Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
The United States will do whatever it takes to win the war on terror
Published on December 23, 2003 By Draginol In Politics

All over the blogsphere I'll see people say "You Americans need to start asking yourselves, 'Why did they do this to you.'"  It is a terrible misreading of the American culture. Americans don't care. You can argue all day that they should care. But they don't. I don't. There is nothing we have done that justified the events of 9/11. And those who try to justify the acts of terrorists will be ignored as sycophants and appeasers of evil.

After 9/11 the question is no longer "why did they do this to you?"  The question should be what is happening to the Islamic world as a result of their growing culture of death and violence towards the west.

Perhaps the Islamic world needs to start asking, why the US does this to them.  Because if the choice becomes us or them, Americans will choose us in a heart beat even if that means the Islamic world is a totally destroyed.  Make no mistake about that.  This isn't jingoism, far from it, it is the quiet knowledge of certainty.  The clear understanding of the American character that is saying this.

I don't say this because I hope that happens, I don't. I hope that the Islamic World can live in peace with the west and in particular the United States. I just don't think Europeans and especially the Islamic world understands American culture. We try to do the right thing. But if we feel we've been wronged (and we do) our history shows that we will do whatever it takes to secure ourselves.

Remember this: Japan bombed a military base to start its war against the United States.  The war ended with the United States vaporizing two of its largest cities after having used conventional weapons to flatten nearly every city in Japan with millions of civilian casualties.  It is one of those things about democracy - it is slow to anger but once angered, once motivated, it is hard to turn it off. So I say to you, for the sake of the Islamic world, they will not continue the path of folly in trying to convince us that the fault lies with us. That sort of argument is interesting in intellectual forums. But in the real world, when people are getting killed, those who would start killing Americans need to understand the full implications of their actions.

Blaming Bush is convenient. But I can say this: Any President of the United States would have done at least as much or would have faced riots.  The US federal government only has one job (the state governments do pretty much everything else): Take care of the personal well being of its citizens  It's not designed to build roads. It's not designed to build schools. It doesn't provide the police.  It doesn't run the water plant. It doesn't provide water or electricity.  It just takes care of individual citizens. And it does this in two ways: Killing non-citizens who seek to harm us and provide services to individuals. That's basically all it does (all but  less than 10% of the budget is dedicated to those tasks). It's not like a European government or the government in other countries in its design.  And it does those things remarkably well. And democracies can be scary things. The average person acts out of passion, emotion. The government is merely the tool of the citizenry. It doesn't rule the people, the people rule the government.  Blaming Bush for Kyoto or the International Criminal Court or the Iraqi invasion or whatever may make some quasi-intellectual feel better. But it's a delusion. It doesn't matter who the President was. Those things would have happened under any President one way or the other particularly after 9/11 in the case of Iraq.

So don't delude yourself into thinking that Americans are going to sweat about the "why" the terrorists murdered so many Americans.  Most Americans care about how its government will make the problem go away in as permanent a way as possible.  It's not the "Arab street" you should worry about, it's the American street people should worry about. Even 4 years after Pearl Harbor, poll after poll taken in 1945 showed that the vast majority of Americans supported the extermination of the Japanese as a people. Do you understand? The extermination of the Japanese as a race. It's not the terrorists that people should be afraid of. That is why the Islamic world needs to stop the terrorists. Why they need to do it on their own. They're not doing it to help us. They are doing it to ensure their continued survival.


Comments (Page 8)
10 PagesFirst 6 7 8 9 10 
on Jan 31, 2004
The United States did not exterminate the American Indians. There are millions of American indians who exist. Please feel free to provide examples of goverment sponsered programs of genocide to the American indians? Hint: The trail of tears is not genocide


You are absolutely right Frogboy, unfortunately, giving cholera laced blankets to American Indians is an early example of American biological warfare.
on Feb 01, 2004
There are millions of American indians who exist


There are also millions of Jewish people who exist, are you therefore arguing that the holocaust wasn't genocide?
on Feb 01, 2004
According to the Dictionary.com, genocide is: "The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group." Did the United States intend to rid the world of the Native Americans?
on Feb 01, 2004

You are absolutely right Frogboy, unfortunately, giving cholera laced blankets to American Indians is an early example of American biological warfare.

An "early" example? People have been hurtling diseased infected material at their enemies since the Peloponisian Wars.


There are also millions of Jewish people who exist, are you therefore arguing that the holocaust wasn't genocide?

No I'm not arguing that. But that's mainly because I actually know what the definition of genocide is.

on Feb 01, 2004
Didn't say you were Brad, that was aimed at Frogboy, also to defend myself from your first quote I was referring to specifically American actions
on Feb 02, 2004
For my 2 pence (or cents) worth, I'm just going to quote a comedian of ours who you seem to have taken a shine to recently:
"I'm not from these parts... I'm from a little place called England. We used to run the world before you" Ricky Gervais
Indeed we did, and eventually, we got too big for our boots, tried to run too many peoples affairs at once, and look what happened. Sound familiar? In the future it may be your turn to play the poodle as we are now.

