Point taken. I read an entirely different connotation from his post than you did and nothing I say will be able to convince you otherwise and likewise vice versa. I'll agree to disagree.
yeah an you're so smart and you can clearly read the author's mind.. even though he has not posted anything in his defense.. so why did the author choose to open this thread in D&D if his intention was to commemorate 911?
Well, that's the point - he wasn't specific. If you're asking me what he meant - i'm not a mind reader. But, maybe he meant Afghanistan - where we no doubt can agree we are fighting terrorists? Or maybe he meant the Philippines - where we no doubt can agree we are fighting terrorists? That begs the question anyway: he still only said support the troops, not the administration, or its policies. You have to make so many assumptions that even if you were 'right,' you're process is totally untrustworthy and hence unconvincing.
More conjecture and assumption. I don't know why. I can speculate. If I can think of a reason then am I right, even if I admit I don't why? Are you right because you can think of a reason for him to do it that fits your scenario? I think not. But to satisfy your question - maybe he knew that Hangout or D&D glynch would be compelled to tastelessly ramble about Iraq just because it was BixTexx that started the thread. Maybe he did it to show that the left knee jerk attacks him no matter what he posts. If so, maybe he was right after all. Fair enough
yeah he didn't specify an locations but how many locations are there right now? I'll tell you one Iraq - at least 100,000 troops are there right now. Can you tell me other locations where there is a big contingent of troops fighting to eliminate terrorism?
First off he didn't say anything about 'big contingent.' Again you just invent stuff to justify your editorial. I already named TWO places that are not Iraq where we are fighting to eliminate terrorists. Second, if you agree we are fighting terrorists in Iraq - which you obviously do from your statement above - then I have NO IDEA what YOUR problem is. Third, again...he only said support the troops not the administration, the administrations policies, or anything else. Please share one iota of PROOF otherwise.
Excuse me if I don't play the game that all you have to do is mention the suffering of 9/11 or the Rove branded "war on terror" ( what is the new and improved slogan?-- I have forgotten.) or "support the troops" or whatever code word and then we all must agree or be silent as Hayes idiotically suggested that Americans who sincerely disagree with the Iraq War should do. Let's keep the context in mind, as we had a tasteless state sponsored event in DC yesterday that exploited the 9/11 folks suffering in a style reminiscient of a third world strongman. Let me say that I have no problem with urging everyone to engage in a moment of silence, or prayer if you prefer, for the innocents folk killed in the terrorism of 9/11 and their grieving survivors. Let me also urge everyone to do likewise for the many more innocents killed in the Iraq War.
do you have a problem if I have a problem? I thought this was for debate and discussion.. If the author clearly wanted to debate and discuss this because if not, he could have easily put this somewhere else.. isn't that proof enough? can you tell me the other two places where the troops are fighting to eliminate terror?
Then we would have a problem ... Uh, no. It's not proof of anything. As I already pointed out there are other explanations besides yours. Before you ask me to tell you which ones like you do below, try reading my posts above first. The answer is there. I did already above - Afghanistan and the Philippines.
Afghanistan? So are we still actively looking for OBL? Wonder why he has not been caught yet. Philippines? Do you know how many troops are there right now? When you think of the statement support the troops around the world eliminating terror which place comes in to your mind first? Afghanistan, Philippines, or Iraq? What do you think was in bigtexxx's mind? Which one of those? Or something different and new - Iran..
I believe the slogan you are looking for would be the new and improved "global struggle against violent extremism"...
[deckard I want you to know I wrote a whole post and replaced it with this one in the interest of remaining civil] Does anyone really wonder why the D & D has gone downhill? Here's your answer.
Afghanistan, the Philippines, Pakistan (which we won't admit to) and, I suspect, we have teams of Special Forces scouting Iran for possible military action, and possibly Syria. That's besides Iraq, and doesn't include support installations in various countries, and I didn't mention Columbia, where we have small presence that is supposedly there to fight the drug cartels, but they fit the description of "terrorists," by any sane measure. I'm sure I've forgotten some places, but you make a mistake by assuming Iraq is the "be all, end all" of American military action against terrorists. Hayes would disagree, but we had more than plenty on our plate before Bush decided to invade and occupy Iraq, which is why I opposed it. Not that I didn't think Saddam should be ousted at some point, but that it was the wrong time, for the wrong reasons, without the support of our allies, in the main, and without the support of the world, overwhelmingly. Keep D&D Civil!!
Stop grasping at straws. Yes, we are still engaged in Afghanistan. No, it doesn't matter 'how many' troops are in the Philippines. In fact, IIRC the troops in the Philippines are primarily Special Forces, who operate in small units. Does that make a difference? No. Well actually I think of troops 'around the world' - there are a lot more operations going on than Iraq. And even if I thought of Iraq first, that doesn't get you anything. You can say 'I thought of Iraq first' so that is proof he meant to trap us into supporting administration policies in Iraq. That's just way beyond the scope of logical progression. No idea. You don't have any idea either. I'm pretty sure he has a broader scope of knowledge of military goings-on than you do. I'm sure he's heard about the troops in the Philippines and Afghanistan, for cryin' out loud. Look, its certainly within your right to think poorly of bigtexx, to oppose him on the bbs. But you don't have a leg to stand on here. The BEST you can logically say is that he duped glynch et al into being tastless (see Batman's post above). That's best case for you. Worst case is glynch et al tastlessly diverted this thread, and you contributed to it. All your guesses about his motivations/what he actually meant etc are just that - guesses, not proof - not reasonable argumentation.
