Tuesday, August 31, 2004

Damnit

First, in an interview on NBC's Today show, President Bush said the reasonable thing,
I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world –- let's put it that way. I have a two pronged strategy. On the one hand is to find them before they hurt us, and that's necessary. I’m telling you it's necessary. The country must never yield, must never show weakness [and] must continue to lead.
But then Democrats criticized him for being honest. And I'm sure Republicans did too. So President Bush did what he accuses Kerry of doing, he changed his mind on an big issue. I think it's called a 'flip flop.'
We meet today in a time of war for our country, a war we did not start yet one that we will win.
The truth is, we may never win the war against terrorists. It is so very easy to perform an act of terror. There are too many dissatisfied people with enough means and brains, and they are too diverse in origin, cause, targets, and tactics.
So, while I'm glad he had to flip-flop, if only to poke fun at his own phrase, I am pissed we had to leave the considered and intelligent debate behind and move back to jingoism. Damnit.

2 comments:

xxxx said...

Saying you can win the war on terror is like saying you can rid the world of serial killers. It just isn't possible. Threats and punishments don't mean a hill of beans to those people, because they're crazy. Your best hope is to make it more difficult for terrorists to obtain materials for WMDs, which have proliferated all over the globe in the past ten years. But even that will not prevent low-tech attacks like the ones that occured three years ago. The best long-term strategy, and the one that I haven't heard either candidate mention, is to counter the recent rise of fundamentalism. Why are so many people all over the world feeling disenfranchised and desperate? Why are they focusing their hatred on the U.S., and how can we counteract that sentiment?

Another thing I've wondered about is why we haven't heard more lessons learned from England. They lived with the threat of IRA terrorism for years. Surely they have some strategies that could prove useful?

Anonymous said...

Jeffrey:

This is --H from Cafe HedonistiX.
I just posted almost an exact sentiment about this issue on my blog today:
http://hedonistix.blogs.com/main/2004/08/why_medias_misi.html

You used the term "back to jingoism", I used the term "out-of-context-ing" but it really frustrates me. And no, I'm not blaming Edwards for his comments as I think "out-of-context-ing" (or "jingoism") come from both sides, but come on people, can we NOT disagreeing like adults here?

Responding on the other comment about learning from the Brits against terrorism, AFAIK, England is one of the - if not the - most monitored countries in the world. Literally "monitored" by thousands of cameras at public places. While I'm not familiar enough with how this plays with their laws, etc., I'm positive this kind of approach will never pan out here in the U.S.

--H
http://hedonistix.blogs.com