While searching for an article I am absolutely certain I wrote but cannot find, I came across this article. I wrote it not long after 9/11 and I would not change a word of it.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
I haven’t changed my mindFebruary 5th, 2004 |
 72 comments to I haven’t changed my mind |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Yes. Exactly.
NEVER FORGIVE! NEVER FORGET! NEVER AGAIN!
Funny, I still feel that “killing rage.”
I saw it, then smelled it for weeks. The reek of burning buildings and people spread down New York Harbor then across the Jersey Shore, where I live. It went on for two straight weeks, almost three. I will never forget what happened there or here at home, or the people I knew who were lost or the people who people who were lost.
I hope the world reads — and remembers — Dale Amon’s essay, because it’s exactly how I felt then and now. It should be required reading who think we had it coming, or couldn’t relate because of their distance from Ground Zero.
This war has only begun. I, too want them dead.
I am by no means a person predisposed to violence but I’m pretty sure that I’d be willing to dispatch bin laden personally – even if the only tools I was given were a pair of needle nose pliers and a bic lighter.
Without a doubt much of the disconnect between the US and the rest of the world regarding the events that occurred since 9-11 flows from the huge difference in impact that event had upon citizens of the US when contrasted to the effect it had on others.
Based upon my own anecdotal evidence I do not believe the rest of the world’s idea of “how angry America was after 9-11” is even 10% of the true value.
I sure as hell hope this social experiment we’re running in Iraq works because the alternative is too terrible to even contemplate. I’m all for trying to solve this problem the non-genocidal way but I can tell you with no particular pride that I would probably support solving this problem “once and for all” if we experience another 9-11 and I’m quite certain I’m not alone.
Gary,
The smell lingered for longer than 3 weeks, you just got used to it. A friend and I got the chance to visit NYC at the end of October and we could still smell it. I expect it was stronger and more prevalent earlier, but it was still there.
Byna, CA boy.
I perfectly understand your anger, & believe me, the world stands behind you; a vast majority of people round the world would like to see Al Quaida’s leaders & members dead & buried (well… not that i’ve asked, but I’d be surprised if ’twas any other way).
This “killing rage” is troublesome though, & somewhat frightening for the rest of the world. By all means, wish death on those who did this, but please, try & go about it in a reasoned fashion. Make sure the rage is directed against your real enemies, & make sure it’s not manipulated by politicians for their own ends. Those in the grip of strong emotions are often not thinking as clearly as they could. Strike out carefully, only at those who deserve it. You’re not unique in being able to develop this rage when wronged.
None of this is to say “the US is a big unsophisticated monster which needs my euro-sophisticate ass to tell it off”, believe me, but I do feel the public “war on terrorism” is now largely being used as a pretext for plans which are at best tenuously related to disposing of Al Quaida. Hopefully there’s more going on backstage, in the form of assassinations etc., which is how I’d imagine you’d defeat an organisation such as this.
&, AngryAmerican and all those who’ve been talking “nuke ’em” talk, stop all this f**ing talk of genocide, you idiots. Just because a few fanatics come from a country, you think you have the right to kill everyone in it? That’s utter bullshit logic, & shows contempt for the people who live there. You’re telling me a few thousand American lives are worth millions of Arab lives? All I can say is thank God not all Americans think like you, because then lots of the anti-american propaganda would actually be right! Posters on a previous thread were talking, about nuking France. I realise this was somewhat in jest… but for what? Non-cooperation? Ridiculous. Plus f**ing offensive to be honest. My parents live in France, & belive me, i’d be full of that “killing rage” if anything happened to them. You can see where this is going… killing rage all round… wahay! Do you really want to see the end of humankind?
I used to commute daily through the WTC, working for several years at the World Financial Center. My wife’s office stood just a block away – together we spent considerable time at the Towers. We left Manhattan in August 2001, just before the attack – I am grateful for that happenstance – my wife’s building was damaged by debris, my former office destroyed.
I lost a friend in the attack, as well as another friend’s husband whom I only met a couple of times. I went back to the site within days of the attack – a sight (and smell) I will never forget.
Yes, Al Qaeda must be rooted out and destroyed. But in doing so I believe that it is important for us to recognize that we must not stoop to their level of barbarity and must also try to understand their motivations – not to empathise, but rather to do what we can to defuse possible future attacks. If the problem is the Saudi Regime and the lack of hope it provides for young Saudi men, coupled with its support for radical islamic teachings, then let’s bring it down. If it is singular radical individuals who want us dead, and are able convince others (who otherwise might not) to do the same, then by all means let’s kill them.
If it stems from the fact that the region was left out of much of the advances offered by liberalism (such as representative government, free speech and equality – ideals from the Enlightenment) then let us shine the light of freedom there by standing as an example to be admired and at the same time support opposition forces who would change the nature of the region to one that offers liberty and hope.
Let us be on the side of those who feel so disenfranchised that they turn to radical Islam to give their lives meaning and as a way to fight back.
We will never win through force of arms alone. No matter how satisfying that would be.
BTW: I would personally enjoy killing Osama with my bare hands.
well I can certainly undertsand the feeling when seeing the televised image of a plane plunging into the towers.
But I always did, and still do feel that the overwhelming reaction to this event has taken a wrongful place in the history of the world.
An inflated sense of importance if you will, though i am sure even this opinion will probabaly raise more anger in the poster.
The 3,000 killed in this attack pales far in significance when compared with attacks by American forces and other armies throughout the world.
You have said you dont care ‘what their excuses are’ so can I safely use the same statement?
I doubt you will agree, somehow.
The irish conflict has seen about 3,000 deaths which, spread over 30 years make 9/11 seem even more catastrophic, given the prominence of the irish war.
However, given that it is 3,000 of a population 90 times smaller than that of North America it is comparable to 270,000 murdered americans.
The IRA are the most infamous of all concerned in this conflict but one of the worst hit in this conflict are the victims of the British loyalists/ RUC/ British army.
I expect to read such fullsome condemnation of this attack, the attacks on Somalia and on, and on, and on….
Surprise! I agree with A_t. Although I blew off steam at the time too, I do not see nuclear strikes by the US against anyone as a realistic result of almost any likely scenario. I do guarantee you that such an event would mean the end of the Syrian and North Korean governments, and probably the Iranian if it wasn’t already done in by the Iranian people.
There apparently has been some very interesting work going on underground. While on a job in SF I was rivited by a documentary on one of the cable channels (Discovery, History, one of those). It seems that before the war an Iraqi code clerk decided to defect in Rome. He was told he would only be accepted if he stayed on long enough to pinpoint where and when a meeting was to occur in Libya. Once in Libya he was contacted by two arab-ancestry American CIA agents working out of Egypt. He then refused to give the information until he was safely out of Libya. The CIA guys pulled off a mission impossible style operation. They got a drug for the guy that slows heart and breathing to a deathlike state… they tapped into the hotel comms and put in a call to the staff at a particular time… then when the hotel called for an ambulance they intercepted it. They sent off a call to the Iraqi embassy as well… it worked. The Iraqi’s superiors showed up to see he was dead, the Americans took him out to their truck and then (not without difficulties) smuggled him out of Libya where he told what he knew.
Seals then went ashore in Libya and bugged the house to see what was going on. The fibre optic video through the floor let people in DC watch live as an highly placed Iraqi discussed the details of the attacks to be made inside America with the people who were going to do set it up. Yes, I think they were associated with al Qaeda. When that info came through, the DC people gave the Seals the order to take them down. The entire group died and the information was all taken back to the coast and to the US… where they found another attack, by suicide bomber was planned to take out an Iraqi dissident in London. US agents were with him when the bomber showed up. The bomber died. The Iraqi lived.
So yes, I think there are a large number of dead al Qaeda washing up on shores around the world and we won’t be hearing about it except in rare cases. I’m quite happy to see the secret war take out their sorry asses.
