Friday, December 7, 2012

TWO ATTACKS, TWO VERY DIFFERENT RESPONSES




WHICH RESPONSE DO YOU THINK WAS CORRECT?

16 comments:

Dave Miller said...

I don't know Joe... What sovereign country attacked us on 9/11?

What government ordered the attack?

What would you have done differently than the Bush Admin?

Joe said...

DM: As far as I know, there was no "sovereign country" or government that attacked us on 9/11.

I'm sure that proves something in your mind, but I'm not certain what, since you gave no further opinion on the matter.

It is a good thing the Bush administration was in charge, because if I had been in charge there would be no Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran left in the Middle East.

What about the innocent children and women?????

Well, what about the innocent children and women in Japan after Pearl Harbor?

When entities attack another sovereign country, they are responsible for their women and children who get killed in the response.

It is so horrible that one would think people would stop attacking each other.

But they won't, because attack is part of the basic nature of mankind and that will never change under any circumstances.

Darth Bacon said...

Can Dave Miller Ever write a post without using Zgeorge. Bush's name?
No! And
When if ever will he stop licking Pbama's boots?

Dave Miller said...

Darth, 9/11 happened on Bush's watch. How asked a question regarding the response of the Bush Admin.

How should I have responded not using Bush's name?

Joe, I appreciate your honesty. Thankfully you were not president then. It is that type of attitude that brough about the internment of thousands of Japanese people here in the US.

Guilt by association. If some are bad, kill 'em all and let God sort it out.

Do you generally favor defining entire people groups, or associations of people by the worst elements among them?

Joe said...

DM: "It is that type of attitude that brough about the internment of thousands of Japanese people here in the US."

No, that is different. That internment was brought about by a government fearing from within due to a generalization (some Japanese are doing evil things, therefore we must conclude that those Japanese on our soil must be planning those evil things, too).

That's the essence of racism.

Historically, governments and/or dictators (emperors, kings, etc.) have decided that war is necessary, but they don't fight the wars. They use their young men to do the fighting.

When they decide it is "necessary" to attack another government, they thereby open the doors to the suffering of innocents.

That isn't right, but it is what happens.

It came down to "do we let the Japanese have their way and take over the United States, or do we retaliate and hopefully keep that from happening?"

If we retaliate, many innocents will die. If we capitulate, many innocents will die (ours).

So the issue becomes "whose innocents will die?"

Given the awful (and probably unnecessary) choice, I'd rather theirs than ours. They, of course, feel just the opposite.

With 911, no particular government was held responsible for the attacks, but several governments aided and abetted the attackers, and supported their endeavor.

I say they are as responsible as the attackers, themselves. It's the same principle of law that convicts an accomplice of murder, even though he is not the one who pulled the trigger.

Therefore the participating governments must be stopped, lest they continue to support those who would repeat the deeds of terror.

The result is the sad involvement of innocents.

I don't like the way it works, but it is what it is, and neither you nor I have devised a way to stop it.

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ducky's here said...

With 911, no particular government was held responsible for the attacks, but several governments aided and abetted the attackers, and supported their endeavor.
----------------
Most of the planning was done in Germany.

You fire bombing Dresden again?

Interesting that you would murder over 300 million people, some in countries (Iran, Iraq, Pakistan) which had absolutely nothing to do with the attack.

Is this an example of your Christian witness?

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - The response to Pearl Harbor was correct. A Sovereign Nation attacked us. Pursuant to Section 8 of the Constitution, The Congress of United States of America, at the request of the Commander in Chief, issued a formal Declaration of War.

"President Roosevelt formally requested the declaration in his Infamy Speech, addressed to a joint session of Congress and the nation at 12:30 pm on December 8.

The declaration was quickly brought to a vote; it passed the Senate, and then passed the House at 1:10 pm.

The vote was 82 to 0 in the Senate and 388 to 1 in the House of Representatives. Jeannette Rankin, a committed Pacifist and the first woman elected to Congress, was the only vote against the Declaration in either house.

President Roosevelt signed the declaration at 4:10 pm the same day."

The war against Japan was a war that could be won and was won.

Representatives of the United States of America and the Empire of Japan came together on the deck of the battleship U.S.S. Missouri and signed a treaty of surrender that ended WWII.

After 9/11, President Bush used the War Powers Act to unilaterally declare "war" against the battlefield tactic of "terrorism".

He may as well have declared war against "air power" or "infantry" or "behaving badly".

We got sucked in to 2 economy killing, pseudo-wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that could never be won.

We will never kill or capture "the last terrorist".

We will never sign a treaty with "the last person who hates America" that guarantees our safety and security forever.

