DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on December 09, 2008, 08:18:38 AM
-
The Meaning of Mumbai
By Thomas Sowell
(http://www.nationwidespeakers.com/images/biopics/ThomasSowell_217.jpg)
Dec 9, 2008
Will the horrors unleashed by Islamic terrorists in Mumbai cause any second thoughts by those who are so anxious to start weakening the American security systems currently in place, including government interceptions of international phone calls and the holding of terrorists at Guantanamo?
Maybe. But never underestimate partisan blindness in Washington or in the mainstream media where, if the Bush administration did it, then it must be wrong.
Contrary to some of the more mawkish notions of what a government is supposed to be, its top job is the protection of the people. Nobody on 9/11 would have thought that we would see nothing comparable again in this country for seven long years.
Many people seem to have forgotten how, in the wake of 9/11, every great national event-- the World Series, Christmas, New Year's, the Super Bowl-- was under the shadow of a fear that this was when the terrorists would strike again.
They didn't strike again here, even though they have struck in Spain, Indonesia, England and India, among other places. Does anyone imagine that this was because they didn't want to hit America again?
Could this have had anything to do with all the security precautions that liberals have been complaining about so bitterly, from the interception of international phone calls to forcing information out of captured terrorists?
Too many people refuse to acknowledge that benefits have costs, even if that cost means only having no more secrecy when making international phone calls than you have when sending e-mails, in a world where computer hackers abound. There are people who refuse to give up anything, even to save their own lives.
A very shrewd observer of the deterioration of Western societies, British writer Theodore Dalrymple, said: "This mental flabbiness is decadence, and at the same time a manifestation of the arrogant assumption that nothing can destroy us."
There are growing numbers of things that can destroy us. The Roman Empire lasted a lot longer than the United States has lasted, and yet it too was destroyed.
Millions of lives were blighted for centuries thereafter, because the barbarians who destroyed Rome were incapable of replacing it with anything at all comparable. Neither are those who threaten to destroy the United States today.
The destruction of the United States will not require enough nuclear bombs to annihilate cities and towns across America. After all, the nuclear destruction of just two cities was enough to force Japan to surrender-- and the Japanese had far more willingness to fight and die than most Americans have today.
How many Americans are willing to see New York, Chicago and Los Angeles all disappear in nuclear mushroom clouds, rather than surrender to whatever outrageous demands the terrorists make?
Neither Barack Obama nor those with whom he will be surrounded in Washington show any signs of being serious about forestalling such a terrible choice by taking any action with any realistic chance of preventing a nuclear Iran.
Once suicidal fanatics have nuclear bombs, that is the point of no return. We, our children and our grandchildren will live at the mercy of the merciless, who have a track record of sadism.
There are no concessions we can make that will buy off hate-filled terrorists. What they want-- what they must have for their own self-respect, in a world where they suffer the humiliation of being visibly centuries behind the West in so many ways-- is our being brought down in humiliation, including self-humiliation.
Even killing us will not be enough, just as killing Jews was not enough for the Nazis, who first had to subject them to soul-scarring humiliations and dehumanization in their death camps.
This kind of hatred may not be familiar to most Americans but what happened on 9/11 should give us a clue-- and a warning.
The people who flew those planes into the World Trade Center buildings could not have been bought off by any concessions, not even the hundreds of billions of dollars we are spending in bailout money today.
They want our soul-- and if they are willing to die and we are not, they will get it.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/12/the_meaning_of_mumbai.html (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/12/the_meaning_of_mumbai.html)
-
They want our soul-- and if they are willing to die and we are not, they will get it.
===========================
Wonders when Thomas Sowell will be strapping on his suicide vest. ::)
-
He was drafted in 1951, during the Korean War, and assigned to the US Marine Corps
-
There's the attitude that lead to Mumbai and to New York and Washington on 9.11.01. Now these kinds of children are in charge. We have "changed" from a group of adults who take their job seriously to a bunch of children who don't take anything but themselves seriously.