As to the worst case… if enough nukes went off in the US to actually wound the country… then I do agree that dangerous things, things to be regretted years later, would happen. That would be true of any place, not just the USA. If you hurt or scare people enough, they will lash out blindly. No one on this planet wants to see what would happen if the US population were pushed to that breaking point.
I just don’t see it happening though. We might lose a city a decade, but that won’t be enough to kick in the primal reflexes.
If the death toll from the next thirty years’ worth of the War on Terror is under 100 million, I’ll be astounded. If it’s under a billion, I’ll be pleasantly surprised. I can readily envisage mass nuclear retaliation against the Islamic world if a nuke goes off in an American city. Note: prediction is not advocacy (although I am on record as saying that if a clearly identifiable state actor can be found after a WMD attack on the West, then the retaliation should be sudden, massive and automatic).
I agree that we should understand the roots of Islamic terrorism, and the forces that drive young Arab/Islamic men to such evil.
The root is Islam. Not fringe Islam. Not radical Islam. Not fundamentalist Islam. It is Islam and always has been. Since Arab armies first descended upon the Byzantine Christian world in the 8th century, Islam has been at war against the West. It has never once ceased being at war against the West. And now that the Islamic world senses that our civilisation is in decline, hampered by leftist ideology, political correctness and pacifist cowardice, it has begun a long term strategy to defeat us and our political and cultural traditions through mass immigration and constant terrorism.
The time for focused defensive attacks, for single missile strikes, and for the pathetic joke of court cases is over. If a large scale nuclear strike is what it will take to convince the Islamic world to cease its war, then so be it. Because it is not just 3000 murdered on Sept.11. that we fight for. It is the millions murdered by the vile evil that Muhammed let loose upon the world since 622 A.D. that we fight for. Its for people like the Coptic family I have become friends with who fled Egypt because their 12 year old daughter was brutally gang raped by 8 Arab men for the crime of not being Muslim, a crime that happens with regularity in Egypt but which is almost never prosecuted. It is for every Israeli victim of Islamic suicide bombers.
I’m sick and tired of being told we have to be concerned about what the “Islamic street” thinks of our actions in our defense. And I’m sick and tired of the Western left telling us that Islam is a religion of peace. And I’m sick and tired of being told we must excersise restraint. The time for restraint is long past, and it was long past well before Sept.11.
The only response I am interested in is total war. Ands the only outcome I am interested in is to see Islam reduced to a footnote in history books.
This “killing rage” is troublesome though, & somewhat frightening for the rest of the world.
On the contrary, I don’t think Europeans are frightened enough. Witnessing the “peace” marches (“Bush=Hitler,” etc.) I got the distinct impression Europeans were singularly unafraid. After all, Europeans don’t usually taunt and bait those they fear. (Appease, maybe.)
(As for you being offended — get over it. Americans have been putting up with your abuse for years.)
I think it’s high time lefties begin exploring the “roots” of “American anger.”
It’s not even Islam… it’s just hate. A core group of Islamics ‘hate’, propagate that hate as a bureaucratic method, and their energy drives those more apathetic to follow along or be branded as not faithful or apostates.
So we tolerate the 7th century styled human rights violations in the name of multiculturalism…
But America’s popular culture is… popular…
So we find ourselves lumped with the Jews as scapegoats for the shortcomings of a 7th century cultural ideal.
So the cowards attacked us… even though many of us, called extremists, warned of the attacks for years…
Two buildings holding 40,000 people survived long enough that 37,000 were saved… a miracle.
But now we are much more angry then anyone who isn’t an American will ever understand.
Not because it’s a cultural thing… not as a method of our political agenda… but because we know how lucky we were… how much danger we face… and we are going to stop that danger if we can.
That is simple common sense… simple American connect-the-dots common reasoning.
“Over time it’s going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity,” we said. “You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.”
Ponder that.
Dale Amon-
You warn America not to do things which we will regret later. Take this to heart: We do not regret the fire-bombing of Tokyo or Dresden. We do not regret Nagasaki or Hiroshima. In some sense we say “It’s too bad the Japanese and Germans forced our hand.”, but we loose no sleep over it.
It is BaitAndSwitch that has hit the nail on the head. Europe is not fearful enough. The Arab world (except for Khadafi, apparently) is not fearful enough. If they were, there would be no War on Terror.
America does not seek out enemies. We really would prefer to trade peacefully. But enemies have sought us out. We do not care why.
“Why” is important, strategically – know your enemy, and all that; but it is not important to our cause.
Ciarian –
You are wrong because I agree do with you. You are perfectly within your rights to not care about our motives. We understand that our actions will affect you in a material way. We understand that our motives, however base or pure, will not rebuild homes or lives.
We understand because we don’t use double standards. That’s why we act without malice. In a world where only consequences matter, and motives mean nothing, we would still do as we do. We will act to protect ourselves.
Ciarian, if you can do your friends a favor, convince them that the motives of America don’t matter, and all that matters is our actions.
…and since we could not assure our safety through peace, we are trying to assure it through limited war. If you want to total avoid war, as only America can wage it, do everything in your power to assure our safety. It is the only way.
We regret that your choices have been taken away from you, in some sense; but we won’t lose sleep over it. Any more than over Nagasaki.
Brock,
Wall Street, Manhattan
Don’t be silly. We wouldn’t nuke a city full of innocent people to get at a handful of enemies. There might be rage on the American street, but by the time it gets to planners cooler heads will prevail. You do what you have to do to win, and today we can do that with relatively minimal loss of life.
Nuclear weapons are becoming less and less useful as time goes on. About the only things left from a military perspective are:
* getting at deep bunkers
* attacking massed formation in limited geographic areas when very outnumbered.
The strategic purpose and MAD almost don’t exist anymore. If North Korea were to launch a missile at us, and it succeeded in hitting, we’d at most drop the smallest one in our inventory on their weapons facility. We’d wipe the face of northeast asia with them using only conventional weapons.
If any nation state does it or harbours those who do it, we will defeat them conventionally with as little loss of civilian life as possible. If they are hiding out in areas that are difficult to reach and are not backed by a state, our special forces will just pay them a fatal visit.
I just simply see no circumstance other than a complete breakdown of America as a civil nation in which we’d commit genocide on *anyone*.
But we’d sure as hell make the lives of the perpetrators nasty , brutish and short.
Having read some of the comments above I have to say that if they are truly representative of american sentiments, as a European, I am scared to hell. Not of muslims but of americans, and I am married to a New Yorker.
I agree with every word that Dale Amon has said in his posting and his additional comments. I want the cowardly murderering scum dead too. These filth are a minority. Just as most terrorist organisations do not represent the people that they claim to, these wretches do not represent the muslim world.
I don’t blame the muslim world most of whom are just ordinary people trying to live their lives. I do not believe there is a muslim conspiracy to wipe out the west or whatever rabid rubbish Shawn is spouting. The muslim world isn’t that organised!
Specifically on the subject of finding out why so much of this hate is directed at the USA and, to a lesser extent, at us in the UK. I do not believe it is just the muslims who hate us. I think many people hate and envy us and most of all fear us because the USA and the UK have the power, and they have repeatedly proven this, to do exactly what they please regardless of international opinion.
I call myself a libertarian. I believe everyone should have the right to defend themselves and sometimes this means you kill the other guy before he can kill you. But I also believe that when no credible threat exists you let the other guy get on with his life without interference. Some of you people above seem to take the attitude that if they are muslims then they are guilty. Lets use our brains and considerable resources to wipe out the guilty with as little colateral damage to the majority of the world who just want some peace.
The WTC attacks were horrible, but the US has been working for its own ends in the Middle East for Decades. This has understandably upset a lot of the locals. The attacks when they came were hardly unsurprising and not entirely undeserved.
The answer to militant Islam is not to bomb largely innocent if ignorant muslims which does little but create footage for Al’Quaida recruiting posters and reduce our moral high ground.
