Six Years

Sep 11, 2007 22:37

I've said it all before.

In summation, we have been destroying ourselves.

No one needs to attack us again. We have done and continue to do more damage to what I consider the heart and soul of the American Ideal, the grand dream this country represented for a very long time ( Read more... )

war, 09-11-01, politics

Leave a comment

Comments 5

Absolutely fractalwoman September 12 2007, 03:18:06 UTC
I am right there with you.

The sad part is I actually work within this system and try to affect change.

So, what are we going to do to conquer the world?

By the way, thank you for the talk tonight. I really needed someone who has known me for a long time listen and point out the obvious A-HAs!

You are a great friend. Thank you for kicking my arse three years ago. :-)

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

american_arcane September 12 2007, 04:26:49 UTC
Believe it or not, I agree completely.

It's not war I have an intrinsic problem with. In fact, I think it's quite necessary to have a very strong, well supplied and well trained military.

I also think that peace is, perhaps, the most dangerous idea around.

Mostly because it so horribly misunderstood as a universally good thing--and a permanent thing at that.

But that gets into another post that's been brewing in my head for a while...

What I'm particularly annoyed with this time around is the stark self-mutilation and perverting of everything in this country that we are claiming to try to spread to others.

It's the hypocrisy that gets my goat.

That's what makes me more than ready for the fall of this empire. That's what makes me look forward to the rebuilding.

Reply

Peace anonymous September 12 2007, 11:38:29 UTC
I think it depends on your definition of peace. So, on some level, I agree. Of all the agro people I know, to include myself, I completely understand the humanistic aspects of war.

War, while inflicting change, is a lot of pent up aggression and allows the fallacy of control and conquering to overcome the attacker. This is only to the plight of whomever "loses" the battle.

What I do not like is the basic ideal that the death, dismemberment, and destruction of a country, group of people, etc will actually cause them to change their belief structure. It won't happen.

It positively destroys the attacker however. With each new battle and success, human nature of large groups of people only suggest that there is more control and power to be had. The attacker or attacking country will proceed to "eat themselves alive" with the power they think they have.

I still think no one should fight with the Israelis because they keep kicking everyone's arse.

Reply


akilika September 12 2007, 04:20:06 UTC
It's happened before, it'll happen again. I mean, how many times have sedition acts been passed in this country? I'm not too worried; we always move away from it eventually.

Reply

american_arcane September 12 2007, 04:31:33 UTC
Agreed. But you must remember that every time it happens, it takes longer to move away from it.

It's like poking a hole in a bucket. One hole, maybe two, you can still get it from the well to the house without losing too much water.

Right now, we are quickly approaching the national equivalent of a sieve.

We hold less and less water with each hole poked in our credibility and grand ideals. When we no longer hold water, we are no longer relevant. We are discarded.

The Great Experiment ends.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up