Just because you are not of the sixties generation does not mean that you have nothing to understand or to learn.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemed to repeat it. -- George Santyana

Out of that time (from the Nixon and Ford Administrations) came two evil men, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. They believed at the time that we became justifiably involved in the Vietnam War just at they believed now about the Iraq War. They believed in an Imperial Presidency (unitary executive), that fighting "for democracy/freedom" by sacrificing American lives and civilian lives in other nations they deemed less free was an acceptable cost of achieving their ideology, whether it be anti-communism or anti-Islamic. Enormous profits have been made off of these wars by "the military-industrial complex" (then) and corporatism (now) for their friends -- the people they serve -- rich oligarchical masters for whom the rest of the nation is sacrificed over and over and over. Like Nixon then, Cheney now continues to encourage the erosion of our constitutional rights. Presidents are above the law. As Nixon said then, "When the President does it, it's not against the law" (paraphrase).

In Vietnam, over 50,000 American military personnel died. I suspect that history will tell us that the burst of economic bubble was fueled in part by inflation designed to fund the Iraq War. Will people die from the resulting poverty?

Yes, they will.

We have to end these wars. We cannot afford them and we cannot afford the enormous risk which they bring to the world at large.

And no, just because we have have the power to steal other people's oil, doesn't mean it's ours.

It worries me that Obama wants to move troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, but I am at least encouraged that he seems to recognize the problem that oil dependence causes. Step by step, we need to become energy independence.

The war in Iraq is as immoral now as the Vietnam War was then.

Here's the simplest, most obvious question you never bothered asking Ayers:

"Yes or no, do you specifically regret committing and planning to commit acts of violence?"

Instead, you let Ayers blather vague, undefined, unspecified notions of regret, which he's already done in numerous venues. If you couldn't pin him down on the crux of the matter because of your personal relationship with him, you should have recused yourself.

You still have his phone number, why not call him up and ask him that one follow-up? Ayers has managed to dodge that question with several other journalists, you could still get a scoop.

Or is that not your actual goal?

True, they destroyed property, but if you destroy a bomb that would used to kill and maim innocent civilians, wouldn't that be the exact opposite of killing people? Saving lives?

I agree.

But what I'm wondering is not whether we can or should learn anything.

But whether we *have*.

I'm somewhat encouraged by the results of the last election. But I get the impression that people just aren't making the right connections. They voted for the wrong reasons, and are not willing to make the necessary sacrifices.

Lets face it.. we *have* repeated the mistakes of the past. It has the feeling of inevitability now, like massive things that were set in motion decades ago and can't easily be turned.

I should have woken up to it sooner. A lot of people will be saying that, in a few years.

Yes or no, do you think it's a good idea to bomb the pentagon to 'wake up' the establishment?

Seems like a simple question. The fact that he talks about his regrets, about being against Vietnam (as if he was the only one), and how he's pro peace, etc, doesn't justify his actions to me.

BTW, I'm against war as much as you are Bill, just don't like rich boys turned terrorists turned self aggrandazing profs. What a cliche.

Your dipshit friends deserved to blow themselves up.

Being born in 1963, I was too young to really take part in the tumultuous years of the 60's. But with my Dad being a syndicated columnist before he died in '68, we had guests in our home like the regulars, Lenny Bruce, Rodney Dangerfield (when he was still Jack Roy), Tony Bennet, and Abbie Hoffman. So because the weather underground was still extant while I was forming "my head and moral compass", I clearly recall lauding the efforts of all those people to end the war.

The parallels to the current military industrial complex at their hard days work in simply inescapable in comparison. On the other hand, that was 40 years ago, and although I still question authority at every turn and wish I had the energy to "fight the power", I'm lucky I have enough energy to get to the couch in my underwear by Saturday morning.So when I heard the comparisons Palin and friends were trying to evoke between Obama and the guy who "took part in all these violent acts" 40 years ago, it was such obvious bunk. This is a softball interview because the guy is now an older softball guy for chrissakes!

We all did crazy things in our twenties, in that era maybe more so. But to expect an "update" on the violent acts from this type of interview as was mentioned above, is simply as silly as him being used in the election as he was,...silly and tired! This is abviously a guy who is very different from the kid he was when he took part in weather underground activities. And that he is using the energy he has left now improve the educational opportunities of the youth for the future IS the news, not what silly crap he did 40 years ago. I know what happened back then. And if I want detail, I can go to the libarary. Thanks for paintin a picture of the man, however slight, as he is now, and that quickly explains all we need to know about the past and the poor fact checking skills in the MSM, (which tells us something exponentially more important than anything we can learn about Mr. Ayres' past.)

Viva education! viva la Futura!