Had the UK been sensible during WW2 we would have avoided war, armed Hitler’s enemies and armed ourselves to the teeth and then waited for the Russians to wipe him out.
The US would be sensible to follow a policy similar to this.
Well said, Nick. This American agrees with you.
Daniel,
Had the UK been sensible during WW2 we would have avoided war, armed Hitler’s enemies and armed ourselves to the teeth and then waited for the Russians to wipe him out.
I think your country tried everything short of pre-emptive war to head off WW2. I don’t think it’s as simple as saying you should have avoided it. And in any case, waiting for the Russians was not an option, given the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact. War was coming whether Britain wanted it or not. It is to your nation’s unending credit that it knew it had to fight, and fought.
Oh, Daniel, I forget to comment on this:
The attacks when they came were hardly unsurprising and not entirely undeserved.
It’s this sort of thing that feeds American resentment and anger. You may not care, but you should. That’s the not-so-subtle warning being delivered by the Angry Americans in this thread. I think it’s a lot huffing and puffing personally, but I begin to see their point when I read your particular brand of nonsense.
We are not going to nuke or even attack a country just to get a few trerrorists. However if there is a significant nuclear or bio attack on the US that kills a large number of people, then any country that we think might have people who had anything to do with it or who had any people that might pose such a threat in the future will have two choices.
One is to truly make a maximum effort to root all such people out. If they are unable to do so they must allow the US to help them do so in any manner we want. If they will not cooperate in this manner then the entire country will be part of the enemy.
So far in the war on terror we have shown that we will go to significant lengths to avoid mass civilian casualties. I do not expect that we will have to use nuclear weapons because of the effectiveness of our conventional military. However, let there be no mistake. If we could not accomplish what we felt we needed to in such circumstances we would use nuclear weapons. I would support such action and I believe that if it came to it a majority of US citizens would.
I have discussed this with friends and co-workers. There are differences on what the threshold would be to trigger this response but few that I know would rule it out.
While this is not intended to make Europeans afraid I hope it does make countries, including their citizens, afraid to allow terrorists sanctuary.
For a long discussion on this see: Total War by Steven denBeste.
For a discussion of how we are trying to win this war without it comming to the use of nuclear weapons see: Strategic Overview This is a tremendously ambitious and risky endevour that we are embarking on. It is likely to be as large an effort as the cold war. However I believe that it provides the best chance to really solve this problem.
I suggest that “Europeans” truly join us in this effort rather than oppose us. Comparing the number of deaths in 9/11 is beside the point. The key is that it made clear to the US that this and something much worse is possible. We cannot let that situation continue.
“the US has been working for its own ends in the Middle East for Decades”
Don’t kid yourself, Junior. So has every other major industrial power on Earth.
It should be obvious to anyone that the testosterone laced commentary above is not wholly representative of American public opinion, which is most likely a Gaussian distribution biased in the direction of proactive confrontation rather than meek withdrawal, with many of the posters above inhabiting the upper 2-sigma tail.
The fact is though, the reaction to a major strike against a major population center in the US or its allies would immediately have worldwide repercussions that could easily spiral out of control. The difficulty with the massive retaliation approach is, where and whom do you strike? I somewhat doubt that the initial reaction would be as coherent and as apocalyptic as “attack everyone now!”
I would expect the first reaction would be a massive shutdown of the borders and an economic shock that would throw the entire world into chaos and turmoil. What would emerge from that turmoil is anybody’s guess but, I would bet that it would result in a war the likes of which has never been seen on this planet. Events would take on a life of their own and, the entire world would be sucked into the vortex. It would not be a grand plan of conquest and destruction but, a day-to-day sequence of action and reaction pulling humanity into the strange attractor of Earthly hell.
I very much doubt that the religion of Islam or its 1 billion devotees would survive. Does that prognostication make my commentary “testosterone laced”, too? Well, I’m not threatening anyone, I merely foretell. Just because I arrive at the same conclusion does not mean I took the same path.
Let’s hope we never see the day.
I would like to add my agreement to those who like Dale Amon have said that we would not use nuclear weapons on an entire population unless as Tony Lekas just wrote there were no other way. Then, as he suggests, I am an American who would accept, indeed demand the use of whatever means were necessary. Including nuclear means.
If Europeans had more of a sense of history and more of an understanding of the fact that there really is an ‘America’ – a real culture, a real shared set of beliefs and behaviors, then they would be very frightened right now. I suspect that the Japanese do not have the same problem understanding this. They did at one time. Americans are not just a lot of Irish and Africans and Germans and Italians and English and Chinese and who knows what who happen to live together, we are Americans. We are among other things, the people who helped Sherman reduce the South of our own country to a state of starvation that would have impressed Stalin or Pol Pot. (It still has not totally recovered). We are the people who paid back Pearl Harbor and Bataan with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I am not stating these things out of pride. I am simply stating them. I am pointing out the fact that, aside from a few academic self flagellators, the vast majority of Americans (nee’ Irish etc, etc.) agree with me that those things seemed necessary and will seem necessary again at such time as our existence is threatened by anyone who cannot be reasoned with. We may be charitable before and after the threat, but once we are convinced – and 9/11 was nothing if not convincing- we are as ferocious as anything history has yet produced.
I have a difficult time understanding a people who will be relatively supine as an enemy invades and conquers them. I suppose that is my cultural and historical blind spot. We don’t feel that way. And while we would prefer that the rest of the world approve of us, that is not a matter of highest importance.
Bush may have seemed simplistic or bellicose to you non Americans, (I need to exclude the Anglosphere in this statement – somehow most of them seem to understand), but his “You are either with us or against us” is as clear and precise a statement of most American’s deepest feelings on this matter as can be made. If you really want to understand us, understand that.
And by the way, if you believe that time will dim our feelings, well, you are mistaken. Apparently Dale reread his old post and has not changed. Judging from my feelings in reading it and from the other American comments here, it is still there and will be until this threat is eliminated permanently.
“Americans are not just a lot of Irish and Africans and Germans and Italians and English and Chinese and who knows what who happen to live together, we are Americans.”
I think this point is very difficult for outsiders to understand. I am an immigrant of European origin, and I feel absolute allegiance to my new country, yet my relatives in the Old Country still think that I only “live in America”.
I cannot but agree with Doug Collins and other commenters from the US. I do not look forward to what we will do if sufficiently provoked; I am frightened by the prospect of our most likely response and yet I know that, should it come to pass, it will have to be done. I don’t know if the nuclear option will be used, but even if not, our conventional response will be like nothing anybody have ever seen.
The world should pray that we succeed in our current Middle East strategy. Nobody should want to see what happens if we fail. And I am not bragging or threatening. But this is a reality: if the choice is between our survival and survival of our enemy, we will fight until the enemy is no more.
Everybody always complains that Americans never pay any attention to the rest of the world. Well, the world has our attention now.
I always considered the US my real home, even tho I’m a Canadian citizen. I never enjoyed living here, I spent alot of my youth traveling the US, learning her history what she stood for. What the people fought to create, why they died, why they fought themselfs and the reasons behind it. Why the constitution was a sacred document. I spent 4 years living in the US going to University. But since I was young I’d always had a strong kinship to the US, to the people I’ve met and the cities I’ve lived in. And when 9/11 happened, it was a hit against me and my home.
I was in NYC in the pit for the 9/11 memorial this past year. I know what pollution smells and tastes like, I lived in SoCal for 4 years. You can still smell the death and burning in the air. You get used to it…you’d have to, my cousin says she doesn’t smell it…but even I could see it in her eyes when I looked at her. But it’s still not gone, it’s in *everything* in NYC now.
My cousin is a US citizen, her fiance died when those animals attacked. Her twins will never see their father, she’ll never see him again. She burried the end of a finger in the ground. That’s all they recovered.
If we nuked the middle east into a sheet of glass you wouldn’t see me weep over it. My anger is as sharp today as it was the day the towers were hit. They struck at me, and mine and they’ll pay.
