Bush major policy address

[foraker]

JayB, there are times when you sound like an intelligent sort, and then there are times when you sound like my dad: take something someone says, blow it completely out of proportion, assume that the only other possible option available is the ridiculous one you propose. yes, yes, I'm completely aware that other people do this too but it still doesn't help make your point and win converts to your view....

[JayB]

I know that when my wife saw the stooped chick in the bee-keeper suit walking three steps behind the bearded guy in the park the other day she got a serious case of Burqua envy, and nothing keeps couples devoted like seeing a good public stoning every now and then....

 

He at least gets points for consistency. Always throw out an absurd straw dog option to beat upon in opposition to the Bushie line, therefore making the Bushie line seem (almost) plausible. The above is a classic example suggesting that those who are looking for an alternative to this administration's stumbling are in favor of the Taliban. Excellent! Great parallel to Bush's references to the Communist threat. Bring on the black lists! Hmmmm, who is likely to stand in for McCarthy?

 

Yeah - thankfully we're safe enough to engage in semantic dithering about the moral equivalence of Bush and Osama - though it would be interesting to see how many of the Grand Equivocators on this board would be willing to enter into a lifelong game of "trading spaces" with your counterparts in Tehran, send Johnny off to the Madrassa instead of the Montessori school next to the PCC, etc.

 

The other interesting component of these discussions is the presumption that the Islamists have only a reactive agenda, and have no long-term agendas or aims of their own.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Great parallel to Bush's references to the Communist threat. Bring on the black lists! Hmmmm, who is likely to stand in for McCarthy?

 

The new McCarthys = liberals, with their inflexible, dogmatic, intolerant worldview, and penchant for conspiracy-theories, hyperbole, and paranoia. It is you who have replaced a real threat (Islamofascism) with manufactured threats "big corporations", "fundamental Christianity", "American imperialism", among others.

[cj001f]

The new McCarthys = liberals, with their inflexible, dogmatic, intolerant worldview, and penchant for conspiracy-theories, hyperbole, and paranoia. It is you who have replaced a real threat (Islamofascism) with manufactured threats "big corporations", "fundamental Christianity", "American imperialism", among others.

[Jim]

Great parallel to Bush's references to the Communist threat. Bring on the black lists! Hmmmm, who is likely to stand in for McCarthy?

 

The new McCarthys = liberals, with their inflexible, dogmatic, intolerant worldview, and penchant for conspiracy-theories, hyperbole, and paranoia. It is you who have replaced a real threat (Islamofascism) with manufactured threats "big corporations", "fundamental Christianity", "American imperialism", among others.

 

This is like shooting fish in a barrel. More please!

Edited October 6, 2005 by Jim

[catbirdseat]

Reminds me of 1984: Black is White and White is Black.

[JayB]

Great parallel to Bush's references to the Communist threat. Bring on the black lists! Hmmmm, who is likely to stand in for McCarthy?

 

The new McCarthys = liberals, with their inflexible, dogmatic, intolerant worldview, and penchant for conspiracy-theories, hyperbole, and paranoia. It is you who have replaced a real threat (Islamofascism) with manufactured threats "big corporations", "fundamental Christianity", "American imperialism", among others.

 

This is like shooting fish in a barrel. More please!

 

"Yet in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century. (always have to have a worldwide enemy to keep up the Defense Department budget )"

 

This is a serious question - have you ever read a serious history of the Soviet Union, or Maoist China? Or the 20th century for that matter?

[JoshK]

It is you who have replaced a real threat (Islamofascism) with manufactured threats "big corporations", "fundamental Christianity", "American imperialism", among others.

 

I hardly thing any "liberal" will tell you that Islamofacism is not a threat. I think the difference is progressives dont see it as the ONLY threat. Sure, ridding the world of those fucks is probably the largest threat but that doesn't mean I am going to sit idly by while my future is further sold off to corporate power, christian dogma is pressed into our government and the environment is further degraded. We gotta take care of those bastards, but look out for our other other interests at the same time.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Reminds me of 1984: Black is White and White is Black.

 

Of course it does, because you, like poor Winston, "love Big Brother".

[Jim]

This is a serious question - have you ever read a serious history of the Soviet Union, or Maoist China? Or the 20th century for that matter?

 

Another red herring. Try to keep on subject here. The serious subject that you're avoiding is how the Bushies continue to use scare tactics to amp up their inadequate respones to 911. Yes there is a terrorist threat that should addressed, likely more like a police investigation than some slogan "war on terror" with no apparant objective, goal, financial limit.

 

We've royally FUed the Iraq scenario by rushing in and no plan. The "war" is lost over there, now it's just a matter of when and how we get out. Yet our idiot pres keeps trying to paint the rosy scenario while laying it on thick about "they're coming to get us".

 

Now let's hear about how we're ignorant of other world history events.

[Fairweather]

Speaking of verbal blunderers, did anyone hear Howard Dean on Larry King Live last night accusing the white house of playing "hide the salami" (his actual words!) regarding legal briefs written by justice nominee Mier?

 

[bunglehead]

Speaking of verbal blunderers, did anyone hear Howard Dean on Larry King Live last night accusing the white house of playing "hide the salami" (his actual words!) regarding legal briefs written by justice nominee Mier?

 

 

 

Hide the Salami.

[cj001f]

This is a serious question - have you ever read a serious history of the Soviet Union, or Maoist China? Or the 20th century for that matter?

Yes, and yes.

 

Sorry Jay, I think we have far more to fear from the Chinese, a culture who don't have the tradition of individual liberty, private property, or many others that we in the west have. Currently they are economically and militarily a far greater threat than a bunch of Koran quoting whackos. Of course to face that threat would be to realize the grave danger of irresponsible fiscal policy and the massive military weakening that technology outsourcing represents.

[JayB]

Given that the whole premise of Bush's speech is baseless fearmongering, and there's nothing more at work here than superficial attempts to manipulate the minor differences and misunderstandings between the Islamists and the West - I presume that none of you would object to jettisoning the principles that underly our civilization and replacing them with those advocated and enforced by the Taliban.

 

The above post suggests that you see the Bush administration and the Islamic fundamentalist movement as being absolute political opposites. This must mean that you see nothing ironic in any of the words our president spoke this morning. Ambition...militaristic expansionism...unburdened by conscience... for some Americans, not only the Taliban comes to mind when we hear these words. There is an email making the rounds today titled "Bush calls for his own impeachment." I conclude from your post that if you were to receive this email, not only would you fail to see the humor-- you wouldn't even get the joke.

 

Well - I'm aware of such perspectives Barry, but being aware of them and thinking that they are reasonable and logically or morally defensible is something quite different.

 

I think that the major reasons that I disagree with such a perspective is that I don't agree that things that are physically equivalent to one another are morally equivalent, and that the ends which the said acts are intended to advance also matter. It follows, then, that I don't believe that deploying the millitary and sacrificing lives and capital to depose dictators and create functioning democracies is the moral equivalent of using indiscriminate terror to install and maintain totalitarian regimes. Apparently none of the tens of millions of people who literally risked their lives to cast their votes in the elections held to advance the cause of democracy in their countries agree with your perspective either, and their opinion counts rather more with me than yours.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

This is a serious question - have you ever read a serious history of the Soviet Union, or Maoist China? Or the 20th century for that matter?

Yes, and yes.

 

Sorry Jay, I think we have far more to fear from the Chinese, a culture who don't have the tradition of individual liberty, private property, or many others that we in the west have. Currently they are economically and militarily a far greater threat than a bunch of Koran quoting whackos. Of course to face that threat would be to realize the grave danger of irresponsible fiscal policy and the massive military weakening that technology outsourcing represents.

 

No way. The Chi-Comms love their lives, because they, as good atheists, believe this is it. The Islamofascists believe that 72 virgins are waiting for them after they blow themselves to kingdom come - much more dangerous.

