"Addicted to 9/11"

97silverlsc

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2004
Messages
953
Reaction score
0
Location
High Bridge, NJ
Addicted to 9/11
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: October 14, 2004
I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I hear the president and vice president slamming John Kerry for saying that he hopes America can eventually get back to a place where "terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance." The idea that President Bush and Mr. Cheney would declare such a statement to be proof that Mr. Kerry is unfit to lead actually says more about them than Mr. Kerry. Excuse me, I don't know about you, but I dream of going back to the days when terrorism was just a nuisance in our lives.

If I have a choice, I prefer not to live the rest of my life with the difference between a good day and bad day being whether Homeland Security tells me it is "code red" or "code orange" outside. To get inside the Washington office of the International Monetary Fund the other day, I had to show my ID, wait for an escort and fill out a one-page form about myself and my visit. I told my host: "Look, I don't want a loan. I just want an interview." Somewhere along the way we've gone over the top and lost our balance.

That's why Mr. Kerry was actually touching something many Americans are worried about - that this war on terrorism is transforming us and our society, when it was supposed to be about uprooting the terrorists and transforming their societies.

The Bush team's responses to Mr. Kerry's musings are revealing because they go to the very heart of how much this administration has become addicted to 9/11. The president has exploited the terrorism issue for political ends - trying to make it into another wedge issue like abortion, guns or gay rights - to rally the Republican base and push his own political agenda. But it is precisely this exploitation of 9/11 that has gotten him and the country off-track, because it has not only created a wedge between Republicans and Democrats, it's also created a wedge between America and the rest of the world, between America and its own historical identity, and between the president and common sense.

By exploiting the emotions around 9/11, Mr. Bush took a far-right agenda on taxes, the environment and social issues - for which he had no electoral mandate - and drove it into a 9/12 world. In doing so, Mr. Bush made himself the most divisive and polarizing president in modern history.

By using 9/11 to justify launching a war in Iraq without U.N. support, Mr. Bush also created a huge wedge between America and the rest of the world. I sympathize with the president when he says he would never have gotten a U.N. consensus for a strategy of trying to get at the roots of terrorism by reshaping the Arab-Muslim regimes that foster it - starting with Iraq.

But in politicizing 9/11, Mr. Bush drove a wedge between himself and common sense when it came to implementing his Iraq strategy. After failing to find any W.M.D. in Iraq, he became so dependent on justifying the Iraq war as the response to 9/11 - a campaign to bring freedom and democracy to the Arab-Muslim world - that he refused to see reality in Iraq. The president seemed to be saying to himself, "Something so good and right as getting rid of Saddam can't possibly be going so wrong." Long after it was obvious to anyone who visited Iraq that we never had enough troops there to establish order, Mr. Bush simply ignored reality. When pressed on Iraq, he sought cover behind 9/11 and how it required "tough decisions" - as if the tough decision to go to war in Iraq, in the name of 9/11, should make him immune to criticism over how he conducted the war.

Lastly, politicizing 9/11 put a wedge between us and our history. The Bush team has turned this country into "The United States of Fighting Terrorism." "Bush only seems able to express our anger, not our hopes," said the Mideast expert Stephen P. Cohen. "His whole focus is on an America whose role in the world is to negate the negation of the terrorists. But America has always been about the affirmation of something positive. That is missing today. Beyond Afghanistan, they've been much better at destruction than construction."

I wish Mr. Kerry were better able to articulate how America is going to get its groove back. But the point he was raising about wanting to put terrorism back into perspective is correct. I want a president who can one day restore Sept. 11th to its rightful place on the calendar: as the day after Sept. 10th and before Sept. 12th. I do not want it to become a day that defines us. Because ultimately Sept. 11th is about them - the bad guys - not about us. We're about the Fourth of July.
 
My God, SOMEBODY GETS IT!!!!!!!
I couldn't agree more. So well said. :I
 
Wow, imagine something like that coming out in the middle of WWII. Except it would be called "Addicted to 12/7". I respectfully disagree with the premise that the terrorist threat has been over-stated. That is the lesson I learned on 9-11-01. It would be unforgivable if our president didn't learn that lesson as well.
 
That article is bologna. Bush's tax cut was before 9/11 and No Child Left Behind was well underway in Congress before 9/11. But why worry about facts when you can write an editorial that proves a faulty point with falsehoods.

