Skip to main content

View Diary: Barack Obama, Drone Ranger (347 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Far Too Many Americans Accept (32+ / 0-)

    ... the fact that there is "collateral damage" during drone strikes.  And that it is an unfortunate side effect.

    The policy ought to be unacceptable and is certainly not sustainable in the long run.

    •  they are not accepting, they are choosing who dies (6+ / 0-)

      we are in a zero sum fight to the death with terrorists and the people in danger of being killed in this fight are the following:

      1. US civilians
      2. US soldiers
      3. terrorists
      4. civilians the terrorists hide amongst

      one or more of these groups of people are going to die in this fight.  there is no resolution to this fight that does not involve people from these groups dying.  that's the reality of the situation we are in.

      so, then it becomes a choice.  who is going to be killed.  i think the choice by the US has been plainly made by choosing to use drone strikes.

      the choice to use drone strikes is a choice to kill terrorists before they kill US civilians without risking the lives of US soldiers even if it means killing civilians that the terrorists are hiding amongst.

      that is the choice.

      we are choosing with drone strikes to save our soldiers at the cost of killing civilians.  

      that is what is what choosing between the lesser of two evils really looks like.

      Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?

      by AntonBursch on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:16:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In other words, killing "them" over there (39+ / 0-)

        before they get over here?
        Why are we over there again?
        That's a shitty choice you gave, AB.
        We need to get the hell off other people's property. Out of other people's country.

        Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

        by JoanMar on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:27:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm Intimately Familiar (26+ / 0-)

          ... with the concept of "Zero Sum Game" for I formally studied international relations for almost a decade.

          It was consistently used by Cold War hawks from the 1940s through the 1960s to justify any and every policy enacted under both Democratic and Republican administrations.  Detente between the Soviet Union and the United States eventually changed that destructive thinking.

          Sorry Anton, but I'm not buying it.

        •  yes it is a shitty choice (0+ / 0-)

          but that's life sometimes no good options just bad ones

          •  Agreed (17+ / 0-)

            In this case, the least bad option is to stop bombing people, improve our image in the world, and work to make our anti-terrorism security here better (efforts which do not involve security theater or privacy violations).

            "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

            by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 07:53:00 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  right (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hooper

              and love and peace will conquor all

              meanwhile back in the real world we still have terrorists to deal with and they very inconsiderately refuse to wear signs that say 'kill me I'm the bad guy' and only gather far far away from civilians

              •  That is indeed exactly what I said (11+ / 0-)

                You are truly a master of interpretation.

                And in this real world, the fact that killing terrorists also involves killing civilians would seem to suggest that it might be a good idea to pursue alternate paths.

                "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

                by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 08:32:08 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  in a war and make no mistake this is a war (0+ / 0-)

                  innocent people will die, it sucks I wish it otherwise but that's just reality

                  and innocent people have already died, now if you have an alternative viable path for stopping the terrorist please speak up but if all you have is quixotic complaints then on the whole I'd rather you didn't

                  •  I gave an alternate viable path (7+ / 0-)

                    in my previous comment, which you snarkily dismissed. I gave a more detailed list of ideas here. Since none of them involve killing people, I expect you won't consider them "viable," but that's not my problem.

                    "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

                    by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:19:42 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  right because I just love to kill people (0+ / 0-)

                      in fact if I don't get in at least 3 murders before lunch I get rather cranky

                      wow you know you're really dead set on proving you don't want an actual adult discussion aren't you?

                      you're right I dismissed your ideas because all the image building in the world does not change that we are dealing with people that loathe are very existence, there is no appeasing or persuading people like that

                      and build a better mouse trap? yeah taht will work for a bit, till the mouse gets smarter

                      so no those are not viable answers to the immediate problem

                      as to your other point

                      1. even if those nations harbor terrorists? harbor weapons of mass destruction or programs to build them?

                      2. I've never really cared for any aspect of american forgien policy in regards to friendly dictators, of course there will be pratical consequences to severing such ties so that action becomes one of political will

                      are americans willing to take a hit on oil on a matter of principle? cyincally I think not but I wouldn't object to being surprised there

                      but again this isn't going to slove the problem in question

                      3 actually I think we should do the opposite, cut forgien aid and stop being the world's unpaid and unappreicated policeman

                      4. frankly I (barely) side with Isreal, Palestine needs to prove they are sincere before we deal with Isreal

                      5 as opposed to our citizens? sorry but corporations are not nice to people in general

                      6 frankly I personally  am tired of being held accountable for actions I never had input on or were even alive for and this is teh great problem in the middle east people holding grudges for events in teh past

                      yes those things happened, no the US shouldn't have done them but the Islamic world and the world in general doesn't get to perpetually hold them over the US' head whenever it's convient

                      As a third generation Irish I don't hold England responsible for the centuries of abuse of Ireland because England has changed.

                      •  You were the one who characterized me (13+ / 0-)

                        as saying "love and peace will conquor [sic] all," so any hope of an adult conversation was kind of scuttled from the start.

                        There will always be a very small number of nihilists, but the idea that most terrorists just irrationally loathe our existence is absurd. I hate to break it to you, but terrorists are actually humans with human motivations, and the main cause of Islamic terrorism are the political decisions the US made after WWII.

                        1) Yes, even if. We aren't the world's policeman. Again, I'm not claiming this is a perfect solution, just that it's better than killing civilians and causing blowback worse than the original terrorist. As for "weapons of mass destruction"...honestly, at this point I don't even know if you're referring to Iran or Iraq or what.

                        2) Our continuing support for brutal Arab dictators is one of, if not the, major reason so many people in the Middle East despise us. So yes, severing ties with them will help.

                        3) "Unpaid"? Our government, perhaps, but our corporations have been reaping the rewards of our Empire since WW2, and they have done very well indeed.

                        And do you even know how much we spend on foreign aid? One percent. I'm pretty sure the Pentagon loses more money each year than we spend on foreign aid.

                        4) Whatever your opinions on I/P are, it's a fact that the Palestinian issue is one of the main grievances most Arabs have with America.

                        5) So not only do you think we shouldn't have foreign aid, but you don't mind corporations exploiting foreigners because it's not us? Because I have a hard time reading that comment any other way.

                        6) Yeah, except that we're still doing the same thing (see: Saudi Arabia, Mubarak until right before he was deposed, etc). Supporting brutal dictators isn't a shameful episode in America's past; it's proud, official US policy. An apology might at least be a sign that we're preparing to change course.