It’s a raw wound, and it won’t heal until those who commited these crimes against us are brought to justice. And nothing, nothing burns me more then those who think that *we* deserve it. The damnest part is, I don’t think some of these people will get it until there is smoking cinder in their own backyards.
Dale, it reads as true today as it did when you first penned it. I lost a bunch of colleages in the WTC that day, some other old colleagues managed to flee for their lives. The rage is still there in my heart.
Of course, there is, and in a free society indeed there should be, debate about how we deal with the maniacs who would carry out such attacks. As libertarians, we owe it to ourselves to ensure that we don’t trash the very things we hold dear in the process.
Oh, to some of the commenters above, spare us the stuff about how America/Britain etc has done much worse in the past. I am not aware of the American or British armed forces deliberately seeking to kill vast numbers of civilians without declaring war beforehand. There’s a huge moral difference between a modern military using laser-guided munitions which deliberately minimise non-combatant deaths, and those who deliberately try to slaughter as many “infidels” as possible.
Re-read your article. I can identify with it 100%. I’ve gotten over the white hot rage. Now, I’m just determined that whatever the price we eliminate this threat. I have relatives serving in the US military. They could very well die. I don’t look forward to that at all.
I wish we could just close our doors and send out the diplomats to obtain peace. But, that type of thinking is living in a dream world. I want those bastar## so afraid of ever attacking the US, or one of our allies again, that they never even think of it.
I also have a fear. I fear what we’ll do if we ever get something like 9/11 here again. Currently, we’re fighting with the proverbial one arm behind the back.
We place our soldiers at risk as we go out of the way to avoid civilian casualties.
*IF* these jerks are stupid enough to blow up thousands more in the US, I’m afraid of what we’ll do.
I think we just may turn some country into a parking lot.
WOW. I just re-read all the posts. Amazing that most Americans, and Canadian friend, feel about the same.
I bet most Europeans will read these posts and just not get it. Can’t blame them. They were not attacked. We acted the same way before Pearl Harbor.
Hitler overran most of Europe. Britain stood alone against the might of Hitler’s forces. Japan had invaded China and was on the move. The US debated about getting involved with the war. We debated!!
I never understood, until now, how we could have done that. I can see that we acted just like many countries are acting towards this current war. They won’t get involved until it impacts them. It’s just human nature, I suppose.
A question someone posed on another blog was:
“Why did they fear us so little as to attack us?”
I started wondering that myself. Why did they have so little fear of us? Hopefully, we will be feared now. I’d rather be feared and left alone than respected right now.
When the United States first entered the Great War, one British wag (whose name I do not recall) remarked “Americans approach everything as either business or a game. It is yet to be seen which approach they will bring to this war.” The answer is provided by a German officer after the war. “The French went into battle singing, the English, yelling. But the Americans attacked in complete silence, and that was the most disturbing of all.”
We do not address serious issues by “huffing and puffing”. Nor do we strike out in blind rage. Our anger is personal and very deep. Our vengeance is, and will continue to be, efficient, deadly and served up cold. We will do whatever is required to destroy this plague because failure to do so would mean the loss of everything we hold dear.
Our immediate enemy is the Wahabi/Islamist version of Islam. Their doom is certain. The question that has been put to the rest of the world is: “Who stands with them?” The majority of the 1 billion Muslims in the world (and quite a few non-Muslims) have yet to make that choice. They wish to support at least the goals of Jihad (or oppose America as the greater evil) without bringing our wrath down upon their heads. They cannot. Eventually, they will either be forced to choose or a choice will be made for them. Ghaddafi chose wisely. Saddam chose…poorly.
We Americans have been given a choice between our own children screaming in horror as their lives are snuffed out in a giant fireball, or other people’s children screaming in horror as their lives are snuffed out by American bombs. There is no third option. ‘Peace’ is not on offer. My children will not die that way, so I choose theirs. And yes, my children are worth more than thousands of Muslim children. And I care not one whit what self-righteous pontificators, who are protected by those bombs, have to say about it.
Our friend Nick is quite right to fear America more than the Islamists. Perhaps his American wife has given him some partial insight into the American soul. But we are not evil. We will only do what is required, and no more. My question for Nick, A_t, Ciaran and Dale is: How much do you require from us?
Some on this thread talked of nuklear mass extermination, and others expressed horror at such sentimental talk, with A_t proposing that only the guilty individual terrorists be punished.
The problem is, you can’t hunt individual terrorists all over the globe, especially not if they get shelter and assistance from terror-supporting sovereign governments. Terrorism can be stopped only if ALL governments fight it to death, rather than support it.
So the US, rather than nuking regions (which no serious US official is even contemplating), should concentrate (beside chasing individual terrorists) on removing terror enabling regimes. A case in point is Iran. It badly needs regime change. The US is far too coy and inactive on this, and it might regret that in the future.
Changig regimes does not necessarily involve occupation and nation building like in Iraq. Let’s face it: social engineering is difficult, costly, and slow, maybe not possible at all.
What you can do is: destroy bad regimes by force, bombing, subversion, by proxies, by whatever means. When one regime falls, if it’s replaced by another bad regime, you destroy the second one too. You keep at it until some tolerable regime emerges. That can be done, for now, by conventional means. Doing this can prevent the necessity of using nukes in the future, when the bad regimes get WMDs.
The US should not wait for another 9/11; it must work harder now, at regime changes. It has done ok so far, but must do much more, and faster, to prevent the next atrocity.
“When one regime falls, if it’s replaced by another bad regime, you destroy the second one too. You keep at it until some tolerable regime emerges. That can be done, for now, by conventional means.”
Do you have any examples of this strategy succeeding? Could I not equally posit that years of violence would most likely reduce most countries to an Afganistan-like state? The more disrupted & lawless a country is, the more opportunity there is for the kind of covert activity the likes of Al Quaida enjoy. I don’t like seeing dodgy regimes any more than the rest of you, but totalitarian regimes are pretty good at suppressing internal dissent; it might be easier just to sway whichever evil dictator’s in charge round to the “kill Al Quaida” side of things… though you could argue this will, in the long run just lead to more disaffected potential terrorists. It’s a thorny one & no mistake. No single solution will fit all countries.
For all you shrieking hysterical “bomb the lot of ’em, evil muslims” Americans, get a grip. These are people too, most of them innocent of any major wrongdoing. If you would not weep at the destruction of a country, you’ve either managed to build up a non-human idea of that country’s people, or else you’re in need of professional help/incarceration. As I said above, & Dale reiterated extremely well, thank God people like you don’t run your country.
Oh, & btw, maybe Europeans think of *recent* immigrants to the US as “just Europeans who live in the states”, with good reason in my experience, but we don’t just think you’re all a big mishmash of Germans, Brits etc. After all, how could French cultural elites fight “american culture” if it was just a bunch of European culture from somewhere else?
