A Conversation
By Mitch Berg
Austin Bay has a heart-to-heart with a fighter pilot in Afghanistan.
They have a lot of territory to cover together – you should read the whole thing.’
The fighter pilot – a colonel whose son is a new Army officer, the second generation in his family to fight in the War on Terror – is tired. Bay sums it up:
Now, once upon a time we could ignore those suffering in the planet’s hard corners. Oh, we could send them a few bucks and the Lefties could bitch about colonialism and capitalism but the hard corners were isolated. A threat to security? Only nuns and missionaries and you are your brothers keeper types thought so. Well guess what — the nuns were right. 9/11 changed that deceptive calculus. Distance? Colonel, there isn’t any distance. We learned that the destruction of New York and Washington started in the backwaters, of Afghanistan, of Somalia. Technology has done it. We can’t escape one another, for good and for bad. Jet transports, like the ones out on the runway at Bagram, put you on the other side of the globe in 14 hours. The internet doesn’t require description. East Asia shares diseases with Africa within days, if not hours. And special weapons? Nukes and nerve gas make every tribal war an international crisis. Goodbye Tokyo, Moscow, or Miami– because a sophisticated tribesman at war with his eternally despised neighbor decides that demolishing the global economy would make everyone pay attention to his neglected, forgotten grievance. Tyrannies keep breeding this insanity…He looked at me, the dreadful nearness of it.
It’s on us, man, I continued. And I don’t like it. I didn’t like it during the Cold War. Remember 1983? The same creeps who’ve quit now, quit then. Reagan was a warmonger, going to start a nuclear war in Europe my responding to the Soviets deployment of theater nuclear missiles. The defeatists said the Cold War was our fault, we were the threat. Then the Berlin Wall cracked and that jackass calumny disappeared as Marxism’s Eastern European wreckage emerged in drab, polluted, horrifying, undeniable color.
This war follows the same arc, with the same defeatists adding new nouns to old verbs and adjectives. But it’s a war of liberty versus tyranny and they’re shilling for the tyrants.
Take it up with the Colonel. Both of them, really.
November 13th, 2007 at 5:56 am
Afghanistan, Somalia… So where’s Iraq, the central front of the War on Terra?
Oh, and the creeps are the ones trying to use the threat of terrorism to destroy our freedoms at home and our reputation abroad. You wingnuts, in other words.
Hope that helps.
November 13th, 2007 at 5:57 am
Angryclown remembers 1983. Wasn’t that the year Reagan quit Lebanon?
November 13th, 2007 at 9:49 am
Right back to the inflamatory, useless crap it appears.
I remember 1983, I remember a President saying winning a limited nuclear war in Europe was possible, and our allies in Europe wondering what nutjob had inhabited the White House.
I don’t remember people who said we started the Cold War, nor about 100 other things this daffy Colonel has to say, and which are profoundly unproven – this isn’t about Afghanistan, it’s about someone using their service to grandstand to make idiotic comments without proof, and certainly, without value in terms of contributing to succesful policy.
If you think 9/11 ‘changed everything’ you were only 21 years behind the power curve. From Lebanon to Israel to Tehran, this engine, and engine of frustration at economic disenfranchisement in their own borders, at impotent leadership allowing Isreal to continue to exist, at dictatorial repression, has been coming. What you don’t get, if you think 9/11 was the bell-weather, is that it was ONLY a bell-weather for the ignorant in this country, those who sat with their heads in the sand and said there was no need to understand anything about foriegners. And then their reaction wasn’t to learn how to intelligently fight this problem, it was to declare war on “IslamoFascism” as craven bit of political rhetoric as we’ve seen in quite a while – and to bomb, usually indiscriminately, wherever it suited us, including in Afghanistan, to the point that our ‘allies’ like Hamid Kharzai (and Chad, I’m too busy to look to see if that’s spelled right – if it isn’t- fling some poo) are now telling us to STOP!
Maybe the Colonel should take his rant up with Kharzai, I’m sure the PM of Afghanistan doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:03 am
I was at a Barnes and Noble over the weekend….a new book about MAD magazine was on an endcap. I picked it up. Opened it up randomnly and here was this long rant about what an idiot Ronald Reagan is. They had a long list of what was wrong with him and how he was going to destroy the world.
If the looney left was so wrong in 1983, why should we believe them today?
November 13th, 2007 at 10:04 am
“Oh, and the creeps are the ones trying to use the threat of terrorism to destroy our freedoms at home”
Name me one freedom you have lost. And be specific.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:05 am
Eat my multicolored shorts. And be quick about it.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:30 am
at impotent leadership allowing Isreal to continue to exist,
Should Israel cease to exist? Clarify.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Right back to the inflamatory, useless crap it appears.
And yet I continue to let you comment.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:47 am
Eat my multicolored shorts.
God, I hope that’s Vegemite.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Kel – I don’t believe it, I am saying it was forseeable AND the attitude of the militant muslim world long before 9/11/2001.
