Every 9.11 I get a little emotional and seriously consider joining the marines.Unfortunately, a big part of being "American" is fighting for the principles, morals, and beliefs that A) make up the bedrock of these great nation and B) freakuently gets minipulated by fat old white guys (congress). I am not sure if I will ever join the Marines, but I sure as hell respect those that do.
Whether you like or dislike the way President Bush has handled the "war on terror" (i'm sorry, but that is exactly what we are in) we must always remember, especially on anniversities such as these, how great of a nation this is. Over 300 years ago a small group of determined individuals decided to risk their lives in order to resist the tearney of the monororch and create society built on democratic ideals.
Over the proceeding decades that ideals have been challenged, manipulated, confused and forgotten, yet these nation still stands as a beacon of light for so many. I am presently taking a class on Niger, and will be visiting the country in December. If you think that things are messed up in the U.S., you should see the slides that I saw today in class. No matter how bad things get here, we are still a great country. And part of our character, our heart, our soul, has been forged by the man and woman in the armed services. Through good times and bad, popular wars, and controverial ones, these individuals have stood as the protector of everything we hold true.
I know there have been a lot of tributes today, both on the news, on the radio, through websites like this, and through other mediums. Some people have questioned the Presidents decisions in the last five years, some of paid tribute to the lives lost that day. If you don't mind, as I sit here with a tear in my eye, I would like to thank everyone, both victims and soldiers, who have given their lives, so that I can sit here and have the opportunity to carve out whatever niche I want. Thank you everyone, don't you think that there is a day that goes by that I don't appreciate it.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 14
Who has denegrated our military? I don't know of a single case where anyone who has vehemently opposed the illegal and immoral actions of this failed adminstration has EVER questioned the integrity, resolve, and character of our military service men and women.
They did sign up for an honorable reason, but unfortunately, this president has chosen to abuse them and send them off into an illegal, unnecessary war of choice, for profit. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or terrorism.
Btw, we are NOT in a "war on terror." You cannot wage a war against an ideal or a tactic. It is militarily impossible, as has been demonstrated by the colossal failure of the BA policies of permanent warfare. The ONLY thing that can arise from a democratic nation that is permanently at war is an eventual end to that democracy.
I do have to agree with Clark, however, and question the idea that we are in a "war on terror." I believe that this term is extremely misleading and gives those in power too much control to decide the parameters of what the struggle is, how it is waged, and when (if?) it ends. A "war" has a defined space and time. Terror as an "enemy" can be anywhere and has existed for all of human history. There are no boundaries.
No one would disagree that we are facing an extremely dangerous level of violent fundamentalism, but using the term "war" simplifies the problem to the extreme and to everyone's detriment. It gives the enemy a face (Muslims/Arabs) to villify and thereby allows the public to focus its fear/hatred almost entirely on the personified image rather than on the root causes of the problem, which include (but are not limited to) economic inequality, political injustice, intolerance, cultural misunderstanding, etc. The "war on terror" slogan is simple and powerful, but unfortunately sets us up for an extremely disappointing end result. We are never going to win a "war on terror" but we have a chance of making terror a smaller threat if we spend more time worrying about the underlying problems rather than catchy PR.
As for the ideals of the republic, keep writing in their defense.
First of all, Clark, I disagree with your assertion that we can not fight a war against an ideal or tactic. History will back me up on this. I hate to use World War Two as an example, but it is a good example of fighting an idea. We were fighting again an ideal that manifested itself in the form of fascism, nationalism, militarism and a tactic, intimidation and manipulation by Hitler. I am not advocating any of Bush's policies, I feel like he did wage an illegal and immoral war in Iraq, but he has made one good point. I truly believe we are experiencing a "class of civilizations". A certain extreme wing of the Islamic religion has hijacked the moral, economic, and social prerogatives of Islam, and waged war against western values. This clash has emerged into a full scale war with multiple fronts. In case you forgot, those fronts include London, Bali, Madrid, Kenya, NYC, and so on and so on. The enemy is out there, it is not imagined, and while I don't agree with our President's methods, the war is perceives is a reality. I am sorry, but it is.
John- In what way is "the war on terror" misleading. We are fighting violent extremists who have used terror has a means to further their ideological goals. We need to counter that with preventative measures to insure that we further our own democracy. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean democratizing the rest of the world, but it is no secret that our way of life is being threatened. We have made some poor decisions in the past, in fact I wrote about one of them recently, but if you listen to Osama Bin Laden or any of the other jihad's, they really won't stop until we are wiped off the face of the earth.
I think using the world "war" is justifiable and accurate, not simplistic. To simplify things we would say that "we are fighting to avenge 9/11". Unfortunately the stakes are higher then that, the battlefields larger, and the consequences greater. We are fighting to avenge the principles our founding fathers laid out over 250 years ago, nothing more, nothing less.
I realize we are giving individuals with cannot offer their constituents anything to offer someone to vilify. That is a line that is hard to balance. I also realize we have to continue the fact of public diplomacy, in the form of giving economic, assistance, promoting cultural tolerance, and promoting human rights. Unfortunately, Bush has ruined his credibility by wage war in Iraq, but we must not forget about public diplomacy. On that note, we must also not neglect military action (WHEN NECESSARY).
Do we fully understand why the individuals in these countries are so angry at the US that they would attack in such a significant way? Is it possible that they felt under attack by things that the US or the West generally or our global companies were doing? Is oour presence there addressing those issues?
I would guess for some of the folks in Iraq and the countries around them, the US is viewed as a terrorist nation. We entered their country, dismantled the government, and have not done a great job restoring order yet. I know that the government that was there was a terrible one, but clearly there are a number of folks in the neighborhood of Iraq that think that we are worse or that they might be next if we decide we don't like their government.
As far as our founding fathers, most, I think, argued against getting involved in foreign conflicts in the first place--so we are already violating some of those priciples upon which the country was founded.
I also agree with the fact that some countries around the world view the US as a terrorist nation, some of our global companies and some of the military decisions made by our country in the last few years are very obtrusive, to say the least.
I also don't agree with the occupation of Iraq. We have done a lot to perpetutate the Arab communities distrust and dislike, and we have failed miserably in the reconstruction. We have a lot of work to do, i admit.
As for our founding fathers not wanting us to get involved in foreign conflicts. That, I think, hasn't worked out to well. Think of our isolationalism before World War 1 and World War II.