WIll we believe him again?
POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Monday, August 22, 2005 08:56
VIEWED: 11093
PAGE 10 of 12
Gosh- they all look the same. Sort of Greco-Roman. Must have picked a model from Sicily.
Jokes aside, that IS a lovely statue. Graceful pose, free-standing details, meaningful execution. The marble is exqusititely lusterous. I took a tour through the website. Not all memorials are as successful, but many are fantastic. Much better than the Statue of Liberty- but then perhaps the technical difficulties of creating such a large statue created artistic difficulties.
-----------------------------
EDITED TO ADD:
Quote:Now, that was about as misdirected as one can get, Hero. What AJ can't wrap his mind around is the whole concept of the opposite: We did good things, we did things the opposite of good. No matter HOW you define "good" and "not good". I'm not imposing any sort of meaning on what the answer should be, simply that there is no answer at all... an entire direction is missing. It's like... have you ever dealt with someone who had a stroke? How they neglect one side? EVERYTHING is missing from that side: vision, the body, memory, attention... In fact, they become resistant- agitated- if you try to point out the other side. Well, AJ is like that. EVERYTHING we do is "good". There is no "not good". He refuses to even acknowledge that direction. That's why I picked the number-line analogy. I'm surprsied you didn't see it.
SIGNYM: Lynch, I'm going to repeat a previous poster and I hope you take this advice seriously: Your inability to admit (USA) mistakes invalidates everything you might have to say because you're literally incapable of handling a whole category of facts. You're like a mathematician who can't go past zero on a number line... it blows such big, basic chunks out of your capabilities that I frankly see no point in parsing your distorted POV.
HERO: Wow, thats impressive. Let me try.
Signy, I'm going to use your political views to justify my dismissal of your political views because you are literally incapable of handling a whole catagory of facts defined by me for me to support my point of view. Your like a mathematician who chooses the answer he wants and works backwards to make the numbers fit. Thus 5=2+2 and if you can't accept that its because you don't understand what "2" really is. So this response is to inform you that I cannot respond to your "distorted POV".
But at least we agree on one thing- although our performance doesn't always live up to our ideals (when does it?) America at her best is an shining example to the rest of the world.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I feel a group browncoat hug coming on....
The fuzzy Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Me too. If you're "fuzzy" can I be "warm"?
The warm (and ever so agreeable) SignyM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
T.A. for Tots.
Grrrrr! Arg!
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yike, I think I may have helped start this kick the French sub-thread. Let's not be too harsh on them. Let's face it, they have yet to come to terms with their country going from a leading world power to, well, France.
Has America done things I'm not proud of? Sure. Just in my lifetime we've had the Bay of Pigs, Gulf of Tonkin, Vietnam, Watergate, segregation, Desert One, and the skirt stainer turning Gitmo into a concentration camp for Haitian refugees. And guess what, America will make mistakes in the future. We are a nation of human beings. So we admit our failures (AJ - love ya guy, but you could lighten up a bit there) learn from them and go on. My problem is with y'all who get to the 'admit' part, stop, and then let it metastasize into your 'America is the Great Satan rant'. By any yardstick we have poured more of our blood and treasure into FREEING people from tyranny than any nation in history. America was, is and, I pray, will continue to be the ideal people around the world subscribe to.
Just to save us all some time and the FFF server some wasted disk space, please don't bother posting back to say that all you are trying to accomplish is to make America a better place. All you are doing is judging actions from your 'enlightened' vantage point (instead of as an historian would - trying to fit them into the cultural and political context when they happened) and using that to wallow in your loathing for this country.
As an example, I've noticed some folks sniffing disdainfully (a very French thing to do) about our use of the atomic bomb. Estimates are that to invade the home islands we would have taken over 1,000,000 casualties. Japanese losses would have been higher. For me personally, my future father-in-law was in a Marine division that would have been in the spearhead. In the allied invasion plan, his unit, by D+3, is no longer mentioned. It was assumed to have been destroyed.