Mitch – posting things like this don’t help, they only serve to say “those damned lefties” etc..etc.. I didn’t insult you – I commented that this post is of no help, and less value.
Chuck, I didn’t make the comment, but I’ll name three, three pretty importnant ones.
1. The freedom to not have the government know everything I say, everthing I write, electronically. The freedom to protest without fear of reprecussion.
2. The freedom to be free, without the risk of being jailed without charge, or access to a court, counsel, or my family.
3. The freedom to dissent, without having my patriotism, my loyalty, my service, and my intellect insulted by people with little more to say than “you’re a scum sucking coward” (yeah, that’s not in the Bill of Rights – so sue me)
4. The freedom to stand up for looking forward, to a time when a goverment might not be trustworthy (surely this one is, right?) and to say – we have been, and should be better than this – we need to worry about that day when the government isn’t to be trusted, and in fact our Constitution says we should never be put in the position of HAVING to trust our government, without proof or oversight – that they are doing the right thing, just because they say so.
5. The freedoms that to along with the rightful expectation the government is required to prove it’s case, to show cause – rather than hide behind government’s secrets acts never intended to shield them from generic disclosure, before it starts prying into our private lives.
6. The freedom to travel without fear of ridicule, mockery, and much worse, at the heinous acts of a government out of control, which spits upon our treaties, and declares profoundly important agreements as quaint.
7. And finally, the freedom to buy, travel, invest, and look forward to a nation holding it’s own in a wider world of commerce, rather than one bankrupted by hyper-militarism bent on lining the pockets of it’s corporate patrons far more than it is concerned with victory over the hatred of Islamic extremism.
Some of those are hardly a government guaranteed right, but then again, since when did the government guarantee rights? We do that ourselves – and we should include among them the right to expect decent and civil conduct from our neighbors, rather than rabid hate speech – fundamentally, the right to live in a good land, with good and kind people – rather than the cesspool of divicivness the current political environment, and so many blogs, currently embrace.
But let’s just leave it as:
1. Habeaus Corpus protections
2. Due Process (6th Amendment)
3. Freedome from Self-Incrimination (5th Amendment)
4. Due Process warrant requirements (6th again)
5. Destruction of protections of the Press (1st amendment)
outside of those, nothing.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:14 am
Sorry, guess I should have said 5 – ya see, the number of Constitutional infringments just grows and grows once you start thinking about it.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:15 am
I commented that this post is of no help, and less value
While no insult was intended, make no mistake: I alone determine value on this blog.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Peev can’t quite grasp that concept, Mitch. Peev labors under the illusion this is somehow HIS blog.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:45 am
Peev, how do you know the gov’t is spying on you? You’re not like the crazy old guy who thinks the gov’t controls the cable on his TV and is recording everything he does? (I did meet a guy like this once).
And when were you or a family member jailed without cause?
November 13th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Oh, what the hell:
1. The freedom to not have the government know everything I say, everthing I write, electronically.
that pretty well evaporated under Clinton. For that matter, FDR ordered the reading of all mail, cables and, telegrams coming to and from the US during WWII (to say nothing of comprehensive eavesdropping on voice commo), a vastly more intrusive system than we have today.
The freedom to protest without fear of reprecussion.
I call BS! How exactly has this been lost?
I don’t want generalities, here – how precisely that freedom? What are the “repercussions?”
2. The freedom to be free, without the risk of being jailed without charge, or access to a court, counsel, or my family.
Exceedingly vague.
3. The freedom to dissent, without having my patriotism, my loyalty, my service, and my intellect insulted by people with little more to say than “you’re a scum sucking coward” (yeah, that’s not in the Bill of Rights – so sue me)
Not only is it not in the Bill of Rights, it’s never been a right at all! People have the right to think anything they want about you, and to say it! You have NO right not to be offended by other peoples’ thoughts, actions or deeds! Neither do I!
Anyone can say anything they want about you – and as long as it’s not legally defamatory, your only defense is (and has always been!) responding.
And government has – and MUST NEVER HAVE – anything to do with that.
4. The freedom to stand up for looking forward, to a time when a goverment might not be trustworthy (surely this one is, right?)
Jeebus, Peev – you’re not even trying, are you?
Where has that “right” been taken away from you?
You sound like you’re suffering from depression more than “lack of freedom”.
5. The freedoms that to along with the rightful expectation the government is required to prove it’s case, to show cause – rather than hide behind government’s secrets acts never intended to shield them from generic disclosure, before it starts prying into our private lives.
And this affects you, Peev, middle-American who’s presumably not involved with terrorists, exactly how?
I share (or, more likely, vastly exceed) your concern for real violations in this area – and did long before 2000, when the Clinton Administration enacted the wiretapping laws, property forfeiture laws and other outrages against liberty that you on the left didn’t really care about until John Ashcroft was sworn in.