New York is full of liberals. So is Los Angeles. Chicago too. I wonder if they'll be rolling their eyes the next time.
-
Yeah, right. I point out that Thomas Sowell is not about to risk his nectk, an somehow, that mystically causeda bunch of Pakis to attack Mumbai.
Get real.
-
Can you tell me how you know Thomas Sowell wouldn't "risk his neck"?
Or are you just making shit up again?
-
Yeah, right. I point out that Thomas Sowell is not about to risk his nectk, an somehow, that mystically causeda bunch of Pakis to attack Mumbai.
Get real.
Really it only caused BT to point out that TS has already taken his turn risking his neck.
What caused the attack on Mumbi to succeed was the telephone call that no one intercepted.
-
What caused the attack on Mumbi to succeed was the telephone call that no one intercepted.
=============================
I would say that is what might have prevented it from happening.
What caused it were the actual terrorists.
-
What caused the attack on Mumbi to succeed was the telephone call that no one intercepted.
=============================
I would say that is what might have prevented it from happening.
What caused it were the actual terrorists.
The terrorists should bear the main weight of the guilt, that is true .
But people who financed them are not innocent , people who kept their secrets are not innocent .We don't know if there were any efforts to halt this that would have been effective , Supposeing that there coulkd have been something that would have halted this event , whoever prevented the measure being taken would have to share the guilt.
-
Supposeing that there coulkd have been something that would have halted this event , whoever prevented the measure being taken would have to share the guilt.
=================
This would be if they intentionally prevented it. If it was just a case of an accidental inattention, then they would be less guilty.
-
Supposeing that there coulkd have been something that would have halted this event , whoever prevented the measure being taken would have to share the guilt.
=================
This would be if they intentionally prevented it. If it was just a case of an accidental inattention, then they would be less guilty.
I certainly would not limit it so narrowly , someone who ment no harm , but who stood steadfastly against a preventative measure so much that it became useless as a preventative measure , is guilty not from malace perhaps , but from stubbornness or shortsightedness. Do you remember the neewspaper that published the fact that the Al Queda financeial transactions were being tracked?
-
I don't know much about Thomas Sowell so I'm not going to pretend to. If I read him right here, though, I have to disagree with much of what he says.
I have yet to see any evidence that Obama, or anyone in his "security team" is going to be soft on either Iran, or terrorism in general. Therefore I'm a little perplexed as why Sowell would take this tact at this time.
-
Sowell apparently wants every US citizen to join up and tie on one of those Banzai headbands and go forth to slaughter the Pakis who attacked Mumbai. But he isn't doing this himself.
Saying he once was in the Army is a moot point. The threat, according to him, is NOW.
You can rarely go wrong disagreeing with Uncle Tom Sowell.
-
"Sowell apparently wants every US citizen to join up and tie on one of those Banzai
headbands and go forth to slaughter the Pakis who attacked Mumbai"
Do you find it odd to lie about things when it is so obvious?
Where does Dr. Sowell say anything like you are lying about?
But he isn't doing this himself"
So following that logic, liberals that for example advocate policy of national
healthcare are to be dismissed and called racist names if they are not actually
themselves working in healthcare?
-
Advocating that the government implement a program of national healthcare is not the same as advocating that everyone work in healthcare. Sowell wants EVERYONE to go fight terrorism. And yet, he is doing nothing himself.
Sowell is the columnist version of Clarence Thomas. He is predictable in parroting creeps like the Cato Institute.
-
Sowell wants EVERYONE to go fight terrorism.
Could you point out where he said this?
-
Sowell wants EVERYONE to go fight terrorism.
Could you point out where he said this?
====================================================
Here's what he said:
The people who flew those planes into the World Trade Center buildings could not have been bought off by any concessions, not even the hundreds of billions of dollars we are spending in bailout money today.
They want our soul-- and if they are willing to die and we are not, they will get it.
He did not say some of us, he was talking presumably about anyone with a soul.