Whew. Was it good for you too?
Now to actually address the question posed by this thread. Would I believe him? This paleo-con doesn't believe any politicial without independent verification. As to this particular issue my answer is it depends on the circumstances at the time. If he were to say we needed to invade Iran right now then no, I would not agree. If Manhattan were a glowing crater with evidence pointing at the mullahs then I probably would. Anything in between will have to be judged on its own merits. But having lived during the terms of 10 presidents, I do believe that GWB is a man of honor and intregity who takes his responsibility as commander in chief seriously.
Let the outrage and indignation begin...
Fivver
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Citizen- What's a "bint"? (I assume it's nothing flattering!)
"bint" is a mildly pejorative term for "woman", with implications of being young (though not always) and perhaps of loose morals. It entered the English lexicon via the British Raj, though I think the term is actually of Arabic rather than Hindi origin. The female analog of "bin" is "bint" - so if Osama were a girl, she'd be Osama bint Laden. Hmmm, maybe we should all spell it that way just to yank his chain.........
. Like many words, it can become more pejorative by context, like calling Maggie Thatcher a bint.perfessergee
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:
(LtCol North, et al).
???
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Umm, Ollie was sort of on the clock, there. He was carrying out orders (the non-specific type) and became the fall guy for the operation. For what it's worth, he believed he was doing the best thing for his country. He made 'plausible deniability' famous.
Originally posted by lynchaj:
LtCol North was a rogue NSC officer conducting illegal trade with Iran (F-14 & Hawk air defense parts) in exchange for help with US hostages held in Lebanon. Used the proceeds to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.
How this stuff gets wrapped up into such neat, definable little packages is scary.
Edit to inquire: Did you see the hearings, or was it before your time? And did you forget the part about drug smuggling that went along with that whole thing?
History Prof Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fivver:
As an example, I've noticed some folks sniffing disdainfully (a very French thing to do) about our use of the atomic bomb. Estimates are that to invade the home islands we would have taken over 1,000,000 casualties. Japanese losses would have been higher. For me personally, my future father-in-law was in a Marine division that would have been in the spearhead. In the allied invasion plan, his unit, by D+3, is no longer mentioned. It was assumed to have been destroyed.
This argument is one often made and completly ignores the fact that the Japanese were looking for an end to the war. Truman wanted an unconditional surrender, that would have included the loss of the Japanese emperor, something the Japanese would have prefered to die to prevent.
Quote:
Regarding claims that the atomic bombings saved lives, Gar Alperovitz has noted, "It has been argued in this connection that using the atomic bomb was less costly in human life than the continuation of conventional bombing would have been. Apart from the fact that accounts which urge such a view commonly leave aside questions concerning [modifying the unconditional] surrender formula and the impact of the Russian attack, by early August 1945 very few significant Japanese civilian targets remained to be bombed. Moreover, on July 25 a new targeting directive had been issued which altered bombing priorities." "Attacks on urban centers became only the fourth priority, after railway targets, aircraft production, and ammunition depots." "...the new directive (as the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey noted) 'was about to be implemented when the war ended.'". (Gar Alperovitz, The Decision To Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 342).
It didn't take long after the atomic bombings for questions to arise as to their necessity for ending the war and Japan's threat to peace. One of the earliest dissents came from a panel that had been requested by President Truman to study the Pacific war. Their report, The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, was issued in July 1946. It declared, "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." (Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb, pg. 52-56).
http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm
Q: What do you have when you are holding two little green balls in your hand.
A: Kermit's undivided attention.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:Quote:
Originally posted by lynchaj:
(LtCol North, et al).
???
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
I take it that you are joking that you do not remember the 1980's. In case you are not.
I remember. I just found it more than a little ironic that you'd admit that such a thing had ever happened in light of your recent statements regarding US mistakes. Actually I'm glad to see you're not completely blind to them.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME