So, in short: I am pro-military, but I think we spend too much on it (maintain too great a force), and are too eager to use that force abroad.
Entropius, I agree with your points about using excessive military force in places where it's not warranted (like, uh, Iraq). The only part that I come into question is too much spending on military. I don't think we need to ease down on our spending as much as we need to reallocate it more wisely toward our military's greatest resource: our military personnel.
Why is it that we can afford billions of dollars for some snazzy new Howitzers, but our soldiers still support their families with foodstamps, substandard housing, and reduced health benefits? For God's sakes, these men and women are putting their lives on the line for at least the illusion of protecting the free world; you would think we'd treat them better.
Christ, Bush has done everything possible to say Fuck You to libertarians, more so than any Democrat ever has since LBJ, and you're still going to vote for him on the basis of his most statist position--an orwellian-style endless war? I don't think you know what libertarian means.
I used to follow the Libertarian Party quite closely and, if not for many of my more leftist leanings, would consider myself a Libertarian. I remember in the 2000 elections that a lot of my fellow would-be Libertarians considered Bush the "lesser-evil" candidate (I didn't; I've always thought Bush was, at best, a flaming moron, even in his Texas governor days). Now it seems that Bush has totally fucked over his chances of Libertarians supporting his ass.
Consider this Web article from the current Libertarian Party presidential candidate, Michael Badnarik. IMO he sounds even more leftist than Kerry himself:
"A Libertarian president would not have sent the military trampling about the world, racking up a death count in the thousands, wasting tax money on destroying and re-building infrastructure, creating more enemies, and doing the kinds of things that led to 9/11 in the first place."
You americans (in general, not the parent in particular) have to open your eyes to the fact that most of your problems, you have created yourself! You created Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, You gave chemical weapons technology to Hussien to fight Iran.
If you wouldnt trounce around the world like a bull in a china shop, with no respect for the lives and cultures of anyone else, maybe there wouldn't be so many of us out here that want to see you knocked down a few notches!
Bush himself, before he was elected, said that what the US needs is another Pearl Harbour to get things moving.... while you got what you deserved, and now you Dubya lovers have the biggest deficit ever that your kids will probably never be able to pay off, your economy will soon be stuck in massive inflation, with your dollar near worthless as you struggle to once again live within your own means. good job dubya! good job!
[/snip]
I would just like to say that I'm reading this just a little flummoxed. While I do agree that the dominant mentality on the conservative side of the fence seems to be one of disgusting jingoism and stupid-ass "better not criticize our asses, because it's UNPATRIOTIC" so-called defenses for the wreckless war in Iraq, I think many Americans such as myself were fed up with Bush the day he was elected--pre-9/11 mind you--by a marginal (and often disputed) hairline.
To all non-U.S. citizens out there: we're not all assholes, and we don't all support the current Asshole we have for President. Even some people who (ignorantly and blindly) support Bush, aren't necessarily assholes either--they might just be a little misguided and maybe they need a movie like F9/11 to shake up their viewpoints and open their eyes a little.
Look, I get really offended when I hear shit like "_You_ created Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, _You_ gave chemical weapons technology to Hussien to fight Iran." I didn't do Jack Shit to create Osama bin Laden or Hussein; I refuse to take responsibility for something that I was both too young to support (I was like, 9, when Reagan was elected and thus too young to even _vote_) and too powerless to overturn. I have never supported a Republican president; and even some of Clinton's policies both domestically and internationally I have found to be intrusive and self-serving. It really chaps my hide when I hear people from the outside personally attacking me--just some schmuck who punches a timecard, donates to The Hunger Site, and still feels powerless against our albatross of political corruption (in both parties!) even though I march with the peaceniks against the War in Iraq, write my congresspeople and newspapers, and support Kerry. I do not feel that I personally have "trounced around like a bull in a china shop" or "have had utter disregard for other lives and cultures"--I try to do all I can to keep on top of what goes on in my world, because (cliche be damned) it really is just one world we live in. You may not be directing these missives at me personally, but I take it that way sometimes and it hurts.
I don't think all Americans (or all people for that matter) are assholes, nor do I think that we all rock and we're entitled to Godhood just because we live in the lone superpower of the planet. Like in all countries, we have our share of assholes, truly benevolent people--most of us are somewhere in between. I feel ashamed to be an American sometimes based on some of the shit our country gets away with (Iraq war, Abu Ghraib, etc.), and I have my share of skeletons in the closet--but overall, I can't wear the blood of someone else's hands, someone I didn't even vote for, an administration with whom I do not stand shoulder to shoulder. I have voted for third-party candidates like Nader in the past, because I do believe that someday our government will need a huge overhaul with non-"made men" Rebloodlicans and DemoCrips in the status-quo Political Gang, but for now we need a short-term fix for the Bush problem: I
I wish that this was true for all retailers' Web sites. As a woman, I find it so frustrating that some female clothing retailers (w/o mentioning any names) have Web sites with NO Internet shopping cart capability whatsoever. All it is, as the original arguer stated, is advertising, pure and simple. A lot of great Flash artistry and photography but not a lot of usefulness.
jfengel, you bring up some excellent points, but I want to point out that the Bush administration, love it or hate it (and TTYTT I'm not a huge fan of the current administration either), has gone WAY out of its way to not only denounce internal-U.S. discrimination and hate crimes against peace-loving Arabs and Muslims, but also has apparently worked hard to rally support from our Arab allies, including the country's leading Arab-American rights group.
The recent Trent Lott BS notwithstanding (and also the fact that I disagree with the current pro-War-Against-Iraq climate in Washington), Bush and his peeps do seem like they're striving very hard for an egalitarian, although extremely and often distastefully conservative, climate throughout the U.S. When you sweep away the Trent Lotts from the mix, Bush IMO really isn't trying to push a racist/anti-Muslim agenda...just a pro-power one. (That IMO is really rank and self-serving, but that's beside the point.)
IMO, the reason the IRA isn't a target of the U.S. "war on terror" is because you don't see IRA gunmen boarding Aer Lingus planes and flying them into major U.S. landmarks (or even Buckingham Palace, for that matter). This is going to sound really isolationist and self-centered--hell, it probably IS--but why bother picking a fight with peeps who aren't picking fights with us? (emmm...which is why I'm wondering about this whole Iraqi mess to begin with...aside from Bush's need to purge some father-son angst) Truth be told, the Irish Catholic/Protestant conflict is pretty isolated, and has also made measurable (although not perfect) progress since Clinton initiated the Good Friday peace accord in the British Isles. What's going on in Israel/Palestinian Territories now is a huge mess, one partly of our making, which right or wrong is one of the main sources of the terrorist acts against us. So because it involves us more directly, that gives terrorists the, er, "reason," if you will, to target us; and thus gives us justification to go after their asses. Just my $0.02.
Slashdot Mirror
Who do you turn to for the latest breaking news and issues of Campaign 2004?
A.) Slashdot
B.) MTV Rock the Vote
C.) Whitehouse.com
Uhhhh...The Daily Show's "Indecision 2004"?
So, in short: I am pro-military, but I think we spend too much on it (maintain too great a force), and are too eager to use that force abroad.
Entropius, I agree with your points about using excessive military force in places where it's not warranted (like, uh, Iraq). The only part that I come into question is too much spending on military. I don't think we need to ease down on our spending as much as we need to reallocate it more wisely toward our military's greatest resource: our military personnel.
Why is it that we can afford billions of dollars for some snazzy new Howitzers, but our soldiers still support their families with foodstamps, substandard housing, and reduced health benefits? For God's sakes, these men and women are putting their lives on the line for at least the illusion of protecting the free world; you would think we'd treat them better.
Christ, Bush has done everything possible to say Fuck You to libertarians, more so than any Democrat ever has since LBJ, and you're still going to vote for him on the basis of his most statist position--an orwellian-style endless war? I don't think you know what libertarian means.
I used to follow the Libertarian Party quite closely and, if not for many of my more leftist leanings, would consider myself a Libertarian. I remember in the 2000 elections that a lot of my fellow would-be Libertarians considered Bush the "lesser-evil" candidate (I didn't; I've always thought Bush was, at best, a flaming moron, even in his Texas governor days). Now it seems that Bush has totally fucked over his chances of Libertarians supporting his ass.
Consider this Web article from the current Libertarian Party presidential candidate, Michael Badnarik. IMO he sounds even more leftist than Kerry himself:
http://www.badnarik.org/Issues/IraqWar.php
Excerpt:
"A Libertarian president would not have sent the military trampling about the world, racking up a death count in the thousands, wasting tax money on destroying and re-building infrastructure, creating more enemies, and doing the kinds of things that led to 9/11 in the first place."
IOW, a slam against the "lesser evil" himself.
[snip]
... while you got what you deserved, and now you Dubya lovers have the biggest deficit ever that your kids will probably never be able to pay off, your economy will soon be stuck in massive inflation, with your dollar near worthless as you struggle to once again live within your own means. good job dubya! good job!
You americans (in general, not the parent in particular) have to open your eyes to the fact that most of your problems, you have created yourself! You created Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, You gave chemical weapons technology to Hussien to fight Iran.
If you wouldnt trounce around the world like a bull in a china shop, with no respect for the lives and cultures of anyone else, maybe there wouldn't be so many of us out here that want to see you knocked down a few notches!