                        "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

                        by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:52:10 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  that wasn't a characterization (0+ / 0-)

                          it was a sarcastic response to a response high on ideals and fluff and low on realisitic solutions

                          I also never said terrorists were not human maybe you should go reread what I said about them?

                          1. that's fine I just wanted to know the parameters you were suggesting, personally I think this is somewhat wrong but at the same time it's somewhat right

                          2 as I said there will be pratical consequences so good luck convincing a majority of american's on that (and to be clear that's mean both seriously and sarcastically as I am not entirely sure how much I disagree with you)

                          3 empire? seriously? do you even understand what an empire truly is? and yes unpaid though frankly that aspect matters less to me then the unappricated. The world demands the US keep everyone in line and then bitches about how the US does it. If you don't like it then don't demand it

                          4 actaully it's more a fact that the arabic world still refuses to acknowledge the basic right for isreal to exist. No the ball as it where is very much in the Islamic world and I personally am uttterly unmoved by all the bullshit about how 'mean' the US is

                          5 Actaully I just think we should remove forgien aid then reapply it on a case by case basis. As to corporations, again not what I said, this tendency of yours is really starting to annoy me. The fact is I think we just have to be careful how much we 'demand' from corporations becuase I am not a socialist ( and I mean that in the actual definition of the word). I'm all for regulations but not government ownership

                          6 um yeah I think that's a distortion of matters in many regards

                      •  Cut foregn aid? Do you know how much of this (0+ / 0-)

                        exists?

                  •  There is no "war" on America. That is a (11+ / 0-)

                    Republican lie.

                    There are criminals loose in various nations who wish to perpetuate criminal acts against the USA.  They should be addressed as Germany handled their terrorists and other nations have handled their terrorists - through the legal system. And with special forces if absolutely necessary on a very limited basis.

                    At the same time, there are real complaints that many cultures have against the USA and many of them are legitimate complaints.  

                    We need to examine our own foreign policy and trade policy and address those areas which can be addressed.

                    Is there a need for US forces to be permanently based in Saudi Arabia or Oman or elsewhere?  No, not if the USA moves away from middle eastern oil as crucial to our economy.

                    There are many, many non-military ways to address the problem of terrorism AND their recruiting tools.  We don't even try most of them.  

                    We own a big hammer and we see nails everywhere. It is a massive failure of leadership and human intelligence.

                    War. hahaha.... what a joke.  Three terrorist cells, a dozen years ago kill a lot of people in the USA.  And for that, we are in a continual war?  Forever? Because that's how long others are going to hate us and some of their reasons are founded in fact.  

                    If we are at Forever War, that's our own fault -- failure to solve this problem without war.

                    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                    by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:15:24 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  well we're going to disagree on that (0+ / 0-)

                      though I am not entirely sure it would techinically a war the fact is we face individuals and organizations fanatically devouted to destroying us

                      if you want to deny reality that's fine, seeing as you've already lied about me I won't say that that surprises as it doesn't

                      •  The fact you believe they are "fanatically (10+ / 0-)

                        devoted to destroying us" is part of the whole issue.

                        The reality is that there are groups who have their fanatic beliefs around the idea that the USA is occupying holy land in the middle east and we have no right to be there.

                        They also have fanatic beliefs that we are killing muslims and perhaps engaged in "new Crusades" (GWBs own words) against Islam.

                        So, there is a basis for their fanatic beliefs because we do not, in fact, have to permanently station troops in middle eastern nations for any reason.  And the Bush and Obama administration both have undertaken actions which reinforce the "war on Islam" propaganda.

                        We can address both of those main issues - and the side issue of Israel - without drone bombing or other acts of warfare.  

                        Until we do address issues which other people in other lands might have a right to object to, then we haven't really even tried.  The plain truth of the matter is that the USA does whatever it likes in pretty much whatever country solely due to our enormously powerful military.  Without that, we'd have to think out our actions and be a little more considerate of the rights of other peoples to have beliefs about their own lands and what should be done there.

                        And that's leaving out the whole thing of the USA starting up Al Qaeda's predecessors in the first place by arming and funding the mujaheddin. And assassinating the elected leader of Iran in the 1950s because he was a touch too socialist for us. Then installing the hated and cruel Shah who was eventually overthrown by the Ayatollah.  And then, arming Saddam with chemical weapons (Rummy smiling and shaking his hand) for him to kill his own people with....  And, and, and....

                        Our own illegal and immoral actions are behind a lot of the real hate extending today.

                        Perhaps we should try being a bit more just in our treatment of other countries.

                        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                        by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:42:35 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I'm sure that all makes sense to you (0+ / 0-)

                          me I just find your position so far from mine to be absurd, coupled with the fact that so far you are an unapologetic liar and well I simply have nothing to say to you that wouldn't get me in trouble

                          so please go chase yourself for all I care

                          •  Well, I tried rational discussion. Best wishes! nt (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            k9disc, Chi, Aunt Martha, congenitalefty

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:56:25 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You start from the premise that we must never stop (10+ / 0-)

                            occupying and abusing Middle-Eastern and North African peoples.

                            Then you leap to the conclusion that when they say they will fight us until we leave them the fuck alone, they are really trying to "destroy us".

                            But it's you who believes that destruction is the only thing that will get us to stop.

                            "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                            by JesseCW on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:58:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  actually no (0+ / 0-)

                            I never said that

                            Frankly I want us off oil both because it allows us to make what I would call an idealistic choice (pulling out of dictatorships like Sadia Arabia) without suffering the pratical effects we would right now and because climate change is a real and pressing danger

                            More over in terms of forgien policy, I'm closer to an isolationist (though not in the strigent terms of the movement circa 1930s). I am tired of the US being the world's policeman and punching bag at the same time. I'm tired of us sending billions of dollars overseas while our infrastructure crumbles, our schools fall behind and so on.

                            In point of fact I think it past time the Middle East particularly 'grows up' (ie learns to deal with its own problems without holding the world's energy hostage)

                            Yes I do also believe that as it stands there is no reasoning with the terrorists and as such the only thing we can do is what we have been doing. But at the same time that alone is not going to slove the problem.

                            As I told Mom Cat, my view on this topic is complicated

                          •  Well, then, we do agree upon many things. (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mike Taylor, Chi, TealTerror, Aunt Martha

                            But the excessive fear of terror is a problem.