What is the point of that article if not that terrorism is being over-stated and used for political purposes? The reality is that anti-war sentiment is being abused for political purposes and you guys don't want to admit it. Anti-Bush people get a twisted sense of satisfaction when the war in Iraq takes a bad turn. Good news coming out of Iraq is immediately pounced on and rebutted with a reminder of more bad news by the Bush haters. Failure in Iraq is a foregone conclusion by this group, and it makes me sick.
 
Kbob said:
Wow, imagine something like that coming out in the middle of WWII. Except it would be called "Addicted to 12/7".

The difference between WWII and the Iraq war is that we retaliated against the actual country that bombed Pearl Harbor.
:Bang
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
The difference between WWII and the Iraq war is that we retaliated against the actual country that bombed Pearl Harbor.
We both know that there are a lot more differences than that, because under that logic, we couldn't have retaliated against any country for 9/11.

We can continue to debate and disagree whether it was right to go into Iraq or not. I prefer to focus on winning the situation we're in first, because how ever you look at it, a victory there would be beneficial to everyone except the terrorists (and Kerry).
 
Posted by Kbob: What is the point of that article if not that terrorism is being over-stated and used for political purposes
Ok, so you DO "get it". You just choose to ignore it. W would be proud. :rolleyes:
 
Obviously, I agree with the editorial, since I posted it. Kerry has hit the nail on the head with his comments about getting back to a point where terrorism is nothing more than a nusance. Anything else, and the terrorists have won, cause they want to force us to change the way we live. You can't defeat terrorism because it is atactic used in support of an idea, or belief, not a country. There will always be people who are willing to go to extremes for their cause, and you cannot condemn a country because there a few nuts within it's borders. If you are going to do that, we should be the first to go cause we have a lunatic in the office of the president.
 
I never liked the term "War on Terrorism" since it's like you said, a tactic. I prefer "War on Terrorists", but you say tomato and I say . . . . But being pro-active against terrorist organizations is the smart thing to do. And often times people are characterized as "lunatics" when they have the courage and vision to see a threat and warn others even when people don't see it themselves.
 
Kbob said:
I never liked the term "War on Terrorism" since it's like you said, a tactic. I prefer "War on Terrorists", but you say tomato and I say . . . . But being pro-active against terrorist organizations is the smart thing to do. And often times people are characterized as "lunatics" when they have the courage and vision to see a threat and warn others even when people don't see it themselves.
honestly both of you have a valid point. personally i would like to go back to a time when the media isnt scaring the living crap out of everyone on a daily basis. i think the terrorist threat is highly over stressed i think that the media is the real problem. we need to focus on our lives and living them not empty threats. all the finger pointing isnt going to stop another attack if one is planned. trouncing one man over the other isnt going to help anything. look at the man who is better for the country as a whole not because he is for or against war. focus on the issues that matter health care, taxes,and economy dont harp on the stuff you cant do anything about. hang with your kids your wife the boys wash the car wax it. hunt fish or whatever you are into and if something bad happens again just be prepared for it keep your eyes open but stop harping and letting it control your life.
Eric :Beer
 
ERIC1 said:
focus on the issues that matter health care, taxes,and economy dont harp on the stuff you cant do anything about. hang with your kids your wife the boys wash the car wax it. hunt fish or whatever you are into and if something bad happens again just be prepared for it keep your eyes open but stop harping and letting it control your life. Eric :Beer
That's all fine, well and good but none of it will really matter after the next round of attacks. I don't think we have seen anything yet.

Scare tactics??? How about - Reality check!!!

Our enemy is not playing. This is not a game. We can't turn on the lights, hoping to make the boogie-man go away. It won't be over till all the bad guys are dead or have a job, wife and kids. You know, something to lose.
 
You're obsessed! Eric and 97silverlsc are right. To have an administration that is so totally focused on terrorism is a very bad thing. As was said so many times following the attack of 9/11, we need to get on with our lives, go out to the movies, buy cars and houses etc. because if we let terrorism rule our lives, we've allowed the terrorists to win. Also, beyond that you need to remember that most of the great terroristic events to happen against Americans have been planned and carried out by other Americans! The attack on 9/11 is just the biggest one. I mean look at the Oklahoma City bombing, the Beltway shootings, the Anthrax scares, the list goes on and on and they're ALL Americans terrorizing Americans.
Yes, terrorism IS an ongoing problem that requires active monitoring and preventive measures but is it the NUMBER 1 problem facing our country as Bush would have us believe? Only an idiot would believe so.
 
