[QUOTE=Lemur866]
Well, Marley, there are two kinds of people. Those who divide people into two groups, and those who don’t. Which one are you?
[/QUOTE]
“There are two kinds of people: Those who say, ‘There are two kinds of people: Those who divide people into two groups, and those who don’t,’ and those who don’t say! Well, and then there’s me.”
– J.R. “Bob” Dobbs
Last weekend, I had a gall bladder attack. It was extremely painful. I ended up in the ER, and spent the next four days in the hospital, getting surgery to remove said gall bladder. That was also extremely painful. Because I was going to be undergoing abdominal surgery while under general anesthetic, and because of the nature of my condition, I was not allowed to eat for three days. That, again, was pretty painful. The day after the surgery, they finally gave me something to eat: a Jell-O cup. And my god, that was the best Jell-O cup I’ve ever eaten. Heck, it was up there on the general list of “best tasting foods I’ve ever had.”
A couple days later, while recuperating at my parents house, I asked my mom to get me some Jell-O cups, because I really enjoyed that cup I had at the hospital. Of course, by this point, I’d had some home cooked meals in me, so when I tried that Jell-O cup again… well, it sucked. Because it’s Jell-O. Jell-O sucks. It only tasted good to me because I’d been deprived of anything at all to eat for so long.
The point being, if it isn’t already obvious, is that the only reason that sense of togetherness felt so good, after 9/11, was because everything else fucking sucked. The country has suffered just about it’s worst disaster in living memory, everyone was frightened, and angry, and confused, and even more frightened, and anything that was remotely positive became hugely over-magnified in our national need to find something - anything - to feel good about.
Now, in that specific context, it was a great feeling. But it was only a great feeling because of that context. Suggesting that recapturing that feeling would be worth another 9/11 is like suggesting I get my torso opened up again and more of my viscera scooped out, so I can enjoy another fucking Jell-O cup. It’s stupid, and anyone arguing for it, even in hyperbole, is a goddamned moron, and should be mocked and reviled as such at every opportunity.
[QUOTE=Miller]
Last weekend, I had a gall bladder attack. It was extremely painful. I ended up in the ER, and spent the next four days in the hospital, getting surgery to remove said gall bladder. That was also extremely painful. Because I was going to be undergoing abdominal surgery while under general anesthetic, and because of the nature of my condition, I was not allowed to eat for three days. That, again, was pretty painful. The day after the surgery, they finally gave me something to eat: a Jell-O cup. And my god, that was the best Jell-O cup I’ve ever eaten. Heck, it was up there on the general list of “best tasting foods I’ve ever had.”
A couple days later, while recuperating at my parents house, I asked my mom to get me some Jell-O cups, because I really enjoyed that cup I had at the hospital. Of course, by this point, I’d had some home cooked meals in me, so when I tried that Jell-O cup again… well, it sucked. Because it’s Jell-O. Jell-O sucks. It only tasted good to me because I’d been deprived of anything at all to eat for so long.
The point being, if it isn’t already obvious, is that the only reason that sense of togetherness felt so good, after 9/11, was because everything else fucking sucked. The country has suffered just about it’s worst disaster in living memory, everyone was frightened, and angry, and confused, and even more frightened, and anything that was remotely positive became hugely over-magnified in our national need to find something - anything - to feel good about.
Now, in that specific context, it was a great feeling. But it was only a great feeling because of that context. Suggesting that recapturing that feeling would be worth another 9/11 is like suggesting I get my torso opened up again and more of my viscera scooped out, so I can enjoy another fucking Jell-O cup. It’s stupid, and anyone arguing for it, even in hyperbole, is a goddamned moron, and should be mocked and reviled as such at every opportunity.
[/QUOTE]
This is one of the most sensible, cogently written political arguments I’ve ever seen on the SDMB. Well played, sir.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
“There are two kinds of people: Those who say, ‘There are two kinds of people: Those who divide people into two groups, and those who don’t,’ and those who don’t say! Well, and then there’s me.”
