Letters to the Editor
James Levy
Published Letters: 149 Editor's Choice: 18
-
Can you picture the response...
[Read the article: In search of the war czar]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]if Bill or a Presidetn Hillary announced to all who would listen that they were abdicating their role (and responsibility) as Commander-in-Chief so that a "war czar" could do the job for them? The calls for immediate impeachment would be howls and shrieks. My God, this Administration is designed and built for only two purposes: to protect the tax cuts and to prosecute this war. They don't do anything (other than PR to those ends) else. Bush's base should be furious with him. He looks like a dope who is somehow too busy or confused to get on with "winning" a war on "terror." But, then those people would have to get off the halucinogens and admit that, even if they agreed in principle with what this knucklehead maintains to be proper policy, his execution of said has been abominable. It's as if 30% of the US population would rather end their days with the Fueher in his bunker than come out with their hands up and say that perhaps some misstakes were made.
-
The dedicated 22%
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As has been noted:
Unfortunately not. Nixon had 22% support just before he resigned, and Bush has roughly the same percentage saying that they "strongly approve" of the job he's doing.
The worrisome fact about these people is that they form the core around which, if and/or when the economic shit hits the fan and the terrorists get in another crack here at home, another 30%+ of the population will rally. The fact is, these folks aren't marginal if marginal means so far outside the mainstream as to be (say, like the US Communist Party) no threat to gain sufficient alliance partners as to ever form a majority. They are closer to the Nazi Party in the late 1920s--the embryo of a fascist state, waiting for conditions to align so that they can grab and hold the majority. Those 30%+ still have some strong allegiance to republican government. If thaterodes, then the 22% will be running this country for good after the next major crisis.
-
Mike Paces, you've got it
[Read the article: Beyond the Multiplex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here it is Mike: I'm on the Left, and I despise Islamist nutjobs. Hate their guts. Hope they die. Total religious fanatic idiots. Vile murders. You happy? I said it, and believe it. What the hell does that have to do with US people torturing human beings? In contravention of all law and decency? Without a clue about guilt or innocence? And, Chucky, here in the glorious US of A we execute underage criminals who are legally classified as CHILDREN for all purposes save our death penalty laws. Of course, we give them lethal injections instead of cutting their heads off (I defy you to show, knowing what we know of the time it takes for lethal injection to work, that one is somehow a vastly superior way to kill someone than the other). And by the way, the oldest democracy is Iceland, not the US. For someone obviously on the Right, I'm surprised that you are such a Relativists--I thought that some things were moral, others immoral, and never the twain shall meet? Like all conservative phonies, you invoke all these "eternal truths" until you want to punish or kill some darker fellows, then all your universal principles dive out the window.
-
Democritus nails it
[Read the article: The Politico: Exhibit A for our broken political press]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That line from The Great Gatsby has come back to me time and again during the last few years. A Philosopher friend of mine once looked quizzically at me and asked how the Administration can ignore global climate change, as it will certainly effect them and their children. My response was that they all believe that they can safely retreat to their Montana/Wyoming/Texas "ranches" and hide behind barbed wire and Blackwater mercenaries and ride out the disastre in comfort. He couldn't believe me. He should.
-
To MacK.
[Read the article: George Tenet, spook for all seasons]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I, too, am a bit perplexed by th cuases of the war. Military historians like myself are supposed to be able to explain these things with either a dose of facts or, if all else fails, a dollop of theory. My best guess is that it was overdetermined by 1) the need to reap more satisfying revenge on the Moslem world than the Afghanistan adventure, 2) Bush and his Cabinet's desire to "finish the job" daddy supposedly "bungled", 3) the demented idea of some Jewish neocons that they were somehow doing Israel a favor, and 4) the desire to "set an example", not of a democratic state in the heart of the Middle East, but of America's determination and ability to kill those who would oppose our will (including the innocent bystanders). Americans believe two very interesting and contradictory things--that we should and will never give into intimidation, but if we use intimidation against others it is a great way to make them dance to our tune. Since only American have true patriotism and moral fibre, using intimidation against us will only earn our righteous wrath. But other peoples are cowardly and fickle, so if we push them around, it will show them who's boss and work like a charm. We tried this crap in the run-up to Pearl Harbor, sure that the Japanese would cave. We tried this in Korea and Vietnam. We're trying it now in Iraq, where we think that stopping and frisking men and women on the streets at gunpoint will make them appreciate their "sovereignty" and their "liberators." Think Fallujah, which was also intended to "send a message." To paraphrase Napoleon, it is with such infantile macho posturing that Empires are led.