Note on Comment section:

I have received numerous complaints over the past week, including from many regular commenters here whose contributions I value highly, about the intentional disruptions caused by David Sugarman. I really prefer to avoid banning, so I would like to do two things -

(1) request that he confine himself to one comment per post; and,

(2) encourage everyone else to ignore his posts, skip over them, not respond.

I hope and expect that this will work to preserve the quality of the discussions here. If not, I will consider more active steps, including banning.

Let's not have this thread today turn into a discussion of that one commenter or this issue - I write this just in response to the many emails I've received.

Nothing is more scared in the right-wing/neocon religion than the intense fear of Muslims and the belief that they are coming to get us all.

scared/sacred

You want the draw but only if it's from the officially approved punchcard of opinions? Perish the thought that if you substituted the world "Israeli" for Muslim in your article here?

GG: "They're not going to be the ones on their knees, begging. They're not going to be the "faggots." Instead, they are going to send others off to fight and bomb and occupy and kill and thereby show who is strong and tough and feel protected."

I laughed out loud at this. Then the sad truth of it sunk in...

"One can only marvel at how developed and richly detailed is the fantasy that he has created and carries around with him -- being on one's knees before a Muslim terrorist, begging and pleading and shaking, dialogue about "having served you." It is really right out of some cheap, trite sadomasochistic pornography script, and yet these fears and truly creepy fantasies are the foundation for their political beliefs, driving most of our political discourse and policy."

You hit it right on the head here. What disturbed subconsciouses some of these people must have!

But, of course, it was only a matter of time before the right-wing bloggers started harping on your sexuality in lieu of rational debate/discussion. Sad.

I still go back to bin Laden's stated goal, from several of his communications in 2003 and 2004, where he makes it clear that his strategy is to engage the US in prolonged conflict in the Middle East. Based on his view of the downfall of the Soviet Union coming about from their over-extension in Afgahnistan, his point has some credibility. Many add that this collapse also was hastened by Reagan's massive military build-up that the Soviets tried to match, and it seems likely that both factors weighed heavily in the final outcome.

Sadly, Bush continues to play directly into this strategy, extending operations in Iraq beyond all reason. He continues to stretch the military near breaking, continues to provide massive recruitment incentives for al Qaeda and now wants to show more manliness by attacking Iran. All of this can be argued to be nothing more than giving in to this irrational fear and the need to be "manly" in the face of it.

I've seen no rational description of just how this band of poorly equipped and loosely organized fanatics can place our country in existential danger.

Of course, true courage would be to broker a peaceful Iraq withdrawal, engage in dialogue with Muslims to marginalize fanatics and move ahead with a domestic agenda while allowing small groups of special forces and intelligence agencies to pursue the operatives plotting against us.

Confession time: I must admit to a little venting that proved cathartic during the September 15 antiwar demonstration in Washington. When we reached the pathetically small band of counter-protesters, I couldn't resist shouting "Look, behind you, a terrorist!", followed by my best "girly-scream" and "Aw, look, they wet their pants". Childish, I know, but very fulfilling.

The really strong, don't just weather the storm, they build a house so they can weather it in comfort.

The tough stand out in the rain.

The really strong stop and think about their actions, and when their actions prove futile, change tactics.

The tough act first and stick to it especially when those actions prove futile.

The strong lead their countries, the tough lead their parties.

The rightwing is obsessed with being tough, and that is all you need to know about their policies on war, peace, poverty and wealth.

The leftwing, would much rather be strong.

...when you think of them in rational terms, logically dissected, and make even a cursory cost/benefit or threat analysis...

*HOWEVER* the manifold 'police actions', 'bringing democracy', 'fighting drugs', 'fighting terrorism', 'overthrowing dictators', 'establishing peace', 'rolling back communism', and otherwise -you know- saving the world from itself, make PERFECT (if not perverted) 'sense' when you see that *certain* sectors, *certain* cronies, *certain* companies make TRILLIONS of dollars off the resulting 'wars', (and it has the satisfactory side effect of shutting up the stupid, scared sheeple who piss their pelts)...

the eye-rack-eee war doesn't make ANY sense when thought about in terms of a real, credible, serious threats to our pwecious national sekurity; but it makes PERFECT SENSE in terms of PNAC goals, war profiteering, establishing those invisible PERMANENT bases for continuing dominance of the mideast, and otherwise scamming, fleecing, and -literally in the one case, figuratively in the other- destroying both iraq and amerika...

come the revolution, privateers will be invited to a necktie party...

art guerrilla

aka ann archy

eof

Political beleif is just psychology anyway.

In my real life I may encounter and interact with perhaps 40 or 50 people on a given day. Of those, probably 80% of them will fit into my own demographic. I rarely talk politics with people I don't know well and I never encounter violence. But I nevertheless feel a strong involvement with politics and am an active participant on this board and others.

What this means is that what drives my political involvement isn't my daily experience but my imagination of what happens elsewhere in the world that I don't experience directly. In this regard, I'm probably not that much different the foamers who are responding to your post. The main difference, is that as I go through life, I try to minimize the harm I do and maximize the good. These folks on the other hand, seem to be hell-bent on maximizing the damage. Its one thing to have violent fantasies. It's quite another to insist that thousands of strangers to you die in order to protect you from them.