– J.R. “Bob” Dobbs
[/QUOTE]
What this country needs is to kill Bob!
[QUOTE=eleanorigby]
Underlining mine. Americanicans? Is that like being a Viscious Knid? 
[/QUOTE]
Why do you hate Americanica?
[QUOTE=MaxTheVool]
Interestingly, speaking as a Bush-hating generally-anti-war Atheist, I thought congress singing God Bless America was incredibly moving. It did NOT, to me, seem like some calculated political move. It was not an official action, entangling church and state. Rather, it was a bunch of really scared people (almost all of them personally theists) standing together and singing. Plenty of stupid idiotic spin-doctory shit has happened since then, but I didn’t get any of that vibe at all, right then on the very day itself.
[/QUOTE]
The ‘vibe’ I got was that someone came up with the idea as a “spontaneous” political stuff and the rest of them thought to themselves, “Oh fuck, there’s cameras - can’t be seen to not be singing. Hope I remember all the words.”
-Joe
“It will take another attack on the homeland to quell the chattering of chipmunks and to restore America’s righteous rage and singular purpose to prevail.”
This to me is the central sentence. Or as I put it in the “Is Pakistan Next?” thread:
“Another attack on that scale will mark a fundamental change in our society. It only took one Pearl Harbor to focus the country in 1941. These days it appears that it will take two.”
Why? Because the whole idea of fighting terrorism is ideologically painful for folks on the left. It forces them to confront the idea that people who practice one particular religion are trying to kill us. This flys in the face of the central tenets of policital correctness and other utopian ideas that the far left would like to see implemented.
That’s why they hate it when 9/11 is involked. It’s much easier to joke about it or to accuse the Republicans of “exploiting” 9/11 than to face the lessons that came from it.
It would be much more simple to oppose the Patriot Act or the NSA surveillance program or the way the CIA interrogates people without the inconvienience of the memory of why these measures were necessary in the first place.
In the six years since 9/11, the country has reverted back to ideological form. And when it comes to aggressive measures of fighting terrorism, the Democrats are on the wrong ideological side. And the only thing that will change that, unfortunately, is another 9/11 scale attack. After that, the country will realize that islamic terrorism is not, in fact, going away and it will have to be dealt with aggressively by whatever means are necessary. That means letting the NSA, CIA and Defense Department do thier jobs and quit the paranoid fantasies about “slippery slopes” and shadowy men in sunglasses listening to your phone call to your Aunt Marge.
Speaking of goddamned morons…
[QUOTE=Miller]
Speaking of goddamned morons…
[/QUOTE]
Yes, I know. I rudely disturbed the acoustics of the echo chamber again. Forgive me.
So how much of what I said do you think is untrue?
Well, I’m certain that you did indeed post that quote in a different thread.
Other than that, you’ve got nothing.
[QUOTE=Miller]
Well, I’m certain that you did indeed post that quote in a different thread.
Other than that, you’ve got nothing.
[/QUOTE]
A cogent and stinging rebuttal indeed.
If one attack didn’t do it, why do you think one more will?
[QUOTE=Strinka]
If one attack didn’t do it, why do you think one more will?
[/QUOTE]
Because another attack will wake up the majority of americans with short attention spans. Those of us discussing this issue are a severe numerical minority. Another attack will convince the population that an aggressive response is necessary and discredit those who currently have thier heads in the sand and would like the rest of us to join them.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
Another attack will convince the population that an aggressive response is necessary . . .
[/QUOTE]
But, it is not necessary, not in any military sense. You can’t fight terrorists with an army. That’s like using a machine gun to exterminate termites.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
Another attack will convince the population that an aggressive response is necessary…
[/QUOTE]
We tried that the first time. A second attack is likely to forcefully deliver the message that competence counts, especially among our leaders. What more proof could anyone desire that the current crop of yahoos-in-charge went after the wrong guys?
[QUOTE=Evil One]
Why? Because the whole idea of fighting terrorism is ideologically painful for folks on the left.
