“With all due respect to the senator, it just sounded so foolish,” she said. “I can’t imagine that al Qaeda will be impressed by sensitivity.”
This coming from a horrible harridan that takes regular injections of rat blood before eating her bowl of “Bits o’Kitten” cereal.
Hey, you know my feelings on the matter. While one cannot associate a bulk of the blame onto us or the West in general, we certainly haven’t given our detractors any reason NOT to hate our fucking guts. I can’t imagine anyone NOT getting the point that there is some sort of responsibility on our asses for this mess, but every time one makes a comment of this sort on the SDMB, they all roll up telling us we’re un-American for espousing such views.
So clearly there is a subset of the culture in America that supports us as the pure victim with no responsibility for the attitude shown to the world, and no responsibility for the atrocities committed upon us.
Sam
(Words may fail me here as there seem to be no direct translation of the danish terms I’d use) There is a difference between cause and effect and (moral) responsibility. If one of my children pests me and I hit her in anger the direct cause may be her pestering me however I and I alone bear all the responsibility for wrongdoing her. The US may or may not be partly the cause of the disgusting terrorists attacks on you however the terrorists and the terrorists alone (and those that helped them) are solely to blame – the US bears no responsibility and least of all those in the twin towers. Saying the US should change something, or indeed be more sensitive to the Middle East on account of the terrorists attacks as many have suggested (not necessarily Kerry – though it was a supremely stupid remark) or as a means to prevent future attacks is not only wrong it is enormously wrong and dangerously so since terrorists are, almost by definition, never going to settle for a little finger.
And sadly it is true that it is often from the political left that you hear such or similar remarks. Often I’ve read them here on SDMB in regards to the Israel/Palestinian situation (Israel has only herself to blame for terrorists attacks because of settlements/occupation/etc.)
Any country should continuously evaluate and be critical of its foreign policies and relations. But never ever should this be on account of threats or terrorists attacks.
Rune, read what he said again. I don’t recall seeing him ever say that he planned on treating terrorist nations more sensitively. What I think Mr. Kerry meant was that a more sensitive position on the world as a whole will allow us more leverage in the world community and make joint ventures more joint-not like this bullshit “coalition of the willing” we’ve barely managed to cobble together in Iraq.
I happen to agree with Kerry. I happen to think that a less “American Cowboy” approach would have yielded us a much more workable situation than the one we’re in right now. This isn’t a left-wing thing, this is reality. Act like a bully, be treated like a bully.
And yet, amazingly enough, such people do exist – some of them even post on this message board. They’re the ones who say, “the terrorists hate us because of our freedoms” without a trace of irony or sarcasm.
GaWd: This is what he said *“I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side.” *. It’s certainly not clear from this what he meant and what other countries in particular those would be (are he talking France here or Iran?). But Kerry says he was misunderstood so that’s that (which is why I wrote: “not necessarily Kerry – though it was a supremely stupid remark”). However I was in fact replying to you and World Eaters: “We don’t bear one miniscule iota of responsibility? Nothing? ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?” (irony I take it) “Who here thinks we don’t bear any responisibility for the bed we’re currently sleeping in?” (rhetoric question I suppose) “I can’t imagine anyone NOT getting the point that there is some sort of responsibility on our asses for this mess, but every time one makes a comment of this sort on the SDMB, they all roll up telling us we’re un-American for espousing such views.” As I said I don’t believe you bear one miniscule iota of responsibility. But incidentally believing you do so is perhaps a fairly American concept. Certainly few other nations would even contemplate blaming themselves recovering from such a terrible attack. Your enemies wound not for sure.
Why shouldn’t the US change something? We’re never wrong? We never make mistakes? Bullshit.
Occasionally there will be a course of action we need that won’t be the polar opposite of what the terrorists want. We can either follow it because it’s the right thing to do, or we won’t because it will make them look good. Guess which we seem to be doing.
[QUOTE=Rune]
As I said I don’t believe you bear one miniscule iota of responsibility.
[quote]
Good for you. I happen to disagree.
Maybe so. But not the issue at hand.
Just to make sure we’re on the same page here, we’re not talking about 9-11 specifically, or even obliquely. We’re talking about terrorism committed upon Americans and other western countries.
And to set the record straight again, I’m not “blaming us for the attacks”, but I think a fair amount of our behavior, attitude, arrogance and actions have been complicit in the treatment we have been receiving from the world forum at large. They don’t hate us for no reason. They hate us because wew give them a fair amount of reason to do so.
What’s the debate? Kerry’s “sensitive” remark was clearly in regards to our allies, not the terrorists, and both Lynne and Dick are lying shitbags for implying otherwise, that he wants us to be sensitive to terrorists. Fuck Cheney, and fuck the press that coyly lets him get away with such transparent bullshit.
Maybe, but what if you kept hitting your child and one day your child decided to finally hit back? That’s far more analogous to the situation re: US Middle East policy. Had the US not supported disgusting, murderous regime after disgusting murderous regime in the Middle East and instead actually worked towards fostering democracy and human rights in the area, we wouldn’t be in this situation. But we chose not to and are reaping the rewards of our government’s policies.
Did the people who died in the attacks deserve it? Assuredly not. The people who did deserve to die in those attacks were safe and sound in their protected homes and compounds. Unfortunately, we chose not to keep a better eye on our elected leaders and forcing them to spread American ideals rather than oppression.
Terrorism breeds terrorism.
You couldn’t possibly give more idiotic advice. Of course our policies need to change in the Middle East. They’ve needed to change for the past 50 years. That doesn’t mean we need to stop hunting down al-Qaeda, but our tactics must surely change. They only breed more terrorism right now.
Unfortunately, if Israel had not used terrorism in the beginning to get her way with Palestine then they wouldn’t be in the current situation. The PLO initially modeled their terror tactics after the Irgun.
And the photo that appeared in my local paper actually showed Dick Cheney smiling and (I swear! Really!) laughing. I think that the Republicans are doing their damnedest to make him appear less Darth Sidious and more Darth Cuddliest.
As to Lynne: She’s the same person who claimed that her daughter, the lesbian, wasn’t. So turning facts on their heads comes naturally to her.
I agree with those who say that Ms. Cheney misrepresented Kerry’s position. The dependent clause gives a clear sense of the meaning. Of course, Cheney was appealing to intellects that do not know a dependent clause from Santa Claus. But for those of us with advanced brains, I do wish Kerry would spell out exactly what he means. I mean, it is nice that he believes in himself and all, but specifically what would he do that is more effective? Specifically what thoughts would he give it? How would he implement his strategy? And “proactive” is a stupid word, one of those words that bosses put into inter-office memos. Sensitive is a bad choice of words, if for no other reason than Democrats need to shake the image of them that Michael Moore says they have of being “weak-kneed and wimpy”. All in all, it’s just another of those throw-away, meaningless things that politicians say when they’re running for office.