Osama bin Whatever
So apparently Osama's dead. This, in spite of the pretty persistent rumors that he died up to a decade ago. Maybe things really did go down as they're portrayed in the news, but in all honesty, it would not surprise me one bit if the whole thing was staged and he really did die several years ago. Whether a partisan ploy by the Democrats or a pro-
( Read more... )
It's certainly possible that Bin Laden has been dead before now but I highly doubt it could have been 10 years ago. If he had died during the Bush Administration, the government would not have kept that a secret as it would have bolstered Bush's approval ratings. This notion falls into the conspiracy theory category and I am very skeptical and weary of conspiracy theories which are, more often than not, based on paranoid delusion and a desperate desire to seek grand explanations for a series of seemingly related events.
You are correct that we, to some extent, helped to create Bin Laden by using him for our own end in the Cold War. However, this is not an irregular strategy in U.S. military policy. We temporarily joined with the Soviets in WW2 to defeat Hitler. It's the old axiom that my enemy's enemy is my friend (though we never considered the Russians to be true allies obviously but we cooperated with them when the situation made it advantageous to do so). It's a simple strategy that sometimes works out well and other times comes to backfire on us.
Perhaps the statement that I disagree with most is that you say that we are responsible for the hostile attitudes of these nations towards us. I would rather attribute the cause to the one factor that applies to all of the countries in question: Islam. The reason why Islamic countries hate America is because of their religion which permeates both the citizens and the government. Their religion teaches that there are only two houses, the house of submission (Muslims) and the house of war (infidels) and that all infidels must be brought into the house of submission. They think that our amalgam of Christian and Enlightenment values and ideals are a perversity and blasphemy. The United States is not responsible for the irrational dictates of a religion still stuck in the tenth century. A religion, I might add, that is also a political ideology.
As for wars for oil and we, America, only being concerned for nations that have fossil fuels, there is certainly truth to that. However, I do not necessarily believe that is a bad thing. The U.S. military was established to look out for our national defense and national interests. Our military was never meant to be the police of the world or to be the source of humanitarian relief. Therefore, it actually makes sense to ignore conflicts that have nothing to do with American interests or security and instead focus on conflicts that do (and oil is most certainly a national interest).
That being said, I'm trying to refine my personal views on what constitutes a just war and really I don't think we should be involved in a conflict unless there is demonstrable evidence that it is necessary for the security of our country. The circumstances where violence is permissible or justifiable are highly limited from a Christian perspective. And it may be noble for us to try and stop tyranny and cruelty around the world that has nothing to do with us but I don't see any basis for our military to have a moral obligation to anyone else other than American citizens and, possibly, our allies if they call on our assistance.
And finally, your claim that Bin Laden won years ago when we lost our liberties due to fear and national defense policies, particularly those under the Bush Administration, is also specious. Those on the political left constantly talked about how the Patriot Act and other laws were destroying their personal liberties. Yet when you ask most of them to give concrete examples of how their own freedoms were violated, they never could give examples. The only area where I have seen a drastic change in personal liberties is flying on airlines. And one could argue that in such public venues, you don't really have a right to privacy and flying a plane is voluntary. Blanket claims of lost liberty need to be backed up by evidence and I haven't really seen a lot of evidence for that claim.
Reply
As for Islam--that seems a pretty damned broad brush to paint with, considering its adherents constitute a fifth of the planet, and five times the population of the US. Any religion can be used to justify bloodthirstiness and rabid intolerance, Christianity included--there's no shortage of violence against Gentiles in the Old Testament. A large number of Muslims probably do indeed see the West as morally decadent, but if that were the sole reason for their ire toward us, we'd probably be seeing a lot more attacks on Western nations. Nobody goes and blows himself up without--at least to him--a damned good reason. Cases in point: Christians who bomb abortion clinics. I'm against abortion in the vast majority of cases, as I feel it ends a human life; and while I don't support bombers stooping to the same level, one can see how those bombers rationalize it. Somali pirates are another case--they didn't just go out and start hijacking boats for the fun of it, they did so as a response to many European corporations using their coastline as a convenient unregulated way to dump toxic and chemical waste, decimating the fishing industry there (i.e., the only industry). So while I don't condone any of this sort of violence, understand that people almost always have a reason.
It doesn't take much digging to find that reason out: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-04/thaddeus-russell-does-us-support-for-israel-threatens-american-safety/ . This essay in particular http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html? is a must-read, and you'll probably find it very enlightening--I know I did. Oh, and if you think that Christianity isn't also being used as a political ideology, just look around. Taken to its horrifying conclusions, you get something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Bill (being proposed in an overwhelmingly Christian nation and advanced in part by several Christian politicians from the US).
I don't have a problem with the US looking out for its own interests, unless doing so results in death and misery for thousands or millions of foreigners (but they're not "real people" like Americans, so they don't count--seems to be the thought process of many). I agree that there are just wars (WWII comes to mind), but far too many of the conflicts we've been involved with since then don't fall into that category. And humanitarian aid (with the exception of disaster relief in places like Haiti and Japan) has been shown to in fact be harmful, in that it reduces self-sufficiency, makes local farmers unable to sell their own crops at a wage that can possibly support them, and funnels aid money into the hands of a few corrupt government officials (see: practically every country in sub-Saharan Africa).
Reply
Reply
And let's not forget the other huge thing -- the expense. There's a fellow writing a book on the subject that I'm sure you can find on NPR's web page, that discusses the whole idea behind how a $4000 accomplishment like putting a bomb in your underwear can cost the US billions of dollars and all kinds of frustration.