                            Terrorists exist to cause terror - fear.  Refuse to be afraid of them; to change our lives because of them (think London during the Blitz in WWII); and they are already defeated.

                            Fall for the fear, and that just plays into their game and perpetuates the game.

                            I'm not an isolationist. But I do think the US military should be brought home to a great extent and the rest of the world should learn to fund and keep their own peace without our overbearing thumb.

                            I don't think the mideast needs to grow up, though. It is our -- and other nations' -- addiction to oil that is the problem.  Other sources of energy are readily available, as Germany is currently proving to the rest of the world.

                            It's to our own disadvantage that we continue to "need" to stay involved in the middle east.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:17:01 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Your view is not "complicated". It's just not (11+ / 0-)

                            based on observable fact.

                            They don't "hate us for our freedoms".  They don't hate us just because we exist.

                            They hate us because of shit we're doing to them.  We can stop doing that shit.

                            It would help if you dropped the colonialist trope that people in the Middle East are children.

                            We haven't hoisted some burden, Rudyard.  We've climbed on other peoples shoulders and beaten them like rented mules.

                            Once in a while, they violently try to throw us off.  We're completely free to just leave them the fuck alone.

                            "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                            by JesseCW on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:52:58 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Amen: (5+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JesseCW, k9disc, PhilJD, Chi, Aunt Martha
                            (1) They hate us because of shit we're doing to them.  

                            (2) We can stop doing that shit.

                            Thanks for summing up so clearly. My thoughts were too wordy. It's late.
                            We're completely free to just leave them the fuck alone.
                            We should work towards that as rapidly as humanly possible.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 01:00:36 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  lol (0+ / 0-)

                            just because you say something doesn't make it true

                            you talk about 'observable facts' and then make a bunch of claims that have absolutely no observable facts behind them

                            nnow that's irony

                  •  Sometimes you just have to kill innocents to get (8+ / 0-)

                    the enemy?

                    That's really your argument?

                    It was Bin Laden's, too.

                    "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                    by JesseCW on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:54:21 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  WHere is the declaration of war? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    TealTerror, Aunt Martha

                    With what country are we at war with?

                    When will the war be finished?

                    We are not involved in a war right now.

                    Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                    by k9disc on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 03:53:21 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Evidence of civilian deaths other ... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  duhban

                  ... than second-hand "reports" from the terrorists or their sympathizers themselves?  Before answering that trick question--there isn't any--I'm going to do something that Bill Moyers didn't, which is provide a link to 8 USC § 1481. That has been the law of the land for a long time, but some on this site would ignore it.

                  I would tip you, but the man took away my tips.

                  by Tortmaster on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:05:31 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  duhban, if you haven't noticed, the world is (6+ / 0-)

                literally a powder keg at the moment.  China, Japan, Mali, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Iran...all it will take to turn this type of instability into a global conflict is just one death, or one unprovoked killing, or any number of scenarios that involve using violence to resolve problems.

                Armed conflict of any kind should be the very last option we choose to achieve our objectives.  It is our sense of humanity that will save us: not the killing of innocent women and children...that is the easiest way to make enemies who will never give up until they have caused our destruction.

                •  seriously? (0+ / 0-)

                  you seriously are going to suggest that pursuing terrorists, people that have attacked us is going to lead to war with china?

                  Wow, that's so absurd I really have no response that wouldn't breach civility to that.

                  •  Okay, I will spell this out very slowly, so that (7+ / 0-)

                    you can understand...China and Japan are in a standoff that could suck this country into a conflict if there is any type of armed confrontation between those two countries (because of a previous treaty with Japan)...if that happens, then we will be in an extremely vulnerable position because of our involvement in provoking anger and instability in the middle east, which is already a powder keg...the anger caused by our drone attacks in Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan has emboldened al-Qaeda to move into areas of Africa (see the conflict in Mali)...right now there are at least fifteen area conflicts in Africa alone that are reason for concern, especially when combined with the volatility that is being caused by the uprisings in Iran, Syria, Egypt, Israel, Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan.

                    In other words, we need to back down from our military aggressiveness and pursue more peaceful means of resolving conflicts.  We wouldn't be the first super power in world history to be defeated because of over expansion of military force.

                    Your comment was absolutely absurd.

                    •  your analysis is critically flawed (0+ / 0-)

                      because the fact is that the 2 areas are unrelated and I highly doubt China really wants to even chance a war with Japan which while very quiet has one of the most modren and well equipped militaries in the world.

                      Japan on it's own could easily contain China and China knows this and thus is reduced to bluffing and acting tough.

                      You can't just randomly point at problem areas in the world and say 'see! we should let those terrorists go' when in fact it is such a lassiez faire attitude that is partly to blame for their existence in the first place

                      •  Read the world economic forum's global (6+ / 0-)

                        risks report; in fact, if you really think this type of tactic is going to eliminate our enemies (instead of multiplying them), then you really do have your head buried in the sand...

                        Many world experts are saying that the world is in a "perfect storm" situation RIGHT NOW, and all it will take to create a global conflict is one misstep, which in turn will tank the world economy, which in turn will cause more military conflict.

                        I don't know what it is about the "let's kill 'em all" mentality that creates so many people who are willing to push the world into global conflict.

                        •  the only thing I really think (0+ / 0-)

                          is that you enjoy telling people what they think even when you clearly have no clue what they really think

                          Your senario is absurd end of story

                          •  Says the guy who thought Terrorists (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            TheMomCat, JesseCW, praenomen, Aunt Martha

                            attacked a PEMEX building in Mexico.

                            Good-grief.

                            Mexico?  

                            You're just way too into the "terrorists are threatening us everywhere" fear society.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:17:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  that's a lovely lie (0+ / 0-)

                            thank you for your smear

                          •  asdf - modified diary here: (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            TheMomCat, JesseCW, praenomen, Aunt Martha

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:17:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  modified nothing (0+ / 0-)

                            I add a clarification because someone and I actually believe (without checking) it was you some how thought I was saying it was actually a terrorist bomb

                            I never said that, I said it REMINDED me of WTC as I read it, nothing more nothing less

                            I expect, hell I demand an apology

                          •  asdf (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            TheMomCat, JesseCW, praenomen, Aunt Martha
                            the army is actually currently running away from the site. Which points to the site being dangerous and to me raises speculation about this being a bomb (much like how the 1990s WTC bombing)
                            Neither was the case. The "army" never "ran away" from the site.  The first responders arrived and continued to search for victims and survivors.