By "declaring war against terrorism", we dedicated ourselves to a never ending war against people who hate us while generating an endless supply of people who hate us.

This will not end well. We will never be victorious.

We should have handled the 9/11 attacks and every other terrorist attack like what they were...criminal actions carried out by individuals.

Gather the evidence, charge the individuals, present the evidence before a judge and jury, reach a verdict, if guilty impose a sentence, if innocent acquit and release.

If we had followed the Constitution, we wouldn't be spending billions of dollars a day on an illegal "war" against a military tactic arbitrarily declared by the absolutely most idiotic human being ever elected to the Presidency.

George W. Bush inherited a country at peace with the world and with a budgetary surplus.

He decided to take us in a different direction.

That's why we are where we are today.

Trying to dig ourselves out of the hole that you and yours dug.

Thank goodness the American people voted to keep moving us forward instead of following the path that you lead us down.

So the question now is, are you going to help us fix the country or keep destroying the country?

Joe said...

XO:"Gather the evidence, charge the individuals, present the evidence before a judge and jury, reach a verdict, if guilty impose a sentence, if innocent acquit and release."

That would have been the right thing to do if we had intelligence in the domestic and international arenas that could spy their way out of a wet paper sack.

It was both domestic and international intelligence that had the world (including American Democrats) believing that Iraq had and was ready to use WMDs.

I agreed with the killing of Saddam Hussein, but not the invasion of Iraq with "shock and awe."

There is a fly in the ointment, however.

How do you seek out, find, try and/or convict individuals who are protected by their friends and enemies alike against a common foe: The Great Satan, America?

It took us over twelve years to find and kill OBL, even though Clinton had him in his sights once and let him go, Bush had faulty intelligence but finally got it together and Obama took the final step to kill him.

Suppose it took ten years to find each terrorist suspect? How many more attacks on the U.S. would they have accomplished?

We are dealing with barbarians who hide behind women and children, rape women and make it almost impossible to convict the rapists, behead people and show it on YouTube and spew hatred for anything not Islamic.

They are divided on every issue except their perception of the U.S. as The Great Satan, and that unites them much more solidly than we are united in America.

And they see you as part of The Great Satan as surely as they do me.

So what do we do?

Joe said...

XO: Oh, and it was President Franklin D. Roosevelt who authorized the internment of Japanese Americans with Executive Order 9066, issued February 19, 1942.

Wasn't that a wonderful thing to do?

If I am not mistaken, he was a Democrat.

Yeah...I think that's right. A Democrat and a Progressive.

Fredd said...

What difference does it make whether a pack of evil guys who attack us are part of a sovereign country's plan or not?

Just because al Qaeda was not as organized as the Imperial Japanese Navy does not make them anything less than an enemy to the US that must be defeated.

Sovereignty or not.

Joe said...

Fredd: Congratulations! You get it. DM, XO and Ducky do not.

But they think they do.

Xavier Onassis said...

Fredd - "What difference does it make whether a pack of evil guys who attack us are part of a sovereign country's plan or not?"

Because, per the Constitution, The United States Congress can make a Declaration of War against another sovereign nation.

Neither the President nor Congress can make a Declaration of War against "a pack of evil guys".

That's a criminal matter, not a military matter.

From a military/Constitutional approach, it is inherently unwinnable.

You can't declare war against a group of anonymous individuals.

You can't eliminate the Army/Air Force or Navy of the "pack of evil guys" because they don't have any of that stuff.

Their is no Supreme Leader of the "pack of evil guys" who has the authority to meet our government representatives and sign a binding treaty that will guarantee a halt to all hostilities.

You are silly to think that the criminal activities of a "pack of evil guys" can be combated and defeated in the same way that England combated Germany or America combated Japan.

Joe said...

XO: Just out of curiosity, which criminal investigative unit would you send where to find and prosecute these bad guys?

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - XO: Just out of curiosity, which criminal investigative unit would you send where to find and prosecute these bad guys?

The same ones that we have used for the past 225 years prior to a one time event that Republicans chose to exploit to regain what they felt were stolen presidential powers.

George W. Bush knew he wasn't qualified to occupy the Oval Office.

So he over-compensated by bringing in his daddy's old advisers.

Specifically Cheney and Rumsfeld who still held grudges from the Nixon era.

They used the 9/11 attack to try and "reinstate" Presidential Powers that they felt were unfairly stripped from the office after Watergate.

The President should never, ever have the power to declare war.

Congress should be required to make a formal Declaration of War as required by the Constitution so that every member of Congress who voted to go to war can be held accountable for that vote.

Joe said...

XO: "The President should never, ever have the power to declare war.'

Remarkably, evey once in a while we find something to agree on.

Only Congress should have that power.