Imagine, for a moment, that you live in a small town somewhere near the Southern California coast. You’re going about your daily life, trying to scrape by in hard times, when the missile hits. It might have come from the Iranian unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) – its pilot at a base on the outskirts of Tehran – that has had the village in its sights for the last six hours or from the Russian sub stationed just off the coast. In either case, it’s devastating.
In Moscow and Tehran, officials announce that, in a joint action, they have launched the missile as part of a carefully coordinated “surgical” operation to take out a “known terrorist,” a long-term danger to their national security. A Kremlin spokesman offers the following statement:
“As we have repeatedly said, we will continue to pursue terrorist activities and their operations wherever we may find them. We share common goals with respect to fighting terrorism. We will continue to seek out, identify, capture, and, if necessary, kill terrorists where they plan their activities, carry out their operations, or seek safe harbor.”
A couple in a ramshackle house just down the street from you – he’s a carpenter; she works at the local Dairy Queen – are killed along with their pets. Their son is seriously wounded, their home blown to smithereens. Neighbors passing by as the missile hits are also wounded…As news of the “collateral damage” from the botched operation dribbles out, the Russian and Iranian media pay next to no attention. There are no outraged editorials. Official spokesmen see no need to comment further. No one is held responsible and no promises are made in either Tehran or Moscow that similar assassination strikes won’t be launched in the near future, based on “actionable intelligence,” possibly even on the same town. In fact, the next day, seeing UAVs once again soaring overhead, you load your pickup and prepare to flee.
Of course, it doesn’t matter – if it really doesn’t happen here.
Right?
#20
> Steve is on trial for the murder
> of Bob’s family…
Stop right there. “Trial”?! Hah. A better analogy is that Bob’s family is murdered one day while Bob is away. The united neighborhood watch which includes a dozen or two local mob bosses comes around and says they should form a committee to investigate. In the mean time, Bob does some investigation of his own and finds out that not only is Steve, another mob boss, at fault, that there is no one to rein in the rest of this idiotic bunch and their stupid turf war that has been going on for centuries. So, instead of just taking out Steve which would put another Steve in his place tomorrow, Bob decides the best solution for long term peace is to take down the whole lot of them.
Man, Are all American such violent, hateful, selfish, and most of all, stupid people? I’m sure not.
Kill!Kill!Kill! And then what?
With such a language, it’s no surprise that so many people in the world think it’d be a safer and more peaceful world without the USA. So they think: let’s get rid of them!!
I have enough friends in the US to know you’re not like that. But the posts in this thread are appaling!
#16 RedpawGraphics writes, “The Bible says……An eye for an eye. My religion says……Touch me and I’ll rip your arms off and kill your family with them.”
I’m not familiar with your religion, but it appears to be even more insane than the more common varieties practiced in this country. Let me know if you have any manifestos that you need to have proofread. I promise I won’t give the FBI any heads-up.
#22 – So, what ultra-enlightened country (that doesn’t rely on US strength) do you hail from?
MG makes the classic mistake. He misunderstands the world.
Within (some) nations we have the rule of law.
Among nations there is a state of nature. If that phrase is obscure to you, google it.
Pretending otherwise is nice for folks who don’t like to think about things too much, but adults have to actually move and act in the REAL world.
#20 MG. But Bob is hiding at home. We know that because he continues to lob grenades at Steve and his family, not to mention other families Bob doesn’t even know.
RBG
#14 Wow…. what a strange planet you live on. So by your reckoning, we should not have entered WWII after Pearl Harbor because we just lost a few ships and sailors.
Does anything in your calculus factor in the future? That is if a nation does nothing to defend itself against attack, then there will be more attacks to follow?
I, for one, am damn glad to know that we will respond with extreme force to an attack. We will not stop when the numbers are equal. We are not trying to balance a checkbook here.
Are people from the various middle eastern cultures likely to be more forgiving or less forgiving than Americans are, when their innocent friends and family members are killed in a war they didn’t start? If I recall correctly, we weren’t very forgiving when it happened to us. Unless those people are less prone to vengeance than Americans seem to be, our own future could be fairly violent.
The first step in understanding the world is being able to imagine yourself in someone else’s shoes.
#18, Ah yea,
Russia/Iran bombing California vs. US bombing Somalia. Anyone see the weird disparity here?
Yup, I do. The latter is accepted by most here as “deserving” while the former is dismissed as unwarranted. While the former is true, it is aggressive. The latter’s justification demonstrates pure arrogance.
1st, the US would never give permission for Russia/Iran to bomb the US or any of our “friends”. Does anyone involved with that article know that the US has permission to attack Islamic Militants in Somalia?
http://tinyurl.com/33qf9n
I read the article you linked to. There was no “permission” granted or acknowledged. It sounds more as if the US took the action unilaterally.
A better example would have been to imagine being in a village in Ecuador which get bombed because it harbors FARC terrorist.
If you live in that Ecuadorian village you might be concerned. If you live in a S. California village you might be a little concerned too.
#20, MG,
Good analogy. Although I think it is over the head of most of the commentors.
… but to reduce ourselves to the level of our attackers is to become what we despise.
I agree whole heartedly. Unfortunately, many Americans want to be complete pussies, sheeple, and slaves of the government.