                            "raises speculation about this being a bomb" placed by who?  The Women's Christian Temperance League?

                             Or the same people who conducted "the 1990s WTC bombing"?

                            Anyway, a lot of early reporting is confused and misdirected and just plain wrong.  Which is why it is always wrong to bring up bombings when there is some sort of accident. Or whatever happened.  

                            Invitation not accepted, sorry. It is what it is.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:32:10 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hmm that sounds like ct. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ek hornbeck, YucatanMan, praenomen


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:35:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Which as we all know... (4+ / 0-)

                            stands for "Completely True".

                            Or Connecticut, I forget.

                          •  Currently trembling? ;-) n/t (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ek hornbeck, TheMomCat

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:00:23 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Our "friend" should be (0+ / 0-)

                            if he gets caught espousing ct here.


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:08:07 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  again you're being dishonest (0+ / 0-)

                            the full quote shows that I was reacting to a second hand account

                            now are you going to apologize or not? because I'm not going to apologize for an intitial reaction which was not even stated as you are trying to frame it

                          •  Tomayto / Tomahto. :-) (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Aunt Martha

                            I linked to my own comment in the diary. Everyone can read the diary if they like.  And your many comments everywhere where you seem to have fear about terrorists.

                            Here's the thing:  This FEAR is a huge part of the problem.  Everyone needs to let it go and Get Rational about what we are doing.  

                            This FEAR is what FDR warned about:  The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.  Because by falling for the Big Lies, we then permit or encourage policies and actions which hurt us in the end.

                            Yes, there may be terrorists in the world. Yes, they may occasionally kill someone.  Did being born American come with a "universally loved" certificate?  

                            BUT:  "the terrorists," however many are still left alive, cannot ever defeat the whole nation or even ever again kill very many people or even really disrupt the operation of a single one of our thousands of cities. So the fear is far, far overblown.

                            We don't have to change our whole way of life, surrender all our rights and freedoms to continual government monitoring and persecute whistleblowers who help us understand what the government is up to.

                            We have far more to fear from the mass criminals in the banking system than from "terrorists."  I might be killed by a terrorist too, but the chances are far greater of a drunk driver or a safe falling from an open window or something else doing me in.

                            We fear "terrorists" far out of proportion to the real danger because that's what Bush/Cheney wanted.  And so we continue to enrich their cronies through our fear and therefore permission for permanent war.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:55:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  for someone that knows nothing about me (0+ / 0-)

                            you seem overly impressed with your ability to read me and frankly as I said elsewhere if you're not mature enough to apologize then we have nothing more to discuss

                            I will not reward you with my attention for lying about me, it's that simple

                          •  Just how did that remind you of the WTC? n/t (4+ / 0-)


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:33:02 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  if you want to ask that (0+ / 0-)

                            then kindly do it in that diary because even if I disagree with the diarist it's not right to have an offtopic discussion here and that certainly is off topic

                          •  That's absurd, (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ek hornbeck, YucatanMan, Aunt Martha

                            because it's part of the topic now since you responded to Yucatanman and are demanding he apologize.


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:55:20 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  in the spirit of being nice (0+ / 0-)

                            I'll answer even though I only responded to Yucatanman because he included in on topic response and then  refused to apologize.

                            To me it was simply a gut reaction to what I was reading both with where the explosion took place (the basement according to reports I read) and that the area was apparently being at least evacuated for the moment. However it was nothing more then that and frankly if I could I'd go back and just not mention it. When I posted the diary it was rushed and about as close to stream of consciousness as I write.

                          •  I'm sorry you are upset, but if you cannot see (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            TheMomCat, k9disc, Aunt Martha

                            that your diary alluded to terrorists bombing the PEMEX building in Mexico City, then I don't know what I can do.

                            Regardless of whether you are responding to another report or whatever, "explosion" does not take the leap to "bomb" and "WTC" without "terrorists" being part of the mix, because terrorists make bombs and the WTC garage was blown up by terrorists in the "1990s."

                            Those were all your interjections.

                            Your gut reaction to an explosion in Mexico City was "WTC bombing" which wasn't done by the Girl Scouts, it was done by terrorists.

                            So, I did not lie about you (that's my perception and I'm sorry you disagree, seriously).  

                            I think you've got a lot of good thoughts, but there seems to be a blind spot in discussing terrorism.

                            You've made up your mind they want to kill us all, when Bin Laden said he'd make America bankrupt itself, not kill us all.  And we've done exactly that, thanks to Bush/Cheney and everyone who believes in permanent war.

                             > We've handed Bin Laden a win, even though he's permanently dead.

                             > We continue to hand him The Win as long as we continue to persecute the permanent war.

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:55:56 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  this is not about perception (0+ / 0-)

                            it ceased being perception when I flat out stated that I in no way intended to even imply anything other then an initial reaction and you persisted in trying to call it something else

                            that makes you a liar, and if you think this is me 'upset' then I rather hope you don't ever actually see me upset

                            now please go away I have nothing to discuss with dishonorable liars and I'm not going to defend my diary in another person's diary as that's just rude

                          •  Where is the space between these two statements: (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            TheMomCat, Aunt Martha

                            You:

                            I flat out stated that I in no way intended to even imply anything other then an initial reaction
                            Me:
                            Your gut reaction to an explosion in Mexico City was "WTC bombing" which wasn't done by the Girl Scouts, it was done by terrorists.
                            They seem to be saying the same thing to me. But, then, it is very late and who knows, right? I mean, who really, really knows?

                            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                            by YucatanMan on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 01:23:56 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What you intended (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Aunt Martha

                            and what you wrote are obviously contradictions. It is not a perception, it is what you wrote and what you have been writing here. Indignantly denying that and calling someone a "liar" after they have presented facts, does not exonerate you.

                            You have been perpetuating right wing talking points and possibly conspiracy theories which are bannable.

                            I suggest strongly that you apologize for you mistaken agenda and be more careful in the future.


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 01:39:04 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  you're welcome to your opinion (0+ / 0-)

                            I disagree and the clarification I offered in the actual diary should make that bloody freaken clear

                            so I will not apologize for calling him/her out for what he/she is

                          •  Not an opinion, fact (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Aunt Martha

                            but you stick with the denial.


