[OFB Cafe] Who's Still on Here?

[Peter Hollings]

It seems to me that the most fundamental thing is how we characterize 
the attacks of 911. Were these:

    * the attacks of fanatical Muslims in a "Clash of Civilizations"
    * the understandable response of Middle Eastern people to attempts
      by western powers to subjugate their people and obtain control
      over their natural resources
    * an attempt by powers within the USA to create a political climate
      conducive to active military operations overseas.

If we could prove one of these scenarios, then we should be able to 
narrow the conversation.

Peter Hollings

Timothy Butler wrote:
> I'll jump in the mix again. I'm like a moth to the flame on these  
> discussions. "Thus hath the candle sing'd the moth."
>
>
>   
>> Here is some logic for you:
>>
>> * Domestic spying = for years it has been and always should be
>> ILLEGAL, and rightfully so - it invades the privacy of innocent people
>> without just cause. If someone wants to invade my privacy, they better
>> have a damned good reason to do so. What I say to my wife and daughter
>> on the phone is nobody's business but my own.
>>     
>
> 	Agreed. However, neither Democrats nor Republicans have shown  
> initiative in fixing this and both parties voted for it. I have been  
> on the record opposing the USA PATRIOT Act for years, of course, that  
> doesn't accomplish anything.
>
>   
>> * Uncontrolled military spending = NOT CONSERVATIVE, it wastes
>> taxpayer money. The military should only be as big as it has to be to
>> keep the defensively country safe. In war, the best offense is a good
>> defense, as in "You send your nukes; I'll send mine.", or maybe "each
>> flight will have an armed air marshall that will blow the face off of
>> anyone who tries to hijack it". That might have saved a few lives on
>> 9/11/2001, since the hijackers would have been bringing box cutters to
>> a gun fight.
>>     
>
> 	Mostly agreed. I'm not one for cutting the military down too much,  
> but I'm not a fan of nation building. I supported Bush in 2000 in part  
> on the principle that he would not do nation building projects like  
> the previous administration had. I will note, though, the emphasis  
> like the previous administration had. Neither party is innocent. We  
> need a third party.
>
>   
>> * Random senseless wars = EVIL, because IT KILLS INNOCENT PEOPLE! (But
>> maybe that is the point? "Kill em all, let God sort them out" seems to
>> be our current strategery in the Middle East.)
>>     
>
> 	As I've said before, it makes little sense to argue over whether  
> going into Iraq was right or not. I do think it is somewhat  
> disingenuous to argue from hindsight too strongly, since the vast  
> majority of politicos on both sides felt that Iraq was a real threat  
> and it was the official policy of the U.S. under the Clinton  
> administration to remove Hussein from office.
>
> 	Economists talk of "sunk cost." That is, you realize you could have  
> chosen to run Linux and saved a bunch of money, but you bought five  
> Windows systems and now have a personal IT guy for each to keep them  
> running. Now, you could say, "I've spent all this money, and I could  
> have saved a ton, but since I didn't, I'm going to gnash my teeth  
> about that and fret about how my initial decision could have been  
> better." But that doesn't do any good. The money is gone. It is sunk  
> cost. But, the future is not set in stone. The real question now --  
> the only one that does any good to argue about -- is what will lead to  
> the best possible outcome *now* that we have a new administration  
> coming into power. McCain's plan is to attempt to honor the "Pottery  
> Barn Rule" and invest the resources to fix what we have broken.  
> Obama's plan is to run out of the store with the vase on the ground.  
> The only problem is that the vases around that fallen vase are still  
> shaking from the bump that knocked the broken one down, and leaving  
> without first stabilizing the shelf threatens to leave even more  
> shards on the ground. Obama knows this too; that's why his language is  
> becoming softer and I expect that he will not be nearly as quick  
> removing the troops as he promised to his primary season audience.
>
> 	I'd rather we stay over there -- responsibly with more work to  
> eliminate torture and a focus on improving conditions (ala McCain's  
> plan) -- than for us to have need of sending a bigger army over there  
> in two or three years when the whole region falls into chaos as Iran  
> establishes control over Iraq, Israel's trigger finger itches in  
> response and some of the more stable states like Qatar and Jordan fall  
> into the fray.
>
>   
>> * Unchecked government growth = NOT CONSERVATIVE, it wastes taxpayer
>> money.
>>     
>
> 	Absolutely agreed. McCain's plan would check that growth. Obama is  
> proposing some of the largest entitlement expansions ever dreamed up.  
> Your point?
>
>   
>> Yet this is what the "conservative" Republicans have done for the last
>> 8 years.
>>     
>
> 	They haven't been conservative, of course. McCain is more  
> conservative than Bush. Huckabee would have been better than both.  
> Paul would have been best, had he not been somehow tied in with racist  
> and anti-semitic trash published under his editorial watch in his own  
> paper.
>
> 	Personally, I'm tired of political dishonesty. I'm tired of  
> grandstanding on ideas that cannot work or will make things worse than  
> they are. I'm tired of wiggling around promises to one's political  
> benefit. Despite my own disagreements with McCain on immigration  
> reform, campaign finance reform, environmental policy, some parts of  
> Iraq policy and various other issues, one thing I can hang my hat on  
> is that he gives the straight talk he promises. And, I'd rather  
> someone be mostly agreeable and completely honest than totally  
> agreeable and not so honest.
>
> 	-Tim
>
> ---
> Timothy R. Butler | "He that has and a little tiny wit—
> Editor, OFB.biz   | With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,—
> tbutler at ofb.biz   | Must make content with his fortunes fit,
> timothybutler.us  | For the rain it raineth every day."
>                                    -- Feste the Fool (Shakespeare)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OfB Cafe - Cafe at ofb.biz
> Brought to you by your friends at Open for Business.
> http://ofb.biz/mailman/listinfo/cafe_ofb.biz
>
> DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
> opinions of the author and do not represent those of Open for Business.
>
>