And also, all this “we understand because we don’t use double standards. That’s why we act without
malice.”, & whoever was talking about not being able to understand people who would peacefully allow their country to be invaded… where are these people? A) the US, or the US government at least, employs double standards all the f**ing time. So do most governments. Dirty business, being a government. If you believe the US is pure as the driven snow, you’ve a lot of learning to do. B) Who are these people who would happily have their countries invaded without resistance? I’d suggest they don’t exist. Your tone suggests you think the US unique in this regard. I’d suggest this reflects a pretty weird & unrealistic vision of the world where the US is pure & courageous & everyone else is cowardly & corrupt. More learning probably required.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So why are 627 coalition forces dead? and 3000 wounded? Why are tens of thousands of Iraqis dead and wounded. Al Qaeda are mostly Saudi and a few Egyptians. The warhawks are all scared little girls who are so terrified that they need to act out – sending other people’s children to die in a farawy desert while they hide under their beds.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11? Know that for a fact do you? How? I think those who criticize the was against Iraq for this reason show distinct lack of intelligence. America was attacked by people who subscribe to an idea, a vicious, evil idea. That idea whether its called Islamic fascism or whatever, is basically this: the lives of infidels, Muslim women, insufficiently strict Muslims are not worth a grain of sand. That idea is being taught daily in the madrassas of the Islamic world. It is a death cult. We know Saddam funded Palestinian suicide bombers, people who think blowing up pizza parlors is a ticket to heaven. This cheapening of human life in the Middle East is what led to 9-11 and those who cheered it are perhaps not as equally guilty, but certainly as sick and twisted. How do you fight an idea such as this? America for better or worse believes that bringing democracy (to a region where other than Turkey there is none) and prosperity (to a region where the total GNP is less than that of Spain despite oil wealth) might work. Iraq was a good place to start. And no this is not an Empire, we do not seek tribute and Americans genuinely prefer America to most anywhere else. And no, we are not guaranteeing that this will be a success, but we have to do something. Can you come up with an alternative plan? For all that criticism that I have heard, I have never heard a realistic alternative advanced. Please don’t say “diplomacy” or “criminal action” or “appeasement/withdrawal” type crap. We tried that when the Khobar Towers fell, when the Cole was bombed, and when our boys were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. What did that get us? 9-11.
A_t:
But this is just the point: we will not get a grip. What I and other Americans are trying to explain, it is in the interest of anybody who is tempted to shelter/fund/support terrorists to never underestimate America. We are not a paper tiger. As a poster above said, if it is to be a choice between our children dying and their children dying, it will be their children. It is a horrible thing to say and it is a last thing that I wish to happen. But this scenario should be taken very seriously into everybody’s the calculation. It is an open option.
There is an excellent book out by Lee Harris “Civilization and its Enemies”. He discusses these and other issues regarding survival of civilization (and he does not limit it to the Western version of it) in the face of deadly threat. It is not fun reading; frankly I found it deeply scary. But these issues need to be debated in the open. I strongly recommend it.
Amelia well said, but please don’t forget those who died before those days.
Marine Barracks Beruit, Lebannon – 243 —
Pan Am Flt 103 Lockerbie, Scotland – 244
And the others…far too many to list who have died at the hands of those animals.
A_t, perhaps you need to remember the words of Isoroku Yamamoto. 60+ years later they ring as true then as they do now:
“I’m afraid I have awoken a sleeping giant, and have strengthened his resolve.”
When it comes to my way of life, my existance, it comes first. When someone decides to ‘blow themselfs up’ to try and destroy it. They forfeit their rights, and so do entire groups of people to ensure that they will be unable to carry it out.
When someone picks a fight with you, you have threee options. 1) fight back 2) run 3) get beat up. Someone picked a fight with us, they sucker punched us. We expect them to swing again, and were too big to run, and no one wants to get his butt kicked, so we fight back.
We expect to be swung at, and when some one swings at you, you again have three options. 1) hit back 2) block 3) duck. Again, option 3 is out cause were too big. Option 2 is out cause to put up sheilds so perfect that we could block any terrorist action would require a total loss of freedom. I dont like the losses of freedom we have already had because of a “block the punch” mentality, i.e. homeland security.
So that leaves us with hit back first. We hit Afghanistan but missed our target. We hurt him, but mot enough to end the fight. So, when your target hides, you punch the guys he hides behind untill the stop letting him hide there. If youre afraid of looking like too much of a bad guy for just hitting everyone, you hit the least liked guy, and you hope that that will be enough to make everyone think twice.
Iraq was the least liked guy, we are fighting the best way we logically can. That is the reason for Iraq and the deaths of our soldiers there. Was it worth it? I dont know for sure, but Id rather have my knuckles hurt from punching too much than to have another gut shot like 9/11. Al-Qaeda punched a guy that was way too big for them to handle, you know, the big ugly guy at the bar. Hes generous and pays people’s tabs, but hes also rude and nosy at times, doesnt always respect personal space. The thing is tho, most of the other guys at the bar cant pay their tabs without the big guys help, and most of them have been bailed out by the big guys strength.
The thing about that big guy, is you never, ever, ever want to piss him off, cause no matter how big his heart is and how peaceful he seems, he’ll crush you like a Dorito when hes mad.
imberwulf – congratulations – your childish analogy:
“The thing about that big guy, is you never, ever, ever want to piss him off, cause no matter how big his heart is and how peaceful he seems, he’ll crush you like a Dorito when hes mad.”
has just perfectly encapsulated the low opinion a lot of us in Ireland have of americans and their ‘bully boy’ complex.
This comments section is like a bastard-sons-of-George Bush reunion…
some crazy-ass shit here, with some truly sad, inhumane beliefs being loudly voiced.
One question for all you ‘Do not harbour terrorists’ people….
What do you think of the IRA (‘terrorists’ in your lingo) members who fought back when the British Army ‘invaded and attacked’ them in Derry 20 years ago?
I am in now way comparing it to 9/11 – that would eb foolish – but merely using it to show you how the world is not black and white.
these Irish ‘terrorists’ were reacting to an attack – like you have mostly argued is totally valid.
These people have actually reacted with greater focus than your armies yet you call them terrorists…
Ciaran: It is true that you might apply a different name depending on which side you are on. You pick your side and then you fight. I know my side in this particular conflict and I know what is at stake.
When it is over, we will be standing and they will not. What label you apply to the al Qaeda doesn’t really matter at the end of the day. It is WAR, they are the enemy and a no-quarters, no-holds barred enemy at that.
They gave no quarter on 9/11.
We will in return give no quarter.
Ciarian –
I doubt anything we could say now would change your opinion of Americans. That’s fine. We don’t care what your opinion is.
Moving on.
My fellow Americans –
I’m not sure anyone will read this (this thread is getting long in the tooth) but I saw the movie Miracle tonight. It was good, I recommend it, but there was a scene that really caught me off guard. It was New York, at night, 1980. There they were, two towers in the night.
I walked past the pit just two days ago with one of my best freinds. I told him how I tried not to think how much was gone. That dwelling on it would drive you insane. For the most part, I don’t think about it very much. I am successful at that. You have to be, to pass it every day.
But seeing them like that, it really caught me by surprise, and I had to take a moment to bring myself together. It was a moving moment.
This will be my last post on this thread. I think everything that the Americans could say, has been said. We don’t want total war, we’re just willing to serve it up if that’s what’s required. It’s too bad folks like A_t and Ciarian don’t seem to understand the “nuance” in such a stance.
We really don’t want war. We really don’t want to hurt anyone. But that doesn’t me we won’t. We will, if we have to.
And it’s the rest of the world that must make that choice. That’s why Miracle was an uplifting movie, but gave me little hope for our future. The Soviets understood us. They knew they’d rather face us in a hockey rink than in battle. I know, I just know it, that the Islamists have not made that transition yet.
The very troublesome thing is that the the Muslims (not the Terrorists) of the world have the power to save themsevles. All they have to do is surrender up the terrorists to us, and it’s all over.
But they just won’t do it.
And that’s a friggin’ shame.
Brock
This thread is old and getting long so I probably should not make it longer.. sorry.
Just wanted to add that some people seem to be laboring under the delusion, voiced in our own press and by certain vocal citizens, that we’ll go back to trying to be ‘nice’ once Bush is out of office. I can’t blame folks who don’t live here for thinking that, many Americans think that as well … but they are in the minority.
I didn’t vote for Bush and I disagree with him on many things, I don’t agree 100% on how he’s waging war.
But, the fact that he is waging war and not just talking and talking with people who want to kill us … I totally agree with! So do most Americans.
It’s not Bush who pushed the US to war. The US public demanded he DO SOMETHING. We will demand it of whoever takes his place in the White House.
There is a grim determination most Americans have. We want to win the war that has been declared upon us. It will not be a short war. We are in it for the duration. Many of us may die fighting this war. Family members of mine may die. But, we will fight and finish what others started.
