Or you can close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears (one in each), and make stupid noises.
The Nazis used the same strategy of considering those that opposed the war as unpatriotic traitors.
Read:
" Why of course people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don’t want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to do the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
"
–Herman Goering
Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe
There are so many comparisons to be made between this regime and the Nazis
Source?
And when we make them, do they ring true or false?
-
In this country we have many vast concentration camps where untold thousands are imprisoned because of their race or religion. Escape is impossible, and the attempt is punished by death.
-
People are not risking their lives flocking to our shores by the hundreds daily to live free like us. They are fleeing in horror as US tanks roll across their borders to enslave and kill them.
-
Our national slogan is not America, Land of the Free and Home of the Brave; it’s America Over All. Soon Holland, France, Belgium, Poland, Denmark, Austria, Hungary, Russia, England, Canada, Mexico…all will be ours, all ours. We seek not to spread democracy or boost commerce with them, but rather to dominate the industrialized world militarily and own it outright.
-
There is no Congress. We are instead ruled by a megalomaniacal dictator whose power is absolute and whom all must hail and obey unquestioningly. Any and all who disagree or question President Bush’s leadership are summarily executed.
-
In America, we have no free press. All media are fully owned and operated by the State government. Nothing critical of the administration EVER appears in print or over the airwaves.
-
We are known for executing millions of people in our country systematically because they are the wrong religion/ethnicity.
-
In the USA, if you are arrested, you have absolutely no rights whatsoever.
-
Our nation’s leader is so averse to bad news that all his staff are terrified to give him the facts. So he never gets any bad news.
-
People just simply cannot get food. Consequently, obesity is virtually nonexistent in America.
-
Every citizen of the USA must carry their “papers” at all times. If your papers are not in order, you are detained indefinitely and may never be heard from again.
-
In the USA, open and frank discussion about whether or not the government–er, regime is to our liking is not encouraged or even permitted. Such debate is unthinkable and punishable in unimaginably vicious ways.
-
In this country, if we do not like our President, we can never vote him out of office. He’s there as long as he wants to be, since he makes up the rules himself.
-
It is illegal in this country to possess any firearms.
-
We started and then lost WWII.
Holy Holocaust, Batman. In every significant major area, the Joker’s comparisons seem deadly accurate. We really DO live in a Nazi nightmare. At least fuel for the Batmobile will be really cheap, as soon as we knock off Saudi Arabia BIFF and Iran POW and steal all their oil, just like we did in Iraq. OOF
Cecil hasn’t inserted an opinion. He has stated a fact.
International relations as a studied concept largely begins with Thuycidides and the Peloponnesian War. Ever since then, it has been pretty much universally agreed attacking another state is justified in two situations: in repelling an EXTANT armed invasion, or in defending an allied state from such. Thus: Gulf War, justified; Gulf War- The Sequel, unjust.
The fact that the people of Iraq happen to look suitably happy now that they’ve been “liberated” (they are, I remind you, effectively being administered by an occupying force) is neither here nor there. The people of Italy cheered for the Germans when they marched into Rome in WW2; they cheered just as loudly when the Americans showed up instead.
When Cecil suggests that an unprovoked violation of the sovereignty of another nation is “damnfool”, he’s right. Whenever America has meddled in the affairs of other nations we usually make a pig’s ear out of it.
If nothing else, its simply common sense that you end one war before beginning a new one. Afghanistan is further from being pacified now than it was 12 months ago, and the people of Afghanistan are, if anything, even more repressed…
By way of afterthought…
so 70% of Americans favor the war, eh?
And tell me, just how many favored war with Iraq two years ago when Saddam wasn’t doing anything differently than he was up until this conflict? Its pretty obvious that Bush has whipped Americans into an wartime mentality using 9-11.
Given how little Americans really know about Iraq, though, going to war on the basis of public opinion is kind of like giving 5 year olds candy because 70% of them are in favor.
It is a misconception that we went to war on the basis of public opinion. (According to Goering, it’s not even necessary that the public agree. But I digress.) The only fly in the ointment is that the UN Security Council voted unanimously in favor of an item called Resolution 1441, which held among other things that Iraq was to immediately and completely certify disarmament or face “serious consequences”. Not one of the member nations held any misconceptions about what was meant by the words “serious consequences”. None hold forth that Iraq did anything remotely resembling immediate and complete certification of disarmament.
The threat to peace does not come from those who uphold and enforce the will of the civilized world. It comes from those who intentionally and consistently violate that will.
Is a Resolution a resolution if it resolves nothing and reflects no resolve?
OK, so the US is all about ousting Husseina and his cronies because of the UN’s 1441 resolution but when that same UN has misgivings about going in too early we say they’re crazy? Please tell me where the logic is. I won’t even mention the many resolutions against Israel that we chose to never enforce.
OK, so the US is all about ousting Husseina and his cronies because of the UN’s 1441 resolution but when that same UN has misgivings about going in too early we ignore them? Please tell me where the logic is. I won’t even mention the many resolutions against Israel that we chose to never enforce.
It is agreed that the UN showed illogic in waffling on enforcement of its own Resolution 1441 when the rubber met the road. Hence the opinion of a growing throng who see the UN as all but a toothless paper tiger, having virtually invalidated itself after years of baffling reluctance to enforce its resolutions. Still, as civilized human beings it seems we are duty bound to try to work with it the best we can, unless and until something better can be established.