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:05:17 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  lmao (0+ / 0-)

                            well aren't you rather arrogant to be confusing your opinion with fact

                            should I bow down as well? or does a simple master do?

                            obviously talking to you is about as productive as the other guy

                          •  Ad hominums alway work. Enjoy (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Aunt Martha


                            "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                            TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                            by TheMomCat on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 03:38:05 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I really don't think you know what (0+ / 0-)

                            an ad hominum really is

                            when you demonstrate arrogant behavior pointing that out isn't an ad hominum

                  •  We're currently harboring known terrorists (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Aunt Martha, JoanMar

                    inside the United States.

                    If a Venezuelan drone launches a missile into a neighborhood in Miami killing  Luis Posada Carriles, several of his suspected terrorist associates, and four kids...

                    do you seriously think that won't spark a massive war which could easily escalate into a full blown Third World war?

                    "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                    by JesseCW on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:03:00 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  i suppose the flippant answer (0+ / 0-)

                      is to point out that not only does venezuelan not have drones but they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of pentrating us air space

                      that said a cusory reading up on the man points out that you're implied protrayl of the man and what actually is happening are not the same thign

                      Yes he lives in maimi but he also is facing numerous charges in the US justice system

                      Last I checked the governmetns haboring terrorist don't generally do that.

                      and WW3? I'd love to see how a hypothetical attack by venezuela leads to WW3 just to satisfy my curosity

                      •  What makes you sure they don't have drones? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Aunt Martha

                        What's more, it's a certainty that they will have them within a few years.  You can count on Russia getting into that lucrative market, particularly now that Iran has let them study captured examples.

                        Do you believe the US would not massively and excessively retaliate?

                        Do you believe that the rest of South America would, at this point, just whimper to the UN?

                        Don't put words in my mouth, btw.  I said Third World War, not World War 3.

                        "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                        by JesseCW on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 01:45:44 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I would be incredibly surprised (0+ / 0-)

                          if tehy did have drones and even if they do get some knock offs in a couple years the odds of them using the drones to provoke a possible war with the US would be staggering.

                          I would think you'd have better luck getting struck by lightening 3 times then winning the lottery

                          And what's the difference between Third World War and World War 3? I apologize as I didn't mean to offend I just didn't see a difference between the two.

                          As to what the US would do, honestly I think that would depend on who is in charge but the point is this all started with a what if from you about a terrorist (as the man seems to have admitted that part) that you alleged the US is protecting.

                          Except the US is not and yes there's some hypocrisy in the man's case but then again it happened under Bush II so is that a big surprise? The fact is that the man's hardly being harbored and in point of fact the US has tried to get rid of him but no other nation will take him.

                          •  Yeah. (0+ / 0-)
                            And what's the difference between Third World War and World War 3? I apologize as I didn't mean to offend I just didn't see a difference between the two
                            .

                            I'm getting that.

                            We are refusing to extradite an admitted terrorist to face trial.  This did not "happen under Bush".  It's happening right now.  We are still refusing to honor our extradition treaties.

                            It's just not true that "no other nation will take him".  Venezuela and Cuba would both love for him to pay a visit.

                            This is the excuse you use to justify bombing villages halfway around the world - that terrorists live there and the local government will not or can not hand them over to us.

                            Now, what do you think happens if the rest of the world sees you as a role model, rather than embracing your view that the US alone is not bound by the laws of war?

                            "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                            by JesseCW on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:24:18 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  according to wikipedia (0+ / 0-)

                            the man was granted aslyum by Bush in 2005 and then was convicted in absentia by the Argentina government

                            He has since been brought to trial in the US for lying to the US  government

                            The US government refuses to extradite because according to the courts he would surely face torture (and yes I get that is where the hypocrisy comes in given Bush' actions)

                            Those are the abbrivated facts as I understand them if that is not the case I would welcome clarification

                            Further let's be clear here I said I support drone strikes against terrorists. You are trying to turn that into an emotional argument and create what ifs to support your case however so far they haven't worked out too well.

                            I am sorry but while idealistic I don't think your idea ultimately works. As much as I would like it to you can't just flip a switch and make everyone love you

                            And just what laws of war are you alleging the US has broken?

                          •  Might makes right, I guess... (0+ / 0-)

                            We don't have to worry as long as we're superior in terms of military or national might...

                            Interesting... I just got blasted with this idea while writing this headline:

                            The people who are terrified of terrorism and will give up their humanity to fend it off are strong authoritarian followers.

                            It's a subordination to power thing. They can't stop us so we should feel free... They should just let us do what we want to do because we're more powerful.

                            That's kind of creepy.

                            I'm sure that's not everybody's reason for supporting perpetual warfare, but I now think it's probably more people than I would have initially thought.

                            Peace~

                            Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                            by k9disc on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 04:17:20 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  This is the longest conversation against the (0+ / 0-)

                          Right wall I've ever seen without HRs.

                          Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

                          by Smoh on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 07:34:09 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, that's death and destruction. (5+ / 0-)

            Not life.
            We can and should do better.

            Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

            by JoanMar on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:21:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I do not deny my heart has greatly desired this. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TheMomCat, Chi
            And now at last it comes.

            You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the Earth.

            All shall love me and despair!

            No Galadriel
            •  ha ha ha (0+ / 0-)

              but while funny that's a strawman

              •  Not a strawman (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ek hornbeck, JesseCW, Mike Taylor, Chi

                this is what you said

                we are in a zero sum fight to the death with terrorists
                but that's life sometimes no good options just bad ones
                There are better options, you just reject them as does the President.


                "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                by TheMomCat on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:26:11 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  actually (0+ / 0-)

                  I never said

                  we are in a zero sum fight to the death with terrorists
                  so you're either half right or half wrong which ever way works for you
                  •  You are correct about the first quote (6+ / 0-)

                    but as for the second and your comments here in these threads, you sound very like the same people who lead us into these wars.  You can't see that terrorism is a tactic, not something to wage war against, like drugs, we see how well that's turned out. The reason that the perpetrators of the first WTC bombing are in jail was because of good police work, not a military action.

                    The US is just creating more reason to to hate it with drone attacks without justification, Where is the proof that any of these people were "terrorists" or "insurgents"?

                    What is the justification for attacking first responders after the first attack?

                    This is what terrorists do. The US has reduced itself to being the terrorist in their eyes.

