Skip to main content

View Diary: Ken Livingstone's statement on the attacks in London (146 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I dislike Galloway's Afghanistan reference (none)
    which states that it was wrong to attack Afghanistan after 9/11.

    No, it wasn't.  A terror group they were harboring and refused to surrender had attacked America.  What were we supposed to do, send aid?  Say we're so sorry that our having troops in countries that request our troops, like Saudi Arabia, annoys you so much?  That we dare support the only democracy in the Middle East?  That we like oil and buy it, funding Arab economies?  

    Galloway frustrates me, because he says stuff that's so right---and then says something like that, which is so wrong.  People have a right to respond when they're attacked.  Pure pacifism isn't a good strategy---ask Tibet how that worked.    

    •  Well, I didn't say that (none)
      I was a "pacifist".  I used to think I was, but I am not.  I actually believe that every Democrat should arm themselves.  (that's really not a joke).  I didn't and don't wish for "therapy" or "aid" for terrorists.  I also don't believe that terrorists act in a vacuum or act simply because they hate our freedom.  Maybe if we used a more global-friendly, cooperative, diplomatic approach we wouldn't have a terrorist problem?  Therefore no need to attack Afganistan because 9/11 wouldn't have happened?  And I don't mean just us, the USA, I mean all countries that pursue any type of policy that manipulates, impoverishes, or otherwise exploits a weaker country.

      I understand your viewpoint, but all I was trying to say in my comment is that maybe too many people in the media are shying away from what the real motivation is behind the acts of terrorists.  

      I just don't think that it helps to perpetuate the idea that "They hate us for our freedoms".

      And I have no doubt that Saudi Arabia benefits as much, if not more, from having our troops in their country.  What's going on with that annoys me, yes.

      •  That's a good point (none)
        No, the "they hate us for our freedoms" stuff is bonkers.  I agree that there's often a deliberate attempt to avoid looking at what a group like Al Queda wants, which could probably be summarized as 1. All western troops out of the entire Middle East
        2. All western aid to Israel and Gulf states stops.  

        Maybe a few more, by now, but that's probably what they wanted on 9/11.  I think that people in power fear that the populace might not see those as unreasonable things to trade for safety (especially if the alternative is sending America's kids off to war while liberty vanishes at home).  

        All I was saying was that, given 9/11, Afghanistan was an appropriate response.  Whatever wrongs we had done to Arabs and Muslims didn't deserve 9/11.  Hell, America's most recent military campaign had been defending Muslims from Christians.  

        But I definitely see your point about the ostrich phenomenon, and think its a good one.  

         

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (125)
  • Community (60)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (23)
  • Environment (21)
  • Law (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (16)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (16)
  • Economy (15)
  • Republicans (14)
  • Ireland (14)
  • Josh Duggar (13)
  • Racism (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site