What goes around comes around,
BTW star, frogboy=brad
on Feb 03, 2004
::Accepts slap on wrist::

Now, back to my point, attempted genocide can be shortened to just genocide in common parlance, therefore both are acts of genocide, just incomplete ones. And as for whether it was planned, the american generals who provided the blankets knew what cholera would do without treatment, so yes, I think there was some plan to get rid of certain groups of Native Americans
on Feb 03, 2004
---> Well,

i think the problem of american culture is it´s self-understanding.

"we are the most democratic, free, successful, independent, fattest, sexiest.........etcetcetc...." @ everything.

And since in the US the 2nd is already a loser, it´s only natural to assume that the whole rest of mankind wants to be
part of the "best" as well. ...which many want, as well as many don´t.

"we are better than you, so u better follow us, cos theres nothin u can do about it. tough luck!"

the history of prosecution, that drove many american ancestors to the country, leaves a spirit of:
Well Dude, we made it. Now you see how you do it.


if i was american i´d wear a Maple-leafed T-shirt when traveling abroad, it´s just more fun.

And yes i understand the war, and yes we´d do the same.

there´s probably more taliban-style christians in the US than there are fanatic muslims in Afghanistan.


...oh well, just ramblings from OldEurope, by someone who lived in the US,
who likes quite a few americans, who will never tire to criticize stupidity when confronted with it.

- Weltregierung.
on Feb 03, 2004
visit me bLoG
on Feb 03, 2004

there´s probably more taliban-style christians in the US than there are fanatic muslims in Afghanistan.

This statement displays a level of ignorance of such magnitude that it overshadows the rest of what you said.

 

on Feb 04, 2004
I think that the correct statement would be that there are fanatics in every country. The question is the degree of control the country has over their fanaticism. To imply that there are a huge number of christians who particpate in, say, Taliban-style executions is ludicrious. There are extremists here in the US, but Weltregierung, you insult all of us "good christians" who condemn our own extremists.

Yee gods, Brad and I agree and disagree in the same forum!

Cheers.
on Apr 04, 2004

Dear Brad

I have read your essay, but i would like to tell you that u r talking about the islamic countires as they suppoirt terrirists, and that its the source of terrorism,.
Idont say that Osama bin laden or his supporters were right, but isay look at what Sharon for instance is doing to the palestinians, and they get all the support from the USA, why didnt u mention it?

And remeber wars agianst Syria and Iraq will get the US economy down , its not going to seure it,
Thanx
on Apr 04, 2004


I would like to tell you that if the Americans are able to protect themselves they would have been able to in 9/11.

even in Iraq, they are killed and dont know hot to fight, its better for them to go to sell sweats,
and u say your history say that u will secure yourselves, huh? are americans have history or have roots? you are all cowboys , and thje rubbish of the world
on Jun 19, 2004
Guys, it's just sick to be proud of destroying others. Do you want to be a mirror image of what you hate? Well, you are when you talk like this. You are not Americans. You do not deserve the title. Real Americans don't make such generalisations as if the terrorists fuck with us, we'll destroy any religious group they have affiliated themselves with and won't bat an eyelash. Remember Aristotle said: “Anyone can become angry. That is easy. But to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, and in the right way – this is not easy.” Bombing Japanese people is not something to be proud of, it is clearly a demonstration of a country who has lost all sense of control, just as much as bombing Pearl Harbor was. Why cannot we Americans ever admit that we have made poor decisions? Why cannot we ever just say, I am sorry, what I did was wrong? Why do we have to make mistakes and puff out our chests as if we did the right thing, when deep down inside, we know it was wrong? Because we are fighting for freedom and liberty, doing the wrong thing is invariably the right? We are but children behaving this way, and Americans are in great need of a parent who can once again teach them the difference between right and wrong. Anyone who thinks that reacting in a manner that is just as violent and threatening as those who acted first is the right thing to do, is in dire need of a spanking! When a kindergartener hits a child on a playground, do you tell the other child to hit him back harder to teach him a lesson about the importance of being American? Then why as adults do you tell your leaders to do the same thing?
on Jun 19, 2004
Just a girl, you obviously either didn't read the article, misread the article, didn't understand the article, or are reading another article entirely. Nowhere in Brad's article or any subsequent comments did anyone say a single word about being "proud of destroying others".

I thought the article was pretty plainly written, and realistic in it's content. If any group attacks a country it's only natural for that country to fight back. At no time did anyone say a single thing about being proud, or whether it's right or wrong. Simply that it's true. It's also realistic, which you do not seem to be.

Yes, non-violence is always preferable to violence, but I would really like to see all of you people's reactions if someone were to come into your homes and attack your families. Would you stand idly by while someone murdered your wives, husbands, children, parents right in front of you? Would you spout a bunch of philosphical garbage at them, debating whether your loved ones somehow did something to deserve the attack, or would you use violence to try and stop them?

Yes, I am an American. I am a former member of the American military. Yes, I have been in combat. Is war my first choice? Hell no. But, there is nothing that justifies the wanton attack on a civilian population (definition of terrorist attack). People can make all the intelligent sounding (to them anyway) arguments against a nation taking action against attackers that they want, but in the end they would react exactly the same way if they or there loved ones were directly attacked.

Spout all the anti-war, anti-Amercian nonsense you please because in the end you're just blowing meaningless smoke. When your back is to the wall, you will fight too, regardless of the "whys".
10 PagesFirst 6 7 8 9 10