                    Drones are exacerbating the problem and one more reason for the hatred.


                    "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                    TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                    by TheMomCat on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:49:53 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I sound like someone that has a complicated (0+ / 0-)

                      view on the topic because I do and frankly I am talking to people with a monooptic view most of whom can not seem to understand that not everyone views the world the same way as they do.

                      Further they can't seem to understand that just because I disagree that doesn't make me 'like the same people who lead us into these wars'

                      the world is not black and white and frankly ironically that has been one of my points from the very begining. If you choose not to accept that, that's your choice. I would be lying though if I said I don't find it an odd and even quotoxtic one. But I don't demonize your choice which again to be frank is something you and a number of others could stand to work on.

                      As I told Teal, (or at least tried to) I don't have any easy answers to the middle east and terrorism however to me if drones lessen the risks to our military then I am for that.

                      Further the fact is that the 'hatred' towards teh US is a mix that is both justified and not justified in my opinion but honestly the terrorists could just choose to stop. Why should the US give in to the demands of terrorists? Why should the US allow the terrorist to come up with another 9.11? Or another train bombing?

                      •  Your view of the world (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        TealTerror, Aunt Martha, ek hornbeck

                        seems very right wing and one sided as far as the mythical "war on terror" is concerned.

                        And, yes, you are espousing the same views that not only got the US into these wars but are perpetuating and expanding them

                        No the world is not "black and white" but your arguments in support of an unsustainable "war on terror" are. You see no alternatives to continued and expanding conflict which are becoming very isolated views.

                        The lessons in the Middle East, which you have failed to understand, is that they are incited by the continued insinuation of the Western view of how they should run their affairs.

                        The solution to future terrorist attacks is not invading other countries and indiscriminate killing with invasions or drones. The solution as it was prior to the Bush/Cheney regime is good police work and surveillance which is what put the perpetrators of the first WTC bombing behind bars. It might possibly have thwarted the second attack if our elected leaders had not ignored the warnings.

                        Remember, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Walk a mile in their shoes and come back to tell us what you learned. You have a lot to learn about extremism and what creates it.


                        "Information is power. But like all power there are those who want to keep it for themselves" Aaron Swartz, 1986 - 2013
                        TheStarsHollowGazette.com

                        by TheMomCat on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:02:25 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

              •  Aunty Sally! (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TheMomCat

                Am I funny?

                How am I funny?

                I mean funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh?

                I wonder about you sometimes. You may fold under questioning.

                •  yes you're hilarious (0+ / 0-)

                  and if not a strawman it's agrument by absurdity (or as the latin goes reducto ad absurdum)

                  •  You keep using that word. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JoanMar

                    I do not think it means what you think it means.

                    Reductio ad absurdum (Latin: "reduction to absurdity") is a common form of argument which seeks to demonstrate that a statement is true by showing that a false, untenable, or absurd result follows from its denial, or in turn to demonstrate that a statement is false by showing that a false, untenable, or absurd result follows from its acceptance.
                    It's not a fallacy.

                    Just because you dress it up in Latin doesn't make it more true.

                    Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

                    •  I think you need to reread (0+ / 0-)

                      because I never said reductio ab absurdum is a fallacy so clearly you're not reading what I am writting

                      though since you want to make this techinical, a straw man (which is what you wrote) is a fallacy and is an example of reductio ad absurdum

                      sic subsisto dictata

          •  The more bad choice (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Lisa Lockwood, Chi, TealTerror, PhilJD, JoanMar

            is to indulge in killing people.

            Not Killing People is always the best choice if you are a sane person.  

            You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

            by Johnny Q on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:16:37 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  i didn't give us this choice. i am just me. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Chi

          i didn't say anything about the morality of making that choice or about what the undesirable consequences of that choice will be.  i just said that it's not acceptance... it's a choice.  if we are killing people, we at least owe it to them and ourselves to be honest about it.

          Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?

          by AntonBursch on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 08:00:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Would you prefer Rumsfeld and Iraq all over again? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          hooper

          That was "over there" too.   How many innocent civilians did the Iraq (and Afghan) wars kill?  

          War sucks - no matter how you fight it, and collateral damage is always a part of it.      While I understand the opposition to drone warfare, it would seem to be the lesser of evils.  

          What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

          by dkmich on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:56:54 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  To quote myself (0+ / 0-)

            from this comment:

            In this case, the least bad option is to stop bombing people, improve our image in the world, and work to make our anti-terrorism security here better (efforts which do not involve security theater or privacy violations).
            (Incidentally, "Would you prefer we invade them?" is the "Did you want McCain/Romney to win?" of drone debates. You know what the answer is so don't ask the question, please.)

            "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

            by TealTerror on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 07:35:03 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  And while we're wishing, (0+ / 0-)

              cut defense by 60% and put the money into free college educations and modernizing the infrastructure.

              I really don't disagree with you, but I don't think that option is on the table.

              What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

              by dkmich on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 09:44:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  What a..."Bushian"...worldview (20+ / 0-)

        "Us vs. Them".  A realpolitik simple enough for a 1st grader to understand...and devise.

      •  you are kidding yourself thinking this choice (13+ / 0-)

        is the lesser of two evils. But go ahead, it's your choice.

      •  This is not true (25+ / 0-)
        we are in a zero sum fight to the death with terrorists
        This assumes there are a finite number of "terrorists," and if we can just kill all of them the conflict will be over. The fact of the matter is that terrorism is a tactic, used by people who hold resentment toward the US, and blowing up innocent civilians with drone strikes, even if accidental, tends to increase that resentment:
        But as in the tribal areas of Pakistan, where U.S. drone strikes have significantly weakened al-Qaeda’s capabilities, an unintended consequence of the attacks has been a marked radicalization of the local population.
        This is not choosing the lesser of two evils. This is choosing short-term "gain" over long-term strategy--as well as morality.