Bush himself, before he was elected, said that what the US needs is another Pearl Harbour to get things moving.
[/snip]
I would just like to say that I'm reading this just a little flummoxed. While I do agree that the dominant mentality on the conservative side of the fence seems to be one of disgusting jingoism and stupid-ass "better not criticize our asses, because it's UNPATRIOTIC" so-called defenses for the wreckless war in Iraq, I think many Americans such as myself were fed up with Bush the day he was elected--pre-9/11 mind you--by a marginal (and often disputed) hairline.
To all non-U.S. citizens out there: we're not all assholes, and we don't all support the current Asshole we have for President. Even some people who (ignorantly and blindly) support Bush, aren't necessarily assholes either--they might just be a little misguided and maybe they need a movie like F9/11 to shake up their viewpoints and open their eyes a little.
Look, I get really offended when I hear shit like "_You_ created Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, _You_ gave chemical weapons technology to Hussien to fight Iran." I didn't do Jack Shit to create Osama bin Laden or Hussein; I refuse to take responsibility for something that I was both too young to support (I was like, 9, when Reagan was elected and thus too young to even _vote_) and too powerless to overturn. I have never supported a Republican president; and even some of Clinton's policies both domestically and internationally I have found to be intrusive and self-serving. It really chaps my hide when I hear people from the outside personally attacking me--just some schmuck who punches a timecard, donates to The Hunger Site, and still feels powerless against our albatross of political corruption (in both parties!) even though I march with the peaceniks against the War in Iraq, write my congresspeople and newspapers, and support Kerry. I do not feel that I personally have "trounced around like a bull in a china shop" or "have had utter disregard for other lives and cultures"--I try to do all I can to keep on top of what goes on in my world, because (cliche be damned) it really is just one world we live in. You may not be directing these missives at me personally, but I take it that way sometimes and it hurts.
I don't think all Americans (or all people for that matter) are assholes, nor do I think that we all rock and we're entitled to Godhood just because we live in the lone superpower of the planet. Like in all countries, we have our share of assholes, truly benevolent people--most of us are somewhere in between. I feel ashamed to be an American sometimes based on some of the shit our country gets away with (Iraq war, Abu Ghraib, etc.), and I have my share of skeletons in the closet--but overall, I can't wear the blood of someone else's hands, someone I didn't even vote for, an administration with whom I do not stand shoulder to shoulder. I have voted for third-party candidates like Nader in the past, because I do believe that someday our government will need a huge overhaul with non-"made men" Rebloodlicans and DemoCrips in the status-quo Political Gang, but for now we need a short-term fix for the Bush problem: I
I wish that this was true for all retailers' Web sites. As a woman, I find it so frustrating that some female clothing retailers (w/o mentioning any names) have Web sites with NO Internet shopping cart capability whatsoever. All it is, as the original arguer stated, is advertising, pure and simple. A lot of great Flash artistry and photography but not a lot of usefulness.
jfengel, you bring up some excellent points, but I want to point out that the Bush administration, love it or hate it (and TTYTT I'm not a huge fan of the current administration either), has gone WAY out of its way to not only denounce internal-U.S. discrimination and hate crimes against peace-loving Arabs and Muslims, but also has apparently worked hard to rally support from our Arab allies, including the country's leading Arab-American rights group. The recent Trent Lott BS notwithstanding (and also the fact that I disagree with the current pro-War-Against-Iraq climate in Washington), Bush and his peeps do seem like they're striving very hard for an egalitarian, although extremely and often distastefully conservative, climate throughout the U.S. When you sweep away the Trent Lotts from the mix, Bush IMO really isn't trying to push a racist/anti-Muslim agenda...just a pro-power one. (That IMO is really rank and self-serving, but that's beside the point.) IMO, the reason the IRA isn't a target of the U.S. "war on terror" is because you don't see IRA gunmen boarding Aer Lingus planes and flying them into major U.S. landmarks (or even Buckingham Palace, for that matter). This is going to sound really isolationist and self-centered--hell, it probably IS--but why bother picking a fight with peeps who aren't picking fights with us? (emmm...which is why I'm wondering about this whole Iraqi mess to begin with...aside from Bush's need to purge some father-son angst) Truth be told, the Irish Catholic/Protestant conflict is pretty isolated, and has also made measurable (although not perfect) progress since Clinton initiated the Good Friday peace accord in the British Isles. What's going on in Israel/Palestinian Territories now is a huge mess, one partly of our making, which right or wrong is one of the main sources of the terrorist acts against us. So because it involves us more directly, that gives terrorists the, er, "reason," if you will, to target us; and thus gives us justification to go after their asses. Just my $0.02.