IMHO, since we were up against a terroristic, maniacal dictator instead of a reasonable person with whom one might legitimately negotiate, it was better to go in a few weeks too early than an hour too late. I don’t want to stake my life on the recommendation that we should just take Hussein’s “word” that he destroyed (or “evacuated”, as the Iraqi intercepted message put it) the WMD. Why “more time” to “find” the WMD was appropriate with him IN power, but not now that he’s OUT of power, is another question.
I’m wondering what kind of Marsupial could come to the conclusion that by looking into the truth of any issues one ends up with a conservative viewpoint?
If so many of the posters of late think that Cecil got it wrong with regard to shrub going AWOL why haven’t they refuted his arguments instead of questioned his political bent?
twentythree, this whole thread is not really about Bush going AWOL, even though that is the topic of the column, but rather about the comment Cecil summarized/editorialized at the bottom of the column about the “damn fool war”.
hyjyljyj, #7 is getting closer to true every day, between the USA Patriot Act, USA Patriot Act #2, Ashcroft’s efforts, and the recent Supreme Court decision that determined police officers are no longer required to read Miranda rights to suspects. And while #6 specifically says executing (which we certainly are not doing), there is no denying that government efforts have been pointed specifically at Arabs and Muslims. Think of the group arrested for playing paintball, because that was “terrorist training”.
But 2 out of 14 isn’t really all that much.
A lot of progress is being made on numbers 5, 8, 10, 11 and 12, too. Give the scumbags a few more years; they’re working on it.
Having just read Cecil’s comments I have decided - I am madly in love and shall marry him.
Cecil - my idol
One presumes that must include former Fuhrer Bill Clinton, a vocal proponent of abolishing the regulation that limits a president to two terms.
However, re-reading the cited items while wiping away the “cobwebs” will reveal the irony of your cynicism.
If this were in fact the totalitarian nightmare state that you seem to believe it is or is becoming, one of its rules would be that you would NOT be allowed to leave (Berlin Wall, Iron Curtain, etc.). As it is, America’s borders work both ways.
The freedoms you take for granted are yours to escape and abandon at any time. If indeed it is the mark of insanity to stay in a bad marriage where one feels no love and one’s freedom and identity are squelched, then logically this extends to the scale of nations as well. If it is stupid to stay in a bad relationship, then it is even moreso to stay in a bad country.
Oh, so “love it or leave it,” in other words–what about protesting, being vocal, speaking out against injustice, abolishing slavery, passing the Civil Rights Act, working to change it for the better, you say?
Precisely. You can’t do that in a Nazi state, or any other authoritarian regime. You can in America. Welcome to the greatest country in history.
When someone’s notion of logic is “it ain’t that bad yet, therefore it ain’t ever gonna be that bad”, there’s not much room for discussion. People who believe “it can’t happen here” are the ones who will help it to happen here.
I don’t take my freedoms for granted; I cherish them, such as they are, while I have them. And I will certainly fight for them, and kill, if necessary, in an effort to preserve them. I’m just not foolish enough to believe that it’s only swarthy foreigners with box cutters who can be a threat, and I recognize that right now, in fact, the greatest threat to the existence of our Constitution and our freedom lies not in foreign terrorists, but in a fanatically secretive, power-drunk regime with clearly demonstrated, openly stated fascist intentions, a thorough disregard and even contempt for our legal system, and a vociferous and febrile following of yahoos, who unthinkingly swallow and then parrot jingoistic claptrap in the apparent belief that unquestioning acceptance of feculent propaganda makes them better Americans and more secure from harm.
This was indeed a great country: great in its principles, its ideals, and its freedoms. Probably the greatest country in history. But it’s in serious fucking trouble at the moment, and what kind of place it will be ten or twenty years from now is very much up in the air. I hope it will weather the current threat and come out all right. But I’m acutely aware of the possibility that it will not, and with all the help the jingoes and yahoos are giving to the fascists, it ain’t looking good at the moment.
Something about that idea scares the shit out of conservatives, doesn’t it?
And please, justify or explain " Fuhrer".
Conservatives ain’t scared of nothin’, long as there’s duct tape.
Seriously, I’m not sure I understand the suggested polarizing of the two-term limit. It seems clear enough that it’s to everyone’s advantage that presidents be limited to two terms, e.g., won’t two terms of GW Bush be enough for you? If so, then you support the two-term limit–without deserving the label ‘scared conservative’. No matter who is in the White House, one side will always be drooling (and in some extreme cases evidently, gibbering and foaming at the mouth) for him or her to be out of there as soon as possible.
So it comes down to perspective. Just as for some, this USED to be a great country; and there is another perspective from which this currently still IS a great country.
And since you said please,…Some google–er, yahoo a while back attempted to liken present-day America to Nazi Germany. I know it’s an absurdly gigantic stretch, but I am not making this up. Anyway, Nazi…egomaniacal power junkie [insert name here]…Fuhrer…that’s all
We now resume our regularly scheduled BushBash >:^D)
No, I’m not against Bush running for a third term. I can not-vote* him as often as needed. I advocate direct popular vote and no term limits. I see voting as a near duty. I resent having my right to vote taken away.
And I enjoyed Clinton’s presidency. It was fun. 
*Vote for anyone but.