        "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

        by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:49:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Unintended Consequences/Blowback (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kickemout

          What is your long-term strategy against terrorism?  A bigger budget for cultural outreach?  Making amoral decisions is often called "governing" or "leading".  You can agree/disagree with the legality/efficacy/strategic posture of drone strikes and secret kill lists but Obama has managed to prevent any major terrorist attacks (sorry Benghazi is not a major attack) against the U.S. or any of its overseas facilities.  There will always be terrorists.  We will always have to find them and hunt them down.  Better to be feared than loved when it comes to national security.  This is a something many progressives seem to purposely forget.  Once Obama was shown the intelligence briefings that I guarantee would make anyone on this site crap in their pants every morning I think he made the best choice he could to fulfill his number one priority - keep up safe.  Your argument seems to be that in "the long run" we are less safe.  Economists have a saying - "in the long run we are all dead"

          •  I'm not sure how to respond to this (19+ / 0-)

            First of all, I'm not an expert in foreign policy; off the cuff, though, here are my uninformed ideas:

            1) Stop bombing Muslim countries.
            2) Stop propping up dictators in Muslim countries.
            3) Increase foreign aid from its current anemic levels.
            4) Encourage Israel to treat the Palestinians better.
            5) Stop our corporations from exploiting Muslim civilians.
            6) Give an explicit apology for all the crap we've done over the decades, including but not limited to: (a) helping to depose Iran's democratically-elected Prime Minister and replace him with the despotic Shah; (b) supporting Mubarak for almost his entire span of rulership; (c) killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children with our sanctions in the 1990s.

            There are plenty of very smart people who know a lot more about this stuff than I do. I suspect if you were to ask them how to get the Muslim world to like us, instead of how to justify killing them, they might have some better ideas.

            Second: Let me get it straight exactly what you're arguing. You're saying it's okay we're killing hundreds of civilians with these strikes, it's okay we're almost certainly creating more terrorists than we're killing, it's okay we're giving the finger to the rule of law by killing people--including Americans--with no due process; all of this is okay because...it's "better to be feared than to be loved"?

            It appears that you've read Machiavelli; in which case, allow me to remind you of the qualifier he made to that remark:

            Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred
            (emphasis added)

            Something tells me we're not exactly avoiding hatred.

            Your argument seems to be that in "the long run" we are less safe.  Economists have a saying - "in the long run we are all dead"
            When I say "long run," I don't mean 100 years; I mean 10 or 20. I hope most of us are still alive by then.

            "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

            by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 06:35:41 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree, but don't fall into the right-wing (10+ / 0-)

              "war on terror" framework that terrorists are all Muslim.  There certainly are Christian terrorists right here in the US of A.

              •  I sincerely apologize if I gave that impression (8+ / 0-)

                Of course there are plenty of Christian terrorists. But the "War on Terror" has never been aimed at abortion clinic bombers, I'm afraid. (If only!)

                "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

                by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 07:14:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh, I understand. (4+ / 0-)

                  But that's exactly why I think we should reject the whole framework, as it's only the latest manifestation of that Manichean worldview and its embedded language in which we're good and "they" (whoever they happen to be at the moment) are evil.

                  •  The war on terror is a tool for the state to (0+ / 0-)

                    attack those who do not assimilate to the dominant hegemony, corporate globalization.

                    It's easily applied to national leaders who support their populations who do not wish to play ball.

                    It's easily applied to dissidents in a nation as well.

                    We've seen it applied to climate activists, hackers, and whistleblowers.

                    The War on Terror creates a perpetual war footing where we are subject to all kinds of abuses of privacy and liberty.

                    It's a framework for tyranny, foreign and domestic policy McCarthy style.

                     

                    Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                    by k9disc on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 04:38:27 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Yes as I think Domestic Terrorists are just as (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  side pocket

                  dangerous and even harder to take down and infiltrate their network because so many of them are wingnuts who are paranoid and well insulated and funded.

                  Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

                  by wishingwell on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:56:00 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  So true Martha, we have a lot of domestic (3+ / 0-)

                terrorists who are American born and raised and live here now who are just as dangerous.

                Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

                by wishingwell on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:54:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  But, we don't blow up schools to try to kill them. (5+ / 0-)

                  We risk the lives of officers in order to arrest them while truly minimizing risk to civilians.

                  We do that because we think protecting our kids lives is worth risking the lives of our combatants.

                  We don't feel the same about their kids.  Those foreigners over there somewhere.

                  "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

                  by JesseCW on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:08:23 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Generally, 'those people' tend to be (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    TealTerror, Aunt Martha

                    'brown'. I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but 'we' in the good old USofA sure seem to have a problem with 'brown' people with astonishing frequency, both within and without our own borders.


                    When the government wants to keep something secret, assume the protected information would either embarrass officials or outrage people -- or both.

                    by Lisa Lockwood on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 04:01:53 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  I like your ideas, very good except I do not think (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TealTerror

              President Obama should feel compelled to apologize to other countries for policies set forth by Presidents like Bush I and Bush II and Reagan especially because he disagreed with some of those policies.  I do agree with everything else wholeheartedly however that you set forth.

              Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

              by wishingwell on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:53:55 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's not about apologizing personally (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JesseCW, k9disc

                But apologizing on behalf of the country in general. The President is the country's representative, and thus has the duty of speaking for all of us, past and present. For better or for worse.

                "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

                by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:32:25 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Which world are we living in here? (0+ / 0-)

                  Hillary just yesterday described Republicans as not-reality-based. Many of these comments imo show that they're not the only ones.

                  We're entering into a world where 9 billion people will be trying to live off resources that have been estimated to be sufficient for 2 billion.  

                  And over the past 500 years, just about everyone on Earth has seriously offended almost everyone else.  It's not just US policies or our little empire.  Serious grievances abound everywhere one looks.  Plus 1/5 or so of the population controls and consumes most of the stuff, leaving most others with close to nothing.  And the global mind has been largely taken over by consumer and nationalistic propaganda networks.  And ecologically we're approaching the 5th extinction and dieoff.

                  This is not a world situation that would seem solvable with simple solutions, at least short-term.  

            •  All we need to do is (2), (0+ / 0-)

              And get the fuck outta there (1).

              The others should follow from these two. Not sure the apology will happen then again actions speak louder than words.