[/quote]
Hardly. The left is simply more interested in actually doing so. Clinton caught the people behind the WTC bombing that happened while he was in powerr. Bush and friends have only gone through the motions of trying to catch Osama, and that’s being generous. They don’t want to capture him; he’s too good a bogeyman, Bush is a friend of the family, and Osama and the Republicans are in basic agreement about most issues anyway.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
That’s why they hate it when 9/11 is involked. It’s much easier to joke about it or to accuse the Republicans of “exploiting” 9/11 than to face the lessons that came from it.
[/quote]
The lessons : Don’t trust the Republicans. Don’t bother trying to cooperate with them, and don’t listen to any speeches about bipartisanship. The Republican leadership cares nothing about America or it’s people. For the Republicans, it’s all about profit, power, conquest, and pushing their theology/ideology. The Republicans are the enemy of America and the world.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
It would be much more simple to oppose the Patriot Act or the NSA surveillance program or the way the CIA interrogates people without the inconvienience of the memory of why these measures were necessary in the first place.
[/quote]
They are not necessary, and have nothing to do with terrorism. They are an attack on the left and an exercise in sadism and tyranny, nothing more.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
And when it comes to aggressive measures of fighting terrorism, the Democrats are on the wrong ideological side.
[/quote]
From your viewpoint of course. They want to fight it; you and your fellow right wingers want to exploit and encourage it. Outside of the words “God” and “Allah”, there’s little ideological or moral difference between Al Qaeda, the Republican leadership, or the Taliban. Theocratic, amoral sadists and tyrants, all of you. Every freedom eliminated, every random dead person is a victory for both Al Qaeda and the Republicans.
The Republicans have failed at fighting terrorism, because they aren’t even trying. They are more concerned with going after the Democrats and the environmentalists and the ACLU and so on. And if there’s another terrorist attack nothing would make the Republicans happier.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
And the only thing that will change that, unfortunately, is another 9/11 scale attack. After that, the country will realize that islamic terrorism is not, in fact, going away and it will have to be dealt with aggressively by whatever means are necessary. That means letting the NSA, CIA and Defense Department do thier jobs and quit the paranoid fantasies about “slippery slopes” and shadowy men in sunglasses listening to your phone call to your Aunt Marge.
[/QUOTE]
Or hauling me off and torturing me until I “admit” that I’m an Al Qaeda agent. Or invading yet another country for oil and claiming it’s part of the mythical war on terrorism. Or shutting down every organization not controlled by the Republicans. Or nuking some country the Republcans don’t like.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
Because the whole idea of fighting terrorism is ideologically painful for folks on the left.
[/quote]
Yeah, that’s why the Democrats revolted en masse as soon as someone suggested attacking Afghanistan.
It’s easy because it’s become a joke.
Have you considered that another attack might prove that those methods don’t work?
In other words, Trust Your Government. Because, if you look at the entire history of the U.S., when has the government ever done anything to earn your mistrust? Go to sleep and let the government handle it.
[QUOTE=Evil One]
A cogent and stinging rebuttal indeed.
[/QUOTE]
My post was entirely equal in content to your own, except that it contained the added element of brevity. Post something that’s not crap, and you’ll get a real response.
[QUOTE=Marley23]
In other words, Trust Your Government. Because, if you look at the entire history of the U.S., when has the government ever done anything to earn your mistrust? Go to sleep and let the government handle it.
[/QUOTE]
Who else is going to do the job? No system is perfect and individuals within the government have done questionable and illegal acts. But that doesn’t mean we can pretend there isn’t a problem while we worship at the altar of political correctness.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Outside of the words “God” and “Allah”, there’s little ideological or moral difference between Al Qaeda, the Republican leadership, or the Taliban. Theocratic, amoral sadists and tyrants, all of you. Every freedom eliminated, every random dead person is a victory for both Al Qaeda and the Republicans.
[/QUOTE]
This is an example of why your political opinions are either ignored or mocked. If you seriously believe crap like this, there is nothing to be done for you.