And the thing that galls me is that it's so obvious. I mean you just know that someone was looking at the whole "shoe bomber" thing, and how the answer to that was removing shoes, and then they were like "how can we make this even MORE hilarious?!" Congratulations, America... you just got played.. AGAIN.
While I like and respect both of you, I need to say that it's awfully naive to say that, when asked, nobody was able to point to specific violations of their civil rights. Funny thing about the FBI, NSA, etc... they know what they're doing enough that you WON'T catch them at it. That doesn't make unwarranted surveillance any more legal, or ethical.
Of course there is the other school of thought that says "those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing," and that may also explain why civil liberties are a little more sensitive to furries, homosexuals, zoophiles, etc. :P
As to the "right" to fly, you also don't have a "right" to drive a car. That doesn't mean that we haven't come to rely on that, nor that suspension of your privilege to drive a car won't dramatically impact your life. In fact a great example of this would be the drunk driving checkpoints in some states. For no reason they can stop you and verify that you're alcohol-free. Wouldn't be too much of a stretch to see them do the same kind of thing for other contraband. Are there valid reasons for doing this? Maybe. But it is a massive inconvenience, and invasion of your privacy, even if you have nothing to hide.
I agree, the chest beating over bin Laden is ridiculous. I want to punch everyone in New York City all over again... the first time being when $1,800,000 or whatever ON TOP OF life insurance payoffs was so inadequate for 9/11 victims' families that they felt the need to sue the government over it. Typical NYC arrogance.
Reply
Might've mentioned this already, but the TSA is apparently now coming to train and bus stations near you. I suppose that makes travelling in any regard now pretty much "not a right", eh?
As for drunk driving checkpoints, I think there are certainly worse things. I abhor the idea of drunk driving, and think penalties for it in many parts of the US are far too lax. That said, between two drunk drivers, I'd rather see the one who's caught because of a car wreck punished than the one who was driving relatively safely, and was only caught because of a checkpoint.
The celebration is indeed ridiculous. Kudos to my roommate/classmates/professors for not creaming themselves over his death. He was an evil man, and his absence does make the world a better place, but celebrating in the streets in the same fashion as the more extreme Muslims post-9/11 brings us down to their level, IMHO. And anyone who uses the excuse "but we're the good guise!1!!" is ignorant of the fact that, for all its positive attributes, the US is guilty of plenty of atrocities, and a black-and-white view of the world tends to be an overly simplistic one.
Reply
And frankly... okay, so we shot some dude after TEN YEARS of looking, and ended up only finding him because of some chance intelligence and because he got sloppy and didn't read wikileaks. :) And we somehow still managed to crash a helicopter in the process.
Now, I agree he's a "bad person"(tm) that the world is better off without. I just don't see the value reveling in it. And then Obama shamelessly turns it into a photo-op at the old trade center tower site, and conservatives naively buy into his transparent back-patting. Whatever.
Anyway, I don't mean to be as negative/snarky about all this as I probably am. It's just so irritating to me that the country is, for the mostpart, so dumb. :P
One of the comparatively few fatal flaws of America is the need to make everything 100% airtight. See also: Lawyers. People weasel out of obvious laws all the time, as well as people who are wrongly imprisoned because of ones that are usually just. Well, the reality of the matter is, someone with a bomb easily COULD get on a bus, or into a ballgame, or whatever, and no amount of security will prevent all attacks, especially when that security is retrospective and only (for the mostpart) addresses old attacks people have tried before. Here's a thought: Why not put locking doors on aircraft pilot cabins BEFORE someone hijacks them?!?! What the hell. :)
Anyway, I'll stop before I rupture something. :)
Reply
Also, there's nothing wrong with being snarky- trust me on this one ;)
Reply
Ironically, I think this is the real reason more groups are given a bit more leeway these days (homosexuals in particular comes to mind- they aren't treated any differently by people, but ARE treated differently by companies looking for their "disposable income"). AS long as we're still referred to as "gays" (oh, true, it doesn't have the same lovely connotation "faggot" did all those years I grew up with), there should be no doubt that we are a "fringe" group that is looked upon with disdain, and are merely given more freedom to exist because we play into the hands of corporate America by doing so.
Reply
I couldn't agree with you more, EVER. It IS fitting someone like you should point this out.
However, I do not necessarily believe that is a bad thing. The U.S. military was established to look out for our national defense and national interests. Our military was never meant to be the police of the world or to be the source of humanitarian relief.
Agreed. No nation can always come to the defense of another, nor should it be expected to. People only use diplomacy to try to gain something without risking the uncertainy of chaotic violence.
That being said, there is no "just war", because people fight and murder and destroy over vain things like pride. American pride means killing unarmed men, women and children and animals for that pride... but is that any different from Islamic pride? Any less bloodier? Any more realistic? Beyond the pride, there's acquisition of natural resources- and there's always money in land. Yes, people use money for pride as well. Yet, the tangibles that people use to symbolize their power & pride in that power can be taken away. Where is the cop without his uniform and gun? Where is the lawyer without the peice of paper saying he can practice law? Furthermore, all the paths given to people to acquire power and purpose are merely ploys in someone else's larger power game. In the end, people merely aren't satisfied with their existence, and seek out ways to change it- religion is a strong motivator here- but in doing so, they get caught up in that current of seeking, and allow themselves to be led & pushed into activities they would never take up if not for the purpose they were seeking. But what can anyone do to dissuade them once they have taken up their cause? Nothing, and their lives burn out as they try and fail to acquire such things.
Reply
Leave a comment