Hate us. Disagree with us. I don’t really care. I want those who declared war upon us regret what they started. I want them to fear us. They don’t fear us enough yet. One day they will. Hopefully others will as well so we can be left alone and not attacked.
Many innocent people will be killed before the war is over. I care and feel bad about it. However, that’s one of the components of war. Innocent people die. War is indeed Hell. I hate war. But, war is sometimes necessary.
GUYS.
it is all very moving how you want the world ‘to fear the great ‘Ol Us of A’ but can any of you tell me how you are going to make GUys who fly planes into buildings fear you???
Death? No that won’t do it..so what else is there?
are you going to unleash baseball on their asses??
(i would have said NFl but the superbowl was fantastic this year. so… 🙂 )
you have to learn, like the British (eventually) did – that mere violence will not rid you of determined foes (in the brits case – the IRA)
it’s not that you will never stop them, the point is that violence will not accomplish all you wish to, unless you wipe out every single soul = and that is highly unlikely in political and in real terms..
remember how thousands of Americans contributed to the IRA when Britain was attacking ordinary citizens in ireland? NOw think how many people you have ‘put’ on the side of the ‘muslim terrorists’….
C.
Ciaran: I think this is well understood. That is why $87B is being spent to help Iraq become a prosperous and democratic nation. That is why Rumsfeld’s internal talking points memo included the issue of how to cut off the supply of new recruits to the terrorists ranks.
There are two sides to this coin. One is to make sure people grown up in hopeful societies; and the other is for them to know that the other path leads them to certain death.
You have got to drain the swamp to get rid of the mosquitos. We’re well along in draining two of them.
Dale-
I agree with your last comment with one exception: It is evidently not enough to let them know that the other path leads to certain death. The suicide bombers and the hijackers accepted this and went ahead anyway.
Somehow we need to threaten something that matters to them. That, I assume, is the real reason Israel targets the homes and relatives of suicide bombers. That doesn’t appear to have worked either. I’m not sure what would. Mecca? This is the problem that leads to the talk about nukes. I’m not really sure even that would work. Perhaps large public U.S. weapons grants to Israel – say one fighter or attack helicopter for each Israeli victim. That would at least make the tactic counter productive.
The last time we had this problem was with the Japanese on Okinawa and Iwo Jima. Extermination was the only solution we found. Ultimately, we were able to stop short of genocide because there was a leader: the Emperor, with whom we could ‘reason’ via the atomic threat.
I don’t know if Islam has such a leader. There is a story about Wyatt Earp, when he was Marshal of Dodge City. Once he faced a lynch mob outside his jail. There were several hundred very determined armed men. So he had a real problem. He solved it by picking out one man, pushing a pistol into his stomach and loudly telling him that ‘If he didn’t get his men out of there, he was not going to have a stomach’. The man suddenly developed surprising leadership skills!
Perhaps we need to encourage someone to take more of a ‘leadership’ position in Islam. He doesn’t need to be anyone favorable to us, he just has to understand a gun muzzle in his belly.
Clar’an-
You seem to take the comments that I and others have been making about, as you put it ‘”(fearing) the great ‘Ol Us of A”, far too lightly. We are not chest beating or suffering from an excess of testosterone.
This is a serious possibility that I, and I think the Bush administration, worries about. Once a real war mentality develops with Americans, unconditional surrender is the very least outcome that will assuage it. And government of any party will not be able to stop it.
We are on the edge of it, although in spite of our outrage we aren’t there yet. The Democrat Primary posturing is a lot like the America First movement that preceded Pearl Harbor.
We are warning because we are worried, and one of the most worrisome aspects is the European inability to see this.
Doug: You miss my point. The ones who are already into the indoctrination system are lost. We’re going to have to kill all of them. It’s the ones who haven’t been trapped in it yet and their families who need the alternative.
That is where free capitalist societies come in, and it is why bin Laden and his ilk hate them. I’ve read some of their translated documents that say this outright. Wealth and freedom will lead people away from obedience and willingness to jihad.
The weak spot in the entire fundie plan is that dependance on poverty and authoritarianism. Break that and you cut off the flow of new recruits.
You still have to kill off the leftover zombies, and with the utter hopelessness of certain defeat (which they will know is coming if there are no recruits) they will lash out and cause great harm… but after a time they will all be dead.
And we will still be here.
Dale-
Thanks for the clarification, I did miss your distinction between the current and future jihaadists.
However I still am pessimistic about the hopeful society/certain death choice being the solution. My doubts, I think, stem from a difference in interpretation of the problem.
Interpretation 1: Terrorism stems from envy and hopelessness that are the result of rigid society in which young men and, now, women see little chance of bettering their economic state and social status. In most, but not all cases, that status is very low and unlikely to improve given the current situation (eg Palestinians). They see the wealth and chance for advancement of people in the West and in westernized societies like Israel, see the world as a zero sum game with themselves as the victims and are motivated to lash out in rage.
The libertarian solution is to give them hope for better times ahead, particularly if they adopt western concepts and values, which we will be happy to provide. At the same time an iron threat of certain death, which to a rational man is a worse alternative than their present situation, is a disincentive to terrorism.
Interpretation 2: Terrorism stems from the realization by devout believers in a religion based solely on authority (Islam), that continued contact with the ideas, people and products of the post enlightenment West spells the doom of their religion and society in its current form. Christianity went through this -albeit with considerable bloodshed- and survived in a non-authoritarian/experimental(you read and interpret the Bible for yourself) form. Islam may well be able to make the same transition, but I don’t expect them to realize that, anymore than a Spanish Hapsburg soldier eradicating heretics in the Low Countries could have realized it.
I don’t think the hope for the future/certain death approach will work if interpretation 2 is the case. It works against marxists and against Crip and Blood rioters in South Central Los Angeles because they share our core cultural beliefs. Some Islamics do too, but many do not. For those who are still stuck in their equivalent of our middle ages, either we or they must be destroyed – they see no alternative even if we can see one.
I would think from your writings that you tend to the first interpretation. I think it may very well apply in Iraq. It certainly does in Turkey. I am afraid that other areas, more fecund with terrorists, may fit the second interpretation better. If I am correct, the US policy in Iraq makes even more sense, both geographically and psychologically, as a way to innoculate the Middle East with a sort of Islamic reformation than as a quest for WMDs. I wish the administration trusted our intelligence more and could say so. I also wish more westerners, Americans most importantly, appreciated the motivational power of religion more. In this respect the so called Christian Right may have a better understanding of the problem than many post Christians.
I think you have the cure, but I don’t believe it will be effective without the cultural and religious ground breaking in most Islamic areas happening ahead of it. This is a race and if we lose it the alternative will be one of the more apocalyptic scenarios mentioned earlier.
The Brits didn’t try hard enough then.
If that’s what it takes, so be it. Their problem; not ours.
Doug Collins:
I believe that both Interpretation 1 and 2 are correct, for different people.
The Interpretation 2 people can’t be helped. The Interpretation 1 people can.
Smart bombs and CIA spooks fix I-2. The current efforts to modernize Iraq and Afghanistan help fix I-1.
What we are really hoping for, and I believe to be true, is that I-1 outnumbers I-2 to a signigicant degree. What we’re also hoping is that we have enought time to fix their problems. Giving people hope and progress takes a long time. If the I-2 folks set off a nuclear device in the USA, our options decrease significantly. The American people will demand a response.
Our other hope is that we can intimidate the I-1 folks into turning in the I-2 folks. I-2’s can’t be intimidated, but they need the money, support and safe harbor from the world’s 1 Billion I-1 muslims to be dangerous. Without that support they will be madmen howling at the moon, and of little real danger to the USA.
If the I-1 come around, turn in the I-2 folks, and start building successful nations, none of these horrible threats of nuclear war will have to be backed up.
And I really am hoping that happens.
