Reply With Quote
Who?Michael Cooper Jr.
This guy is gonna have Homeland Security so far up his ass for this article that he's gonna cough up Michael Chertoff...
The Terrorist Papers: A Mountaineer Commentary
Thursday - August 31, 2006
by Michael Cooper Jr.
LinkI'm about to do something extremely controversial. It won't make me any new friends. It won't be pleasant to your eyes. But in this day and age, it is necessary, very necessary, to make this upcoming point. So, let's not waste time and just jump right into it:
Terrorism is Justified...
There I said it. Someone had to. Not universally, but in certain cases and cir stances. Why? Because it's a TACTIC, and nothing more.
The United States of America has the strongest armed forces in the world, followed by several of our allies like Great Britain and Israel, and then China (only because they have billions of men, and children, to put in the field). No country in the world could wage a legitimate war against us and win. North Korea and Vietnam might have been campaigns worth forgetting -- though I, and hopefully you, will always remember our soldiers sacrifice in both of those wars -- but I don't seem to recall North Vietnam landing troops on the shores of Delaware in '69. Honestly, no one can touch us. The old Soviet Union didn't even have to balls, now no one will even dare. You can't beat our army, certainly not our Navy or Air Force, and definitely not our stock piles of nuclear weapons.
On a side note, does anyone else find it odd that the United States, the only nation to actually drop the "bomb" on a foe, is deadest against letting our enemies build them? Seems like we'd be the last land on Earth with the right to tell Iran or North Korea they can't have nukes. Now, if Japan tells you that you shouldn't, I'd understand.
Back to the issue at hand. We can't be invaded, or attacked by a country, unless that country wants to risk complete annihilation at the will of a person as bonkers as Donny Rumsfeld. I find it funny we even call him the Secretary of Defense, which is the job of Homeland Security. Might as well call him Secretary of War, it'd make it clearer. But, if you pay attention to history -- I'm a big student of history -- you must admit the U.S. has been wrong quite a bit. Or dare I say even played the role of the villain. Remember slavery, or how we treated Native Americans? It took decades to give rights to minorities and the "vote" to women. So yeah, we're not always right. With that being said, how are folks around the world, who disagree with us, going to get through to us? It isn't going to happen by trying to talk sense into Yosemite Sam up at the UN. If the Kyoto Protocol is any evidence the international community must see this current administration as a bunch of "doody heads." However, we just concluded that countries would be insane to attack the U.S. and now they can't even peacefully work things out. That must mean other TACTICS have to be taken.
Now, before you get the wrong idea about what I'm saying, realize I'm not justifying what happened at the World Trade Center or over the skies of Pennsylvania. I'll provide the reasoning for that later. The Pentagon is a whole different story. While my heart goes out to the families of those lost in that strike, it was a military building and I can't, as a reasonable person, condemn an attack against our military -- you take the risk of getting attacked the second you join up -- considering what we do around the globe. I would be a hypocrite. With that though, is war inexcusable to use a civilian aircraft to attack our military? Innocent lives shouldn't be wasted in an effort to fight our country. But back to the point about the nukes, how can we complain about losing civilian lives?
We are after all the culprits of Hiroshima -- the anniversary of that horrible day was only a couple weeks ago -- and we stood behind Israel as they blindly killed UN and Red Cross Workers in Lebanon.
We lost fewer than 3,000 civilians on 9-11. Considering the amount that perish every day across the globe due to things we support, or even carry out, it's ignorant for us to act like 9-11 was some unheard of atrocity. It finally happened to us, boo-hoo.
I feel unlimited sorrow for those affected by the events of that terrible morning, but come on, in the history of the United States the worst event -- in most white peoples minds -- was Pearl Harbor, a military base, until 2001.
While I'm at it, I might as well jump off the cliff and say that it's ridiculous we have a Holocaust Museum in D.C. and not one dedicated specifically to what happened to Native Americans when the white man came to the new world. I'm thinking it has something to do with a deeper issue involving how we view Jews versus "Indians" and at the moment, I won't dare go down that road, don't have the time. Other countries, though, have known far worse suffering going back through the ages.