-
He did not say some of us, he was talking presumably about anyone with a soul.
I think you read way to much into that statement. I read that as "willing to use force" such as our military against terrorists. The military does not include everyone.
-
I think you read way to much into that statement. I read that as "willing to use force" such as our military against terrorists. The military does not include everyone.
====================
Have we ever had a problem with the military refusing to kill enemies?
I can't recall this happening on any major scale at all.
-
Have we ever had a problem with the military refusing to kill enemies?
I can't recall this happening on any major scale at all.
Again, you're reading it wrong. It's not about the willingness of the military to kill enemies, it's about the willingness of the military's civilian authority to order the military to kill enemies.
-
It's not about the willingness of the military to kill enemies, it's about the willingness of the military's civilian authority to order the military to kill enemies.
===============
Have they had a problem with that?
How many peple have died in Iraq and Afghanistan? I am guessing that more have died there than have been proven to be enemies. Perhaps they are killing the wrong ones, but there has been no lack of killing by the Juniorbushies.
-
Have they had a problem with that?
Under certain administrations.
-
>>The people who flew those planes into the World Trade Center buildings could not have been bought off by any concessions, not even the hundreds of billions of dollars we are spending in bailout money today.
They want our soul-- and if they are willing to die and we are not, they will get it.<<
The people who were actually onboard those planes could have been "bought off", if you will, in a NY second if they thought others in their wider group felt it was the wrong thing to do. They did it because it was accepted and expected of them. No different then American soldiers who do what is expected of them, and by and large won't do what is not accepted or expected.
-
The people who were actually on board those planes could have been "bought off", if you will, in a NY second if they thought others in their wider group felt it was the wrong thing to do. They did it because it was accepted and expected of them. No different then American soldiers who do what is expected of them, and by and large won't do what is not accepted or expected.
I agree with this completely. It takes a lot of fanatical conviction to commit suicide for any cause. When people come to realize that such fanatical martyrdom accomplishes very little, they will cease to participate.
In Palestine, the main impulse to continue with suicide bombings seems to be the videos that are sold and distributed everywhere, and of course, the sense of utter despair of the Palestinian young men who see no future in continuing to be unemployed refugees that are rejected even as street sweepers and garbage haulers.
This stuff about "they want our soul" is a bit silly.
How would they ever know that they had taken possession of a soul?
-
Mr. Literal strikes again ::)
-
So what does "they want our soul" mean to you, metaphorically?
I suggest it makes no sense at all.
-
So what does "they want our soul" mean to you, metaphorically?
I suggest it makes no sense at all.
I think you could take it literally and not be far off, they have a desire to make the planet Islamic , such that every desire contrary to this is evil. So in a literal sense they want your soul.
They also want your stuff , and that is less poetic if not less true.
-
So what does "they want our soul" mean to you, metaphorically? I suggest it makes no sense at all.
....They also want your stuff , and that is less poetic if not less true.
Ahhh, but you see, Mr Literal will come back to claim that they wouldn't have the room for all "your stuff", and why would they want your Gene Autry CD collection
-
It is as absurd to believe that they are going to convert Americans to Islam as it would be to believe that Americans are going to convert Muslims to Baptists or Mormons.
The whole "they want your soul" crap is just silly hyperbole.
-
>>It is as absurd to believe that they are going to convert Americans to Islam as it would be to believe that Americans are going to convert Muslims to Baptists or Mormons.<<
This idiot really needs a history course.
-
What they, Al Qaeda, wants, isn't our soul, or our stuff. They want Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, Jordan, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Israel, and so forth. They hit us because they think we're the the biggest obsticle in the way, and that once they scorded a major blow like 9/11 we'd go away like we did in Vietnam, Beirut, etc.
-
It is as absurd to believe that they are going to convert Americans to Islam as it would be to believe that Americans are going to convert Muslims to Baptists or Mormons.
The whole "they want your soul" crap is just silly hyperbole.
I wish they did think it absurd, or that they might think the conversion should be volentary.