              "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." -- JC, Matthew 6:24

              by Chi on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 07:08:54 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  " 'Humane' Drones Are ... (11+ / 0-)

        ...the Most Brutal Weapons of All" says Dirk Kurbjuweit here

        The German military is considering the purchase of combat drones. But we should not allow ourselves to be seduced by the idea that an unmanned aircraft is a humane weapon. On the contrary, they expose the true nature of war in all its brutality.
        ...
        A suicide bomber needs to be 100 percent willing to sacrifice his life. With a drone pilot, on the other hand, the risk of pilot death drops to zero percent. The West's war on Islamist terror is currently being waged between these two conflicting priorities. Nothing is more indicative of the asymmetry of the war, and nothing is as symbolic of the cultures that are waging it. It's a war between those who are willing to sacrifice everything and those who are unwilling to give up anything -- a war of sacrifice versus convenience, bodies versus technology and risk versus safety.
        ...
        The pilots who control Predator and Reaper drones over the Waziristan region in Pakistan from their bases in the United States face only minimal risk. A suicide bomber would have to make it into their base in order to retaliate, and that's unlikely. According to the traditional concepts of combat, a war waged with drones is a cowardly war. The coward, in this equation, is the one who takes little or no risk to fight against those who take great risks.
        ...
        The drone is especially tempting for politicians of a gentle, humanitarian nature. Former US President George W. Bush, who does not fall into this category, used armed drones in Pakistan 52 times in the last four years of his presidency. His apparently gentler and more humanitarian successor, Barack Obama, has already deployed drones 285 times. Just as the drone suits Germany, it also suits Obama. Because it doesn't seem as terrible as other weapons, the barriers to its use are relatively low.
        I guess you should just read that article. It states some "inconvenient truths" ...
      •  Good grief man take deep breaths and stop (9+ / 0-)

        panicking yourself into foaming-at-the-mouth hysteria!

        There's four times as many terrorists today as there were when The War Formerly Known as On Terror started.

        Maybe you're a Christian Dominionist, as your "zero sum" raving is in full harmony with them. Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Mali, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gaza, the Philippines...

        That's a list of places, in the last ten years, where we've attacked people ourselves, or we threaten to attack, or give material support to attacks, or simply foment chaos.

        Pick out anything unique about them? Well, besides the obvious one, here's the 2nd one: they are all thousands of miles from our shores.

        What do you call it when people leave where they live and go to another country to kill people they consider enemies? Innocents included? Might you know the word for that? I'm sure you know it, but I doubt you'd admit to that based on your screed.

        Meanwhile, for about 10% of what our War of National Suicide has, and will, cost, we could have, since 9/11, brought the entire starving world to a position where they could feed themselves, and to have potable water, according to UN studies.

        You serious about beating terrorism?

        Then destroy their shelter, let the people turn them away. That's Beating Terror 101. Make the people of the world our allies instead of our enemies, or sympathetic to them.

        What you said boils down to "We should do everything we can to increase our enemies, so we can decrease our enemies."

        It's bloody obvious.


        Markos! Not only are the Gates Not Crashed, they've fallen on us. Actual Representatives are what we urgently need, because we have almost none.

        by Jim P on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 08:52:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Excellent comment (6+ / 0-)

          thank you.
          They tell us our troops are fighting for our Freedoms.
          Since the War Of zterror started, we have very few left.
          Patriot Act, NDAA, FISA, ect.
          And we get to pay for all of that shit.

          Gitmo is a Concentration Camp. Not a Detention Center. Torture happens at Concentration Camps. Torture happens at Gitmo. How much further will US values fall? Where is YOUR outrage at what the United States does in OUR names?

          by snoopydawg on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:26:31 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Is this true? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          YucatanMan, k9disc
          Meanwhile, for about 10% of what our War of National Suicide has, and will, cost, we could have, since 9/11, brought the entire starving world to a position where they could feed themselves, and to have potable water, according to UN studies.
          If this is true, it makes me sick, and I didn't think I could be surprised by this kind of thing anymore. Shows you just what our elites' priorities are.

          "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing."--Socrates

          by TealTerror on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:31:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's true. 30 billion a year would provide (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            k9disc, TealTerror, PhilJD

            safe drinking water to almost all of humanity, barring some very remote areas and pastoral people.

            It's a third of what humanity spends on bottled water.

            Over two million people a year, every year, day from water borne illness.  Nearly six thousand a day.

            For thirty billion a year, over one billion people could be getting crystal clear safe drinking water from a community tap within 100 yards of their home, with a sign on it that reads "With love, the people of the USA".

            We prefer to blow people up because they say they hate us for taking their resources and empowering dictators and oligarchies that torture and kill them.

            "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

            by JesseCW on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:20:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  god there's a lack of precision reading on dkos (0+ / 0-)

          your comment is a response to my having made a case FOR drone strikes.  except, i didn't do that.  i argued that the American people are not merely accepting civilian deaths caused by drone strikes, as the comment my comment is responding to says, rather that the American people have made a thought out choice, which i explain.  

          you know, it's funny.  i can write a very emotional diary or comment here and it will get rec'd like crazy.  then i write a very logical emotionless comment and it's crickets or it's exceedingly emotionally reactive people like you transforming my comment into an emotional comment and reacting to that instead of what i actually wrote.

          interesting.  

          Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?

          by AntonBursch on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 01:21:21 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  From Global Cop to Global Problem Solver (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TealTerror

          We're policing the world in our interests. That's a dirty cop. Nobody likes a dirty cop.

          Your solution here, Jim, is Global Problem Solver. It's a much better framework for America, IMHO. It's got tons of economic opportunity as well.

          We could be what we claim to be and what most of us here in the US want to be.

          Great comment!

          Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

          by k9disc on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 04:44:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  What US soldiers have been killed in the drone (0+ / 0-)

        attacks?

        ❧To thine ownself be true

        by Agathena on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:10:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  When looking at whether we should (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        k9disc, TealTerror, PhilJD

        be using drone strikes in other countries we aren't at war with, ask the following question:

        What would we do if another country starting killing people they call "terrorists" in our country with drone strikes and Americans became collateral damage?
        The answer is really that simple.

        There already is class warfare in America. Unfortunately, the rich are winning.

        by Puddytat on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 12:53:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Interesting choice of words here: (0+ / 0-)
        3. terrorists
        4. civilians the terrorists hide amongst
        Inciting terror with weapons that kill without warning, rip the faces off mothers and the arms off  children and then the operators go sleep in civilian neighborhoods. Like McClean, VA, Creech, NV, and other American towns. Are these operators of terror weapons using human shields when they sleep in civilian neighborhoods?

        You do know that a Pashtun family who loses one of its own will wait for generations to extract its revenge on the U.S. right?

        Good luck with your fucking endless war.

        Reaganomics noun pl: belief that government (of, by, and for the people) is the problem and that we can increase revenue by decreasing revenue.

        by FrY10cK on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 02:59:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site