It was bound to happen to us. And terrorism is the form in which it did. But, if you know anything about the war in the South during the American Revolution, fought by men like the Swamp Fox and others like him, you'd know their actions were not far above "terrorism."
We're not fighting a war on terrorism mind you. Don't bother with what the fools on T.V. are saying and you'll soon realize we never were. We're fighting a war against religious fundamentalist. That's who the "terrorist" are. Specifically, they are Muslim extremist.
It's a war between Islam on one side and Christianity and Judaism on the other. Not lovers of freedom versus haters of freedom. Not Arabs versus white people. This is a religious struggle, plain and simple, being carried out by some of the biggest whackos imaginable, on both sides. ON BOTH SIDES!
Why didn't the neoconservatives call for a war on terrorism when Timmy McVeigh blew up a federal building in 1995? Huh? Or how about Eric Rudolph, and his "jihad" against abortion clinics and sexuals? There wasn't the same kind of outrage back then.
, Rudolph became a hero in this area. He had country songs written about him, and t-shirts were made that said "Run Rudolph Run."
And Toby Keith, that son of a that sung about sticking his boot up Osama's ass, has said nary a word about terrorist acts committed by his fellow Christians. And it's because, technically, they're on the same side.
In this state -- pretty much in the whole south -- the "moral" majority is against gay marriage and abortion, same as Rudolph. According to them, he just went a step too far in lashing out against the disgusting individuals who don't follow God's chosen path. Only a step or two too far, but 9-11 was an unthinkable act killing innocent lives like that.
Yeah right, it's high time to put it together how duplicitous this nation has become in fighting a war on terrorism because of some Muslims -- or "Sand ######s" as my pathetic neighbors back home like to refer to them. But, when our Christian citizens terrorize, it's dismissed for various reasons and only the lone perpetrators are rounded up. No huge war against the Aryan Militias seeded throughout the heartland, which would be our version of Al-Qaeda.
If we had treated the horrors of 1995 and 1996 the same as acts of Terrorism carried out by Muslims what would have happened? Well seeing as how we used 9-11 as justification to round up thousands of Muslims who simply talked about or "thought" about attacking the United States might we have done the same back then? Or beyond that, we went after people who were related to someone that had been a terrorist -- except for the Bin Laden family -- or mistakenly helped fund an attack without knowing, or was a friend, or even just a neighbor of a suspect. And we took them a locked them up in Cuba, without a trial, or justice, because we had that right as a means of protection.
But, if we had acted similarly in the mid 90's that means we would have been locking up white supremacist, hardcore Christians, militia men, and former members of the U.S. military -- which Rudolph and McVeigh both were -- and tossing them in slammer without explanation, AND THEN TORTURING THEM!
Imagine the scene of a gagged and half naked Pat Robertson being taunted by guards. Not right is it?
So, how is it at all acceptable to do this to Muslims? Either all terrorism is wrong or none of it is.
Considering that the IRA is still operating in Northern Ireland, committed fire bombings as recent as August 9th, and the U.S. has not said a single f---ing word about it, put any pressure on the IRA, or sent a SINGLE troop to the British Isles, this tells me it's all about religion -- a war between Islam and the West, with Oil playing a role too -- not terrorism.
Now I don't fell comfortable fighting a crusade purely in opposition to extreme Islam.
Maybe it's time to admit that if an Ayatollah is in the crosshairs, maybe the Pope, David Twersky and Billy Graham all should be. Either all terrorism is wrong, or none of it is. Either all religious fundamentalist are wrong, are none of them are. Unless we want to come out and say Islam is wrong and Christianity is right, all religions need to be dealt a blow in this fight.
I don't want to be sitting around twiddling my thumbs waiting to be blown up by nukes, which we don't have a right to tell others not to have, if we only go after Islam.