#20–MG==I was going to let this thread go but once you have Catshit (#30) eating out of your hand, a stand must be taken.
Where to start?
Arguments by analogy always fail at some point==otherwise you are actually talking about the desired subject?
The USA certainly should have used non-military means of retaliation but BushCo and the NeoCons don’t have the intelligence to figure out the more nuanced course. They (aka McCain) STILL haven’t figured it out.
We are acting like the worlds bully when we don’t have the back bone to maintain the effort. If we are going to use military might, then yes==innocents will be hurt and that is the cost of war which is exactly what makes it a poor choice of response.
Whats going on here? Seems like I’m agreeing with you? OH===yea==nothing BushCo or the USA does is guided by the bible and its various and conflicting dictates so that is a very stupid way to approach any subject. Once we use the military, a 10 or 100 fold return of violence should be expected–thats what war is about. Cant do that with a mercenary army though==too expensive. And the reason BushCo lied, is that the American people would never support a real war (aka 10 to 100 times retaliation) whereas we were completely willing to provide that in WW2.
Real politik.
# 25, Bob
MG makes the classic mistake. He misunderstands the world.
How?
Within (some) nations we have the rule of law.
Very true. As well, there are several international dispute mechanisms in place too, including the International Court, the United Nations, and World Trade Organizations.
Among nations there is a state of nature.
There is ??? Let’s see, …
State of nature is a term in political philosophy used in social contract theories to describe the hypothetical condition of humanity before the state’s foundation and its monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force. In a broader sense, a state of nature is the condition before the rule of positive law comes into being, thus being a synonym of anarchy.
When I start seeing words like “theory” and “hypothetical” used to describe a social science I just know someone didn’t pass the joint. In other words, not very relevant.
Anarchy. Kind of like what the US led invasion into Iraq caused?
*
#28, Gary,
Another one of your fine, well said posts. You are making a habit out of this.
Oh stop, Señor Catshit… I’m blushing
of course, you all know the US is way too weak, being the paper tiger pussies they are…to actually retaliate to anything like this right? radioactive wasteland I think not….the US is full of retarded pussies and weak gun-loving fags who couldn’t defend their asses from a randy rapist much less an invading force. give it up already.
So tell me, catshit, if someone has made it his business to kill you, are you going to rest easy at night because a court of proper jurisdiction has duly issued a restraining order against that person?
If yes: you are an idiot.
If no: you agree with me about the state of law between nations.
Have a nice day.
Bob, you will never understand the point if you keep reducing things to black and white issues. Right and wrong is a continuum and you can rarely be 100% right. That thinking is what allows people to build arguments for these type of acts and when we allow ourselves to think like that we allow ourselves to be hoodwinked.
Life is grey. In this continuum Afghanistan started light grey but has darkened over time. Iraq is very, very dark.
And #31, you are correct that analogy does not provide proof, but it is a good aid to clarifying what the key points to the argument.
#35, bob,
The failure in your argument is you are blind to reality. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Most Middle East and Arabic nations understood getting Iraq out of Kuwait. What they didn’t understand was the wanton killing of retreating conscripted Iraqi soldiers. Thousands died on that highway. So who made enemies that day.
Well, the US did take Israel’s side, they provided her with munitions and intelligence, they regularly give a lot of money. With that aid, Israel has subjugated the Palestinians, murdered their leaders, with held food and medicine, destroyed infrastructure, imprisoned people for no reason, taken their land without recourse or payment, and held them in enforced ghettos.
So Israel’s friend was attacked. No, I don’t condone the attacks in 1993 or 9/11, but I understand the hate that caused it. This wasn’t something out of the blue. American foreign policy made a group our enemy. That isn’t hypothetical.
The only ones who like a bully is the bully himself. He ends up despised by everyone else, even those he counts as his friends.
Something not on the table is the fact that this administration allowed 9/11 to occur, even after being handed volumes of good intelligence (boy, is that an ironic use) about what was being done to plan an attack on us. The Bush Crime Family still needs to go to prison for lowering our guard so that the family friends (the Bin Laden Organization) to pull this off. I love that Bush I was playing golf with Osama’s brother when the attacks occurred.
37 MC.
I didn’t realize the convoy had surrendered with white flags. Or had they?
I wonder if Israel’s response had anything to do with Arab efforts to remove Israel from the map?
38 Cochituate. And then you have the DU liberals upset at present efforts to raise the guard. Make up your mind.
Osama had 4,382 brothers, give or take a few: owners of one of the largest Arab companies. I guess you also love that Bush was a pilot and so were some of the terrorists.
RBG
#39, RBG,
They were trapped on a road. They couldn’t go anywhere and they were strafed until every vehicle was destroyed. They were not given a chance to surrender.
White flags? Sure, like every soldier carries one. I have heard some asshat comments but that ranks right up there with the best of joshua, James Hill, Lyin’ MikeN, and Philleep.
So you think that is just one battle. Many others think it was genocide. How would you feel if your brother / cousin / father / son / next door neighbor was killed on that highway? Would you want revenge?
*
Israel was put in the middle of Arab territory. While the local population was willing to have them as neighbors, they were not willing to divide their country into a patchwork. Yet Europe insisted on a Jewish homeland to ease their own guilt after the holocaust.