Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
A former GOP loyalist explains his disgust. More on the ADL's political pattern of condemnations. Which is the country actually threatening a first-strike nuclear attack?
The letters thread is now closed.
  • @ WinSmith

    Yes, that's a good plan. Put the gun down and back away slowly. You have nothing to teach anyone here, and besides, I suspect you're already late for dinner.

  • I'm leaning toward...

    ...smug superiority over misunderstood martyr, despite the Woe is me! of requesting slack for "responding to 15 things at once."

    Maybe it's just the affect.

  • I have been staying out of this fight, but I am curious about this bit...

    I'd hoped to think our side was better than this,...

    1) Please define "our side" just so I know who you are trying to describe.
    2) "Better than this" refers to what, i.e., what exactly is troubling you so much?
    You can go all the way back to Glenn's post if you want. I just want a concise answer as the whole discussion seemed to wander off into the weeds and I never did understand what the problem was.

  • On War

    the head sensei... said wars are cyclical because the generation that experienced wars get old and the next generation start another one.

    I have wondered [forgive me for this] if this was not an ingrained genetic tendency, serving the useful purpose of thinning the herd in service of balancing Earth's resources with population needs. Our intellects - and technological "advances" - should negate the need for this mechanism, but, sadly, old habits are hard to break, yes?

    Just wondering.

  • Timbaland?

    Kudos to Presumptuous Insect. He had him pegged as a young pupster. Under thirty or just barely over.

    WT may or may not know that Timbaland is a rapper.

  • @Gordon re: wars and genetics

    It might be genetic, but is also has to do with cultures/parents that use mental or physical violence to raise children and the children develop insecurities that they deal with in destructive, vindictive ways. The violence has to be stopped at that level if we ever want to break the habit. Then there are the issues of wealth versus poverty, religions, resources, borders and ethnic nation states, to name a few other non-genetic players.

  • On War

    "Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."

    Hermann Goering

  • @ Anonymous

    Some things I know, some things I don't. ;-)

  • Holly

    Other than your eloquent string of insults, I'm not sure what you're asking me.

    But, you have neglected to respond to his letter. Not convenient, was it? Or just of little value in the quest for attention?

    What letter? I've tried to respond to as much as I could. I'd think it would be pretty obvious by now that there's not much I'm not going to respond to.

    Care to rephrase in the form of something I can actually respond to?

  • Which Brings Us, Finally, To The Ultimate WinSmith Question...

    William Timberman:

    @ WinSmith

    Well, yes, there's nothing much linear about your presentation here, that I'll grant you, except perhaps for your jibes. However -- and this is important, I think -- you also don't make any sense. Could it be that you aren't quite the master of affect that you pretend to be?

    Angel dust?

    Or crack?

    Or.... (God help us!) .... airplane glue???

  • All WinSmith needs to know about Glenn Greenwald

    and most of us here, can be summed up in this sentence:

    Greenwald said that neither his personal views, nor his Jewishness, impinged on his decision to defend Hale in court. What is important, Greenwald says, is that Hale has a right to express his views, "and if he loses his right, then nobody has it. As trite as that sounds, it's very true."

    I don't happen to think it sounds "trite". It sounds true. It's American as Apple Pie or Voltaire. And Glenn is perhaps the modern equivalent of Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet) when it comes to speech. You will find that in a 2001 post at the JDL site on Glenn's decision to defend a real racist and anti-semite, Matthew Hale.

    Fascinating reading:

    Nazi Alert: Jewish Attorney Represents Jew-hater

    http://www.jdl.org/enemies/nazi/greenwald.shtml

  • War blowback

    More proof of blowback from Iraq war and permanence of our presence in the region.

    By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 33 minutes ago

    BAGRAM, Afghanistan - Six years after the first U.S. bombs began falling on Afghanistan's Taliban government and its al-Qaida guests, America is planning for a long stay.

    Originally envisioned as a temporary home for invading U.S. forces, the sprawling American base at Bagram, a former Soviet outpost in the shadow of the towering Hindu Kush mountains, is growing in size by nearly a third.

    Today the U.S. has about 25,000 troops in the country, and other NATO nations contribute another 25,000, more than three times the number of international troops in the country four years ago, when the Taliban appeared defeated.

    The Islamic militia has come roaring back since then, and 2007 has been the battle's bloodiest year yet.

    Barnett R. Rubin, an expert on Afghanistan at New York University, said U.S. leaders in Washington "utterly failed" to understand what was needed to consolidate that original Taliban rout, which started with airstrikes on Oct. 7, 2001, less than a month after the Sept. 11 attacks in Washington and New York.

    "The Bush administration did not see Afghanistan as a long-term commitment, and its leaders deceived themselves into thinking they had won an irreversible victory. They did not consider Afghanistan important and always intended to focus on Iraq," he said.

    "Now the U.S. and international community have fallen way behind, and the Taliban are winning strategically, even if we defeat them in every tactical engagement," he added.

    http://tinyurl.com/2axop4