We are getting on with our lives, who here isn't? You can choose to stick your head in the sand and believe that there is no threat if you want. I'm sure there were people in the U.S. during WWII that thought we were over-reacting to Japan and Germany. :rolleyes:
 
Kbob said:
We are getting on with our lives, who here isn't? You can choose to stick your head in the sand and believe that there is no threat if you want. I'm sure there were people in the U.S. during WWII that thought we were over-reacting to Japan and Germany. :rolleyes:
see you are like most people in this world a sadist like myself included i sat watching those attacks that day mortified as the rest of us but also knowing it wasnt the big one and i like most people found myself looking for more devastation so i could sit back and feel that these terrorist schmucks were satisfied and we could go about our routines.

nobody is disputing that this is a real problem it is. and the crap has far from hit the fan yet i agree. but to spend every minute of your existence thinking and worrying for when its going to come is nuts. so live today cause tommorow might not come but it most likely will so live smart.
 
Don't get me going on Armegedon as a topic. The year 2000 bug was a REAL problem but once the hype took over, there were people actually expecting the end of the world on Jan. 1, 2000. Come on, get real.
It's a similar issue with terrorism. Yes, it's a problem but it's DEFINATELY NOT the problem that the Bush administration has led us to believe. And like it or not, all the Homeland Security policies, regulations and laws are not going to change the fact that in a free society like ours, if a terrorist wants to set off a bomb, or dump some bio agent in a water supply, there's little we can do to stop it. Controlling the fall-out from it is far more do-able for us. You'd have to be blind and deaf to miss all the news reports of weapons being smuggled on planes for the purpose of testing our new post-9/11 security provisions, right under the noses of the new screeners etc. Newark airport in NJ recently failed a test miserably. I think it was over 40% of the test weapons made it past security! Gee, you feeling safe now? All these new regulations have definately impacted our freedoms here but have done little to assure our security.
I know, we need to spend more! :slam
 
Many good points here.

We are currently living in a state of terror, exasperated by GW's lies and deceptions, the GOP and the media. Therefore we have already LOST the war on terrorISM.

GW started 2 wars while he was in office, the war on terrorists, and the war in Iraq. As a result we've dug ourselves into a hole. Now the REAL question is WHO is the best man to get us out of this hole?

The man who has alienated us from the rest of the world, decreasing any likelihood of obtaining their cooperation?

The man who under-staffed the initial war to capture Osama Bin-Ladin.......AND LET HIM SLIP THROUGH OUR FINGERS BY RELYING ON AN AFGANI TO PROTECT HIS ESCAPE ROUTE?

The man who LIED to us US citizens about the presense of WMD in Iraq to get us to rally behind him?

The man who initiated PREMPTIVE DEFENSE (an oxymoron if I've ever heard one) actions against a country / ruler that POSED NO IMMEDIATE THREAT TO THE US??

The man who disobeyed direct orders when he was "serving his country" during wartime?


I don't think so.

Misleads.jpg
 
ERIC1 said:
but to spend every minute of your existence thinking and worrying for when its going to come is nuts. so live today cause tommorow might not come but it most likely will so live smart.
I agree with that, but raising a flag of concern is not worrying about it "every minute of your existence". You're first paragraph was a little strange since an even larger attack on us on 9/11 would have been met with an even larger counter-attack. In other words, the only way a terrorist organization will be "satisfied" is when they've won, and it's the job of the president to make sure they don't.
 
Katshot said:
It's a similar issue with terrorism. Yes, it's a problem but it's DEFINATELY NOT the problem that the Bush administration has led us to believe. And like it or not, all the Homeland Security policies, regulations and laws are not going to change the fact that in a free society like ours, if a terrorist wants to set off a bomb, or dump some bio agent in a water supply, there's little we can do to stop it. Controlling the fall-out from it is far more do-able for us.
So you're saying to enjoy ourselves now and just wait and deal with it when a nuclear bomb blows up LA then. :Bang I will repeat, this is wrong. You can keep posting your rhetoric, but it won't change the fact that your stand on this issue will lead to our destruction.
 
And Johnny, you really need to read more than just the Democratic talking points. gulp, gulp
 
Kbob said:
So you're saying to enjoy ourselves now and just wait and deal with it when a nuclear bomb blows up LA then. :Bang I will repeat, this is wrong. You can keep posting your rhetoric, but it won't change the fact that your stand on this issue will lead to our destruction.


If you really think that we can actually stop a terrorist event from happening, you're kidding yourself and proving how little you know about the issue. A nuclear device would be quite a bit "harder" to smuggle in than most other WMD's but trust me it IS possible.
If you want to live your life in a box, have at it. Hey you install your panic room/bomb shelter yet? :rolleyes:
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top