Brock
I will make one statement and one only on the use of Northern Ireland as a comparison. I have lived here for a very long time. I have worked with people who spent time in both wings of H block. This was to a great extent a three cornered civil war where half the people in the two local sides were related in one way or another. Both variants of Christianity condemn suicide and for Marxists there is nothing after so…
The UK experience in NI would be as if the Hawaiians started a violent civil war between Japanase-Americans and native Hawaiian Americans and the US Army tried to keep the two away from each other while one side swore it was on the side of the other… and the cousin of the Japanese-American’s leader was the wife of the brother of the Hawaiian leaders wife whose other son joined the US Army.
That is not a whole lot like what the US is facing right now.
Anyone that doubts American resolve during time of war should read General Patton’s Address to the Troops. Here’s a taste:
stirring stuff Dr. Faust – with that speech, McDonald’s and starbucks you have a hell of a culture to be proud of….
Brock – in Ireland we have a word for people like you – it’s Gobshite…
And Dale – your Hawaiian analogy (much as i understand you being in my country for a while entitles you to an opionion) does not work…
if you really think the British army was ‘in the middle’ then there is no point in me following up any of your other comments…
“if you really think the British army was ‘in the middle’ ”
Initially they were. Bogside ma’s made tea for them. That changed before very long, but that doesn’t change the matter that the analogy of Northern Ireland to the war on suicidal nutcases from far away is completely invalid. I have no intention of trying to explain this place to outsiders any closer than I did. It would take volumes, I’d be flamed and threatened no matter what I say about it and would waste enormous amounts of time better spent on other matters: like being a good capitalist and trying to get rich.
So I won’t rise to the flamebait. I’ve lived here too long for that. “Say nawthin” as Tommy and Colum sing…
Thread is still going on and on I see.
Ciarán said:
I don’t think of the products produced by our corporations as really part of our culture. I suppose they are, but they are very external parts.
I’m actually very proud of my culture, excluding the externals. My culture has produced men and women who have liberated countries and poured money and manpower into countries we defeat during war.
Can your culture say the same?
You could show the wisdom that exists in your culture by figuring out a way to end the suffering that’s plagued your north. Until that happens, I find what you say about war, peace, and culture to be just words.
Put your actions into words and solve the problems in your own backyard.
Your culture has produced ‘men and women who have liberated countries’…
aye right!
i will not be drawn into a ‘my country is better than yours’ tirade here, because it really doesnt matter…
however, i believe you had some american leaders try to ‘assist’ in our problem – and failed….
now they were hardly doing it for altruistic reasons , more so to get the Irish vote…
I think my country has a lot to answer for it’s involvement of the creation of ‘modern america’ but i suppose you’d rather stay clear of that – seeing as most of you on this site seem to want to believe in an American gene that is unique, pure and not the real collabaration of many differing European ethnicities.
To finish, I fear for your future sanity and the welfare of your children… this ‘war; will be your new ‘Nam..
i will not be drawn into a ‘my country is better than yours’ tirade here, because it really doesnt matter…
The substance of everything you’ve said thus far is “my country is better than yours… nya nya nya.” Why the sudden scruples?
now they were hardly doing it for altruistic reasons , more so to get the Irish vote…
Altruistic or no, it’s still more than you did to stop the killing. Or maybe that doesn’t matter to you.
I think my country has a lot to answer for it’s involvement of the creation of ‘modern america’ but i suppose you’d rather stay clear of that
The only reason I’m staying clear of it is that I have no idea what you’re talking about. Two of my grandparents emigrated from Ireland. Should I be ashamed of that? Did they play some awful part in creating (sneer quote alert) “Modern America”?
most of you on this site seem to want to believe in an American gene that is unique, pure and not the real collabaration of many differing European ethnicities.
Well, no one is saying that, as I’m sure you know. But why confuse you with facts, when I’m sure you’re much happier recycling fantasies that justify your hatred.
To finish, I fear for your future sanity and the welfare of your children… this ‘war; will be your new ‘Nam..
Nice to see you folks aren’t above being petty and malicious. Noted.
one word David – paranoid
sticks and stones…
Okay, time for the referee to step in before this gets out of hand. Descent into personal name calling and the like is strictly verboten on Samizdata. You may argue forcefully but stick to debate on the subject at hand.
“Your culture has produced ‘men and women who have l iberated countries’…
aye right!
i will not be drawn into a ‘my country is better than yours’ tirade here, because it really doesnt matter…”
Actually, I don’t think my culture is necessarily better than anyone else’s. But I do get sick of the sanctimonious put downs of it. It *is* a unique culture that is more than just the sum of all the countries we all came from. It is also not McDonald’s, Starbuck’s, Hollywood, etc.. Those are the externals. The internals are shared values and beliefs that cause us to act as we do.
It’s possible many think they *know* Americans because of what our companies export. They do not.
It’s possible one of the reasons why the false beliefs about how we would react to war, if not for Bush, is so prevalent . People think they *know* us because they see all the externals.
“however, i believe you had some american leaders try to ‘assist’ in our problem – and failed….
now they were hardly doing it for altruistic reasons , more so to get the Irish vote…”
Yes. Since there are a great many of us with ties of family to Ireland, there is a great deal of agony over the ongoing ‘troubles’. If we could be of help, we’d want to be. Perhaps those who went there did so just for the votes here. I don’t know their hearts so I can’t say.
I think though, it’s up to the people who live there to solve the problems. Too bad the last attempt seemed to have failed. I’ve relatives in N. Ireland. I was hoping a solution might have been found.
“I think my country has a lot to answer for it’s involvement of the creation of ‘modern america’ but i suppose you’d rather stay clear of that – seeing as most of you on this site seem to want to believe in an American gene that is unique, pure and not the real collabaration of many differing European ethnicities.”
If you wish to divorce yourself from any blood ties to those Irish who did help build the US, go ahead. I don’t think many in the US who are of Irish descent will feel any less proud or cry about it.
There is something unique about the US that is hard to define. People come from all over with different ideas and cultures, but after a while they are no longer what they were, they’re American. Unfortunately, it takes a bit longer now because it’s more PC to highlight the originating group rather than the resulting group. But it still happens.
I believe the US needs the influx of peoples from other countries to help keep us what we are. Most recently, where I live, there’s been an enormous influx of people from the former Soviet Union and Communist China.
These people are a delightful addition to our country.
They put those of us who were born here to shame
because they are so enthusiastic about becoming US citizens.
They bring their culture with them, we get exposed to it and learn about it. We experience the food, the values, and the beliefs, etc. as we get to know them as friends and co-workers. But they remind many of us what we have in our country that we take for granted. They are some of the biggest ‘flag wavers’ around here.
They are still Chinese, Russian, etc.. but they become American. Sometimes so much so that they can’t believe how much the ‘mother country’ has changed when they go back and visit. It’s not their ‘mother country’ that has changed, it’s them. Inside.
So, I didn’t want to leave anyone with the impression that I elevate the American culture over others. I like other cultures. I hope people who live in other countries love their country and culture as much as I do mine. But, there is a uniqueness in being an American that is not just the mixing of the cultures who come here. It is composed of the misxing of all the cultures, it’s just not made up solely of that.
“To finish, I fear for your future sanity and the welfare of your children… this ‘war; will be your new ‘Nam..”
I wish more people would fear our sanity. Since we have all the military hardware we do, add in crazy and insane .. hey, I’d leave us alone. No telling what we may do. We all just CRAZY ‘Merican cowboys. YEEHA!!
As much as many wish it, this isn’t our new ‘Nam. Sorry.
I wish more people would fear our sanity. Since we have all the military hardware we do, add in crazy and insane .. hey, I’d leave us alone. No telling what we may do. We all just CRAZY ‘Merican cowboys. YEEHA!!
It’s amazing how often I still hear people worry over the sanity of the “arab street” without sparing a thought for America’s sanity. Aren’t we the ones with 30,000 nuclear weapons? I’m not saying we should use them, just that if we were attacked again, felt our backs were against the wall — well, who knows how we’d react? It scares me to think about it. Weird that it doesn’t scare everyone.