6. The freedom to travel without fear of ridicule, mockery, and much worse, at the heinous acts of a government out of control, which spits upon our treaties, and declares profoundly important agreements as quaint.
Again, not a “right” in any way, shape or form.
7. And finally, the freedom to buy, travel, invest, and look forward to a nation holding it’s own in a wider world of commerce
Again, not a “right”, merely a desire – one that is a lot closer to fruition today that, say, under Jimmy Carter.
Some of those are hardly a government guaranteed right, but then again, since when did the government guarantee rights?
Indeed, our rights (the real ones) are guaranteed us by the Creator, whatever you believe that is. They predate government.
But you’re dodging the question; you were asked what *rights* you’ve lost. You listed one arguable example, a couple of things that the courts were upholding long before Bush took office, and bunch of things that are entirely under your own control.
the right to expect decent and civil conduct from our neighbors, rather than rabid hate speech
I’m going to assume you’re also claiming the right to decide what “hate speech” is, right?
the right to live in a good land, with good and kind people – rather than the cesspool of divicivness the current political environment, and so many blogs, currently embrace.
That’s never been a right. It never should be considered a right.
So…
But let’s just leave it as:
1. Habeaus Corpus protections Worth a look
2. Due Process (6th Amendment) arguable, and the problems predate Bush
3. Freedome from Self-Incrimination (5th Amendment) ditto
4. Due Process warrant requirements (6th again) even dittoier.
And this one? Hooooie, Peev – this would be funny if I thought you were working for laughs5. Destruction of protections of the Press (1st amendment) Not only is that patently wrong – you can not name a single actual offense against the First Amendment – but indeed you are the one who would gut it. You have supported, in the past, the “Fairness Doctrine”; and re-read that bit you wrote above about “freedom from “hate speech”” and picture it being written by, say, Pat Robertson and aimed at you.
Think about it.
No, I mean really think about it.
November 13th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Mitch revealed: “I share (or, more likely, vastly exceed) your concern for real violations in this area – and did long before 2000, when the Clinton Administration enacted the wiretapping laws, property forfeiture laws and other outrages against liberty that you on the left didn’t really care about until John Ashcroft was sworn in.”
In other words you care about constitutional violations by Democrats. There was a time when you used to hide your party hackery just a little better.
November 13th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
“In other words you care about constitutional violations by Democrats. There was a time when you used to hide your party hackery just a little better.”
Actually some of us have cared about those constitutional violations since they started. Unlike those who only care about them since Bush became president, and will forget about it after he leaves office. And while I am not sure, the property forfeiture laws, while fairly popular during Clinton’s administration, started earlier than that. I am not the lawyer here, but I did find this:
“Forfeiture, the government seizure of property connected to illegal activity, has been a major weapon in the Federal government’s “war on drugs” since the mid-eighties. Two recent developments, however, have called attention to the darker side of this practice: a decision by New York City’s Mayor, Rudolph Guiliani, to deploy forfeiture against drunk drivers”
Which means Reagan. Who I believe was a republican. I thought it was Bush I but I was young then. However my disagreement with it predates Clinton. And I have a very big problem with Guiliani about it.
So how does that square with your side completely ignoring this stuff until Bush came into office, and should the dems win this next election, what are the odds of you objecting to it then?
November 13th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
The other day, you said that we should be working on local elections (like even less then-city wide) instead of Presidential or even US Senate. I feel the same way here.
The fed’l gov’t isn’t going to listen in on my phone conversations (good luck being interested in that), but if I were a business owner, an over zealous ADA regulator/trial lawyer could put me out of business. I will not be arrested for protesting against Hillary, but a property tax hike to support gov’t employees unions could cripple me.
November 13th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Buzzkill mused: “So how does that square with your side completely ignoring this stuff until Bush came into office, and should the dems win this next election, what are the odds of you objecting to it then?”
Cause Angryclown doesn’t have a side, Buzzkill. Angryclown answers for Angryclown.
November 13th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Bah, Clinton was a pussy.
Bubba only extended FISA to authorize searches of non-U.S. citizens, like that panty-waste law allowed of wiretaps at the time.
Real terrorist-fighters like President Bush and my man Giuliani know that the real terrorist threat comes from Americans, so you gotta tap, search, detain, torture Americans too. You can’t pussy foot around with the islamo-fasciitis.
Or the courts.
/jc
November 13th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
You mean Hillary, not Giuliani, don’t you Slash? Pelicano did a better job than the secret service ever did when it came to keeping Bubba safe!
November 13th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Sorry AC, you didnt choose a side, but I think that side chose you.
November 13th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Whatever, Buzzkill. I know it’s impossible for you wingnuts to imagine thinking for oneself.
November 14th, 2007 at 2:26 am
Snark! SnarK! Unresponsive, self-satirizing nonsense shouted over the shoulder as brave Sir Robin runs away!