back out of fear, just because you seem to be vastly outnumbered at the present time!
Glynch, I admire your guts to post your views. It doesn't matter if you are conservative or liberal, black or white, male or female, Christian or Muslim, young or old, we all need to come together as a nation to fight this battle head-on. Even though we have different viewpoints on how to battle terrorism, we both want the same thing as an end result - for it to cease and for us, as US citizens, to feel safe.
glynch: do you not understand that should Bin Laden conquer the US, Christians will be summarily imprisoned and/or executed? Don't even ask about Jews. You can't reason with these Islamic extremists period.
Glinch, I agree with one thing in this post. You are not the ideal messenger on this board for this. I find your comments condescending, self-righteous, and divisive. To suggest that someone would have more or less of a regard for human life and human suffering, based on their political leanings, is absurd. This is not the kind of rhetoric we need at a time when the call has gone out for unity and support of this great nation. As a person who had friends serve in the gulf war, and an aunt who served as a nurse in that conflict, I do feel a need to address that part of this post. You stated: "The moment we first attacked in the Gulf War,in 1990 or 1991? I personally felt with gut jarring ,100% certainty, that huge numbers of Arabs would hate us for a very long time. Many Liberals publicly argued at the time that it would lead to terrorist attacks on the USA itself. Liberals could see this, while conservatives either could not, or just didn't care. They tend to underestimate what they view as inferior peoples. " "In fact, enraging as it is for some, we make little distinction between human beings within or without our own borders. " The Gulf War was not initiated by the United States, and it had nothing to do with the ethnic background of the people in Iraq. In case you didn't know, this war started when Iraq, led by a man named Saddam Hussein, invaded a neighboring country of Kuwait, an ally of the United States. A coalition of forces from many countries, including many Arabic nations (Saudi Arabia comes to mind) worked to eject the forces of Iraq from Kuwait. As far as humanity is concerned, thousands of Iraqi soldiers were taken prisoner, cared for, and returned to their home in this conflict. Coalition forces have remained in the area in an attempt to keep things stable, and limit further bloodshed in the region. The much debated no-fly zones were established to keep Saddaam from bombing defenseless people. The fact that people from Iraq are Arabic had nothing to do with it. The fact we angered many Arabic people, and risked further terrorism, had nothing to do with their particular ethnic background or religion. In fact, if you look at the makeup of the area, and the divisiveness among different people and religions within the middle east, you will see a lot of conflict -- and it has been that way for thousands of years. Simply siding, or not siding, with any group will anger another. Supporting countries that oppose tyranny and despots, who opposessing and slaughtering their own people, is the only choice the United States has had. In fact, we have gone beyond that by reaching out to those countries, and obeying rules which they choose to ignore. Second, you stated: "First, articles from media such as the New York Times and general xenophobia can convince many that any Arab or Muslim American, no matter how settled, no matter how soccer mommish, is a potential terrorist to be feared. This will destroy this country. ... Second, the terrorism in the Middle East, and also the unsophisticated often self defeating response on our part are often rooted to a certain extent in religious fundamentalism and religious bigotry. Liberals tendimg to be tolerant of various religions and are useful in combatting religious fundamentalism. The media has repeatedly emphasized that this is the work of a small group of people, and that we should not single out any particular ethnic or religious group. Again, suggesting that a particular political leaning makes someone more or less tolerant of other religions or cultures is ludicrous. With the exception of a few isolated incidents, which have been criticized in the press, the public has respected this. In fact, by arguing that this is a question of religion or cultural background, you are expressing a form of xenophobia, and encouraging those who do take this view. The point is we should NOT tolerate tyranny, oppression, or terrorism. Keep in mind, Bin Laden is being harbored by a country that currently has 8 American citizens in prison, on trial for expressing their own religious views. Their people can not watch televison, or express views contrary to what is approved by their government. Thank God, you live in a country where you can express your views.
That's an understatement. You would think that such a sophisticated, empathetic individual could have forseen this reaction, but lo and behold , Glynch, I guess your wisdom is not perfect.
"Please feel free to add any other ways in which liberals can help win the war and not just the current battle against terrorism " Just sit back and stay out of the way. We'll take care of it.
As someone else said in a previous post. Glynch, I hope you are a male between the ages of 18-25, and that you have registered for the draft. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is the law !! DaDakota
Sure did. It was one of the best and most moral decisions of my life to avoid the Vietnam War. Unlike dubya and Clinton I don't have to deny it. Very few Vietnam vets I have talked to have begrudged me that.
DuDakota, your posts are showing you are becoming quite an ass. Not that you are alone in this thread by any means. Of course we should pull togther to support the victims of the senseless, barbaric act. However, how to best prevent future such acts is a worthwhile debate that does not show a "lack of patriotism". Blind vengence is not the answer. We should take out Ben Laden and his direct supporters. But the more innocents we take out the more we motivate extremists for future such acts. I admit, my first reaction to the celebrating crowds after the events were to send a "friendly" cruise missile strait into them. But that would not be the right thing to do. We should proceed militarily as thoughtful and targeted as possible or the outcomes will be bad for all. Also, it is obvious we fought the Gulf War because of oil, or money, or however you want to look at it. We also practically enticed Saddam to go into Kuwait knowing full well we would have an excuss to lay our military on his butt. Not that he didn't deserve to have his butt destoryed for other reasons, but we set him up and out foreign policy actions surely costs a lot of other innocent lives caught in these political gamesmesship. That part of it was shameful. What also is shameful is we told the Kurds we would suppurt them against Saddam post war, but low and beyold we have never shown up with the arms because we would rather have them fight and kill each other with Saddam holding power by a thread. That is sick. Finally, we need to stop selling arms and engaing in warefare training to any shaky nations, or "rebels", or "freedmon fighters" or whatever we call them. Doing so just furthers war and killing on a global basis, and sooner or later such unstable groups turn on us. How many times does this have to happen before we learn.
I don't see how statements such as this, at a time like this, can at all be seen as good or appropriate or even humane. Does it matter what political persuasion the thousands who died were? Would it matter in the future? Should you wish that upon anyone?
Desert Scar, I am refering to him as a coward because he FLED the country during the vietnam war and now gets to be back in this country with no penalty at all. That is why I am calling him a coward. Anyone that will not defend his country, but runs like a scared rabbit, when duty calls is not an American. IMHO. Now, if you think that makes me an ass, well so be it. Carter should not have let these losers back in the country without reparations, what do we say to the hundreds of thousands who served in Vietnam? Well, guys you should have run. Glynch is a coward in my book, and to have him back in our country free and clear is a BLACK eye for all who served in Vietnam, including my father. DaDakota
Do you understand what you just wrote? Thay glynch failed ro defend his country but not fighting in Vietnam? Excuse me but when was anyone defending America over in Vietnam? I realize he could have been defending other Americans over there but America does not equal American. Many brave people chose not to fight in what they viewed as an unjust war. DaDakota, do you mind if I ask a hypothetical question? Say the US decides to invade Canada because we need their vast resources of, ummm, ice. They offered no provacation, we just have a national ice shortage. Do you think it possible for someone to realize this is an unjust war in which the US is the aggresor? If he evades the draft because of this is he still a coward? If you think he is still a coward well then I think you listen in blind acceptance to what our elected officals say. If he is no longer a coward in this situation, what is the difference between this Canadian War and the Vietnam war? Sure the US was probable "more right" in Vietnam but not by a whole hell of a lot...