Ted:
I’m scared as well. Well, not scared but very concerned.
We have to finish what we’ve started and ensure those nutz can’t (or won’t) come here again and blow us up.
You saw the anger last time. I can’t imagine what it would be like a second time.
I actually give Bush credit for NOT acting as the public desired in the few months after 9/11. People were crying for blood and did not think about the consequences, just revenge.
The anger has abated. But, everyone I know, even liberal Democrats, want to ‘get them before they get us’.
I would LOVE it if many countries in the world thought we were so frikin’ NUTZ and unpredictable they WOULD WORRY about what we’d do next. I’m puzzled as to why they don’t worry. If I were living in another country, I’d worry about us. I’d be wondering what the crazy, cowboy-lovin’ Amercans would do next. Must be an image problem. We need to behave crazier and much more blood thirsty.
Of course, as has been pointed out already, this would only work on some of our enemies. The core group who are motivated to forcibly convert the world for Islam wouldn’t care. These people need something other than fear. I think it’s either death or containment.
I would like to discover something else that would convince the core group to stop, but haven’t seen anything. I’ve been reading as much about them as I can. The websites and forums these people have established are great places for info..
There are many that just want to usher in a version of the Muslim Paradise on Earth by forcing us to convert. Others want to have a world-wide Caliphate. Both have the same ends .. conversion by force.
About American Culture:
Wanted to add to my post, above, that I believe the bedrock of our culture is that which we received from Britian. So we share many common values and beliefs with other Anglo cultures. I haven’t seen the mass migrations erode our core beliefs, they have added to them. Plus, the Bristish Colonists added their own, very liberal at the time, interpretation of British laws and values that we have inherited.
Chris: Your comment about absorption is very true. Ciaran even proves it with his own words:
“And Dale – your Hawaiian analogy (much as i understand you being in my country for a while entitles you to an opionion) does not work…”
I’m not knocking Ciaran for it, everyone is like that. I could live here 50 years instead of ‘just’ 15 years and and I would never be considered ‘Irish’. I’ll always be ‘that american fellow’. That’s just the way it is here and in most of the world. Belonging is based solely on the land and birth. An american would only say the above to an immigrant if it was meant as a really bitter insult. And even then it would feel ‘wrong’ because the assumption is that everyone who choses to live there is, by the choice, automatically American.
That is a very big cultural difference and one I know personally.
Dale, what I said about your opinion on the northern issue *(with your analogy comparing it to Hawaii) was not meant to insult.
I actually put that phrase in to make reference to the fact that I know you will have a better knowledge of the situation for your time spent here.
I don;t think it was a ‘bitter insult’ as you put it. I still believe your analogy was poor, and I would say so if you were somojne from Kerry 🙂
Don’t worry Ciaran. I wasn’t the least bit insulted. I’m only saying that if you had been a born american and had said it about an immigrant from Albania who had made it their home, you’d have gotten shocked looks from other Americans for saying ‘my country’ instead of ‘our country’.
It is different here. I cannot be Irish because I was not born here. But you could get a job in a bar in Manhattan (green card or not) and everyone would just treat you as just another American with a funny accent. Treating you otherwise would just ‘feel wrong’ to people.
That is why I say it is a cultural difference. America is inclusive by default.
Um, I don’t agree with that either! (shock)
I think you’re being far too kind to your kinfolk, though Americans would be far more ewasily disposed to welcoming immigrants/refugees than Ireland, though we are getting there.
Anyhow, I disagree because I lived in America for 1.5 years and never got that feeling any more than in the 3 years in which i lived in England…
Most Europeans are incapable of understanding America just as they are incapable of understanding the war or how 9/11 affected us all. Europeans think they know us after spending a couple of years in New York or after vacationing in Disney World.
Most Europeans have been condition all their lifes to loathe certain aspects of American life.
I know, I am myself an European who fled Western Europe to come to the United States in the early nineties because I was simply fed up with endless socialism that permeates every layer of European life.
Today I am free. I am an American. And everyone accepts me for an American even though I only had my citizenship for a few years.
Just don’t dare call me an European.
Johannes, when I landed in NYC back in the mid 80’s (I was fleeing Communism), an immigration agent looking through my papers offhandedly said: “once you got here, you are an American”. I never forgot this. Especially that I spent a couple of years in Britain and I was convinced that, should I stay there, I would remain, to the end of my days, “a bloody foreigner”.
In America we’re all “bloody foreigners” — and proud of it. That’s the difference.
I’ve met people who left because they never felt they quite fit in either. Seems reasonable to me. Whatever it is they are looking for or expecting, isn’t met by what’s here in the US.
I also know of people from the US who go to other countries and stay there. Whatever their needs and desires, they were not met in the US. They were met in another country.
So, whetever our American culture is, obviously it’s not for everyone. Same is true for other countries that people leave. Whatever they wanted wasn’t to be found in their land of birth.
If everyone was satisfied with their home country, we wouldn’t have people moving from one country to another. I guess even though you may be born American, Italian, Greek, etc., doesn’t mean you automatically like your culture. Those who can afford to, go in search of something they like.
Of course, not everyone can move just because they like or dislike a culture. Economics, family, and politics plays a large part. Many who came to the US did so for economic reasons and didn’t want to leave their birth country. But, they made the best of it and were very instrumental in building the US.
Most of my relatives came here looking for work. They still loved their home countries, and may have stayed if they could have. They came to love the US but never forgot their birth country. They instilled a love of the countries/cultures they left in their children. (As well as a love and appreciation of the US.)
I can’t imagine myself moving a young family to another country where the language and culture were unknown. But this is what many of our ancestors did. I don’t know if I’d have their courage, especially if I had a young family and no money.
As this article is about to slide off into the archives, I’ll add some closing remarks so no one is left with any misconceptions.
I was not one who left the US because I didn’t fit: I was out for a change and adventure and I knew a few people in Ireland and could speak the language, so I worked with another entrepreneur on setting up an international venture. The response of the IDB (North) vs IDA (South) made the decision for me of Belfast vs Dublin (or Cork or Galway) as to location. The company didn’t get off the ground, I was too broke to go anywhere… so I taught in a University (via my spacer network), started another company and made the best of it… but I never seriously thought of leaving because as a musician I made many good friends who I’d not want to leave.
So let there be no mistake. The people here in Belfast are really so nice you find it hard to believe they can’t all get along amongst themselves… and it’s just a minor bother being ‘the american fellow’, not a hateful thing.
For me Ireland is a part of me in addition to America. And I think that is just fine. It’s a beautiful land with marvelous people.
I’d also like to thank all of you for your comments and discussion and yes, disagreements. It would be a bloody boring world if we all agreed on everything.
“you have to learn, like the British (eventually) did – that mere violence will not rid you of determined foes (in the brits case – the IRA)”
Violence got rid of the Nazis and Imperial Japan – slightly more determined foes than the IRA. The fact is that the IRA survived purely because of lack of political will in the British government to wipe it out (this was not a war after all, just a minor security problem). And the IRA was very careful to never commit a large atrocity, let alone try to acquire WMD, for fear of creating exactly that level of political will that could threaten to wipe it out. Put simply, you cannot compare a low key security operation (NI) with the response to a massive civilian massacre (9/11).
In America’s case that political will – and more – was created as soon as the WTC towers collapsed. So far they have invaded and annexed two countries – hardly the actions of a “gobshite”. A second attack, especially if it is more serious, will lead to at least the same level of response and most likely more. Remember, after 9/11 Bush pointedly reserved the right to use “all means at our disposal” – shorthand for nukes – in the event of any attack that caused mass loss of life.
It is a mistake to underestimate the potential US response. I think Dale may be too optimistic, to be honest. Annexation of terrorist-sponsoring states may occur first, but if the US thinks nukes have to be used, then used they will be. After all they’ve done it twice before.