UT's famous professor Jensen on 9/11 remembrances. ******** The Pain of September 10th Our Grief is Not Special By ROBERT JENSEN [Text of speech given at anti-war rally in Austin, TX, September 11, 2005] This is not a September 11 speech. This is a September 10 speech. We all remember what we felt on September 11, 2001. I want to talk about what I felt on September 10, 2001. On that day, I was in a state of profound grief, in a world saturated with unnecessary pain and suffering. Iím not talking about the inevitable pain of being human in the world, not the personal pain that comes with the unavoidable disappointment and death that is part of being human. We all cope with that, day after day, the best we can. Instead I want to speak of the pain that is manufactured by power: The pain visited upon people in wars that are started to consolidate the power of a nation and its elite; the pain created by economic policies designed to protect the wealth of the few; the pain inflicted on people not because it must be that way but because some choose to make it that way, with no concern for othersí suffering, which most of the rest of us accept without much thought, lest such thinking disturb our comfort and convenience. When we truly come alive in the world, that pain will wash over us and force us to ask why it canít be otherwise. We will feel not only the pain of people but -- even more deeply -- the pain of a living world that is slowly being strangled by the stupidity of one particular species. That was the pain and grief that many of us felt on September 10, 2001. Though there was nothing special about that day, on that day: --More than half the people of the world lived on less $2 a day. That means on September 10 more than 3 billion people did not have access to the clean water, food, shelter, clothing, or medical care to provide a minimally decent life. --About 500 children in Africa died every hour from poverty-related diseases. That means on September 10, about 12,000 children died in Africa as a direct result of an economic system which placed a high value on our comfort but no value on their lives. --Somewhere in a farmerís field, a plow hit an unexploded cluster bomb that let loose its deadly force. That means on September 10 -- in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Yugoslavia, or Afghanistan -- someone died because of our military plannersí willingness to sacrifice civilian life not only in the moment of war but for years to come. --In Iraq on September 10 -- almost two years before the Bush administration unleashed the dogs of war there -- innocent Iraqi civilians were dying from the lack of clean water, medicine, and adequate nutrition caused by the U.S.-enforced economic embargo. On that day, 150 Iraqi parents buried children because of a policy that the Republicans in both Bush administrations and the allegedly more benevolent Democrats in the Clinton administration had deemed acceptable. Those innocent lives were ìworth the sacrificeî to consolidate U.S. power. --And on September 10, 2001, our delusions about endless consumption in a high-energy world continued to eat away at the ecological fabric of the planet. On September 10, each of us did our part to contribute to making the planet unlivable. Each of us -- some more than others, but each of us in some way -- kept living a life that is unsustainable, a life that would be impossible without the inequality produced by global capitalism and U.S. imperial adventures. So, if my conclusion sounds harsh or uncaring forgive me, but it is long past the time to say this: There was nothing special about the pain of Americans on September 11, 2001. And there is no hope for this world until we in the United States -- the most powerful and affluent country in the history of the world -- understand that. The deaths of 3,000 people in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania mattered, but no more and no less than the thousands of other deaths in the world that day, and the day before, and the day before that. Or the deaths since, as the United States has used the grief of Americans to justify two illegal wars of aggression, wars to consolidate the power and control of the few, wars accepted by the many out of moral laziness and fear. All over the country today, people will be speaking about the nobility of the United States, the barbarism of the attacks on us, the deep suffering of Americans. I will do none of that. I will not mark September 11 as a day of special grief until all of us mark every day as a day of special grief for those killed by the callous and cruel exercise of power. I am through indulging the grief of Americans. I will not be part of it. I will not contribute to it any longer. Until we -- not the leadership but us, ordinary people -- in the United States learn to feel the pain of September 10 with as much intensity and humanity as we felt the pain of September 11, I fear we are doomed. We will never be able to be fully human in the modern world. And if we in the United States -- the citizens of the empire -- do not find a way to become fully human and dismantle the empire non-violently from within, then itís not clear the modern world will survive. This empire will eventually be destroyed, as is the fate of all empires. The question that should haunt us is, ìGiven the enormous destructive capacity of the United States and its demonstrated willingness to use that power, will the world survive the destruction of this empire?î We must save ourselves, and in the process make it possible for the new world that is coming -- with or without us -- to be born as gently as possible. If we do this -- if we struggle together -- that new world can be a world redeemed, a place of ìsmall gardens and bright fish,î to borrow from a poet. It can be a world in which we can struggle to bear the ordinary pain of being human, the pain of that inevitable disappointment and death, in loving connection with each other and with the living world around us. If we donít do this -- if we donít save ourselves -- then we will create a world in which the pain we see now will be but prelude to something much grimmer, something we can only imagine. That fate, imagined throughout human history, typically is called hell. We rapidly are squandering the beauty and bounty of creation, and through our greed and gullibility creating a kind of hell, not in our imaginations but on this earth. Time is running out. The patience of the living world is running out. And when that living world turns to us for a final accounting, when it starts to balance the books with us, please donít then begin to speak of justice, for it will be too late. Those forces coming to take back the world for the living will be justice, come alive in the world. And make no mistake: Justice will be coming for us. http://counterpunch.org/jensen09122005.html
Let's not talk about 9/11, let's talk about 9/10. That's great, glynch. You can certainly prove a point beyond a shadow of a doubt.