[cj001f]

No way. The Chi-Comms love their lives, because they, as good atheists, believe this is it. The Islamofascists believe that 72 virgins are waiting for them after they blow themselves to kingdom come - much more dangerous.

Going by history Chinese leaders have never balked at slaughtering millions for a strategic goal. Couple that with our massive technology transfers to China (examples Boeing 787, cellphones, software, laser gain media) and you've got a formidable foe. Especially when you remember Stalin feared Detroit more than nukes.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

No way. The Chi-Comms love their lives, because they, as good atheists, believe this is it. The Islamofascists believe that 72 virgins are waiting for them after they blow themselves to kingdom come - much more dangerous.

Going by history Chinese leaders have never balked at slaughtering millions for a strategic goal. Couple that with our massive technology transfers to China (examples Boeing 787, cellphones, software, laser gain media) and you've got a formidable foe. Especially when you remember Stalin feared Detroit more than nukes.

 

Slaughtered millions of their own, right? I don't see them attacking the US anytime soon.

[JayB]

What strategy should we pursue with China? Seems like a technological embargo would be hard to maintain in this day and age (nos amis are literally clamoring to sell them their most advanced weapons systems as we speak), and even if their were no deficit to finance the odds are good that China would still be buying up massive amounts of T-Bills in order to maintain a favorable exchange rate for exports to the US - the primary effect of which would be reduction of the yield on the said securities. Would you support making sales of T-Bills to China or their proxies illegal?

 

Seems like our best bet is to promoting individual freedoms within China, and ensure that Japan and Korea are prepared to assume responsibility for their own security.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

What strategy should we pursue with China?

 

Mutually Assured Destruction. And yes, let Japan and S. Korea help bear the cost and responsibility.

[cj001f]

What strategy should we pursue with China? Seems like a technological embargo would be hard to maintain in this day and age (nos amis are literally clamoring to sell them their most advanced weapons systems as we speak)

 

Our friends want to sell the Chinese fish. American industry is teaching the Chinese how to fish, as well as how to make the hooks, lines, sinkers and boats. I'm not sure what the best strategy is to face China, I wish I did.

 

I do know that spending $50 billion a year on Homeland defence technology (half of world spending), $260billion in Iraq, as well as untold billions elsewhere, isn't giving us a firm footing for the future.

[ScottP]

It seems that since the shrubs inaugural address ("spreading freedom and democracy throughout the region") the tone has changed ("we must prevent the spread of islamic radicalism throughout the region")

Like he's realizing that the situation in Iraq has turned into one that is in al Qaeda's favor, but...just...can't...quite bring himself to admit it.

 

It must suck to be George W. Bush.

[mattp]

Apparently none of the tens of millions of people who literally risked their lives to cast their votes in the elections held to advance the cause of democracy in their countries agree with your perspective either, and their opinion counts rather more with me than yours.

 

Say what? Because they decide it is worthwhile to vote, given the situation as they find it, means they think some U.S. - led coup or invasion of their country was a good thing -- or that they can't possibly think our foreign policy smacks of ambition, militaristic expansionism, or a lack of conscience?

 

I'm not going so far as to say we are no better than the terrorists, but c'mon, Jay - surely there are one or two Iraqi's who right now today are saying they wish we hadn't invaded and are highly suspicious of our motives in doing so. I bet there are a couple of voters in some other country where we have replaced their government who might also remain skeptical.

[Fairweather]

I fear the home-grown western leftist more than Islamic fundementalists - more than China or any manifestation of the former USSR.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I fear the home-grown western leftist more than Islamic fundementalists - more than China or any manifestation of the former USSR.

 

The Fifth Column.

[foraker]

Yeah, those dope smoking hippies and their free love ethic scare me a lot more than Kalashnikov-wielding ... well ... pretty much anybody running around the streets with one would worry me more than dope smoking hippies.....