It's amazing that after all these years it's still religion that's the cause of warfare. Not terrorism, terrorism's only a tactic of the war. If we keep egging on Iran, we'll see a whole separate set of tactics, trust me.
Sensationalism fueling the war
I've become aware of an odd trait that many Americans share, especially conservatives. I've been following this since the events in late 2001. Now it's all too obvious, Americans are sensationalist.
Watching "Fox News" during the day is a marvelous way to study this growing trend. Whenever a young rich white girl goes missing, it becomes extraordinarily obvious. That shoots to the top of the news topics. Time seems to stand still.
Sean Hannity, the deep voiced woman, Nancy Grace, and the others can't spend enough time talking about it. I'm sure if I watched "Faux" News all day tomorrow, they'd mention the Aruba case a good ten times. There's no telling how many times they'll mention the Duke rape case.
It pisses me off though that you never see young Hispanic girls, who have gone missing, on the mainstream media. It's a crying shame. But, it's apparently a huge deal when a young white girl, with rich parents, goes missing.
It's a big deal when a woman gets set on fire at work, or when we apprehend suspected terrorist before they strike. This is only because is makes for good mind numbing television. It pulls us in like a tractor beam and glues us to the recliner.
But honestly, how much do these acts of terrorism even affect our every day lives?
How much did the D.C. snipers affect anyone outside of the beltway? Did someone in Arizona need to hear about the case every time he turned on the television? No, in truth only the people in that area HAD to hear about it all the time, for their own safety. This makes me wonder though about things that kill every day in huge numbers. The "behind the scenes killers" as I like to call them.
Take obesity for instance. If you're in bad health, from years of eating at McDonalds, then you are at risk of several heath problems like heart attack and so forth. These things kill every day in huge numbers. In numbers that far outweigh the number of people that will ever be killed by terrorism, or set on fire at work, or in Aruba on vacation.
And then there's drunk driving. As I pointed out in The Appalachian Newspaper a while back, drunk driving kills approximately 50 citizens a day. That's a plane crash, of 9-11 proportions, every week.
If we lost 50 a day as a result of terrorism this country would be going nuts. Are those dying not real people? Last time I checked they are. They're someone's son or daughter, and maybe even someone's mom or dad. That's reality ladies and gentlemen. If we invested the amount of $ spent on the war on terror to drunk driving I think we could at least make a dent. Maybe drop the number to 40, even just 30 deaths a day. Even that would be f---ing huge.
And because honesty is great, I'll admit that I've gotten drunk and drove before. Shucks, I've done it numerous times. I'm not proud of it, it's wrong. I'm not Jesus -- neither are you -- I do bad things. But, rather than ask for forgiveness and let that be it, let's actually take responsibility for those actions. And try to right some wrongs.
I mention this issue because it's one that an enormous percentage of us are guilty of, especially those of us that are college students. Therefore it's an issue we can all work to make changes in, to save lives.
Terrorism isn't like that. I can't recall ever committing an act of terrorism -- doubt you can -- and thus I find it absurd it's the main issue every time we turn on CNN.
Let's face it, terrorism is sexier then heart attacks, and it's hard to get good footage of car crashes caused by drinking and driving in suburban USA. Maybe it's time to blame the media for shoving this war down our throats, and ourselves for buying this crap. If we really wanted to save lives there are better ways to do it.
You're not going to turn on the television and see the "behind the scenes killer" of health deterioration -- by things like eating too many thick burgers -- on the screen. For that you'll have to look in the mirror.
[/QUOTE]
Who?Michael Cooper Jr.
He's screwed.
But he has a point. The US continues to exploit other countries resources to stay militarily powerful. People are going to get angry and do something about it.
3,000 died on 9/11.
60,000 Iraqis and 3,000 US soldiers died in response?
Iraqi civilians were less likely to die to Saddam's persecution than in this current war.
This is based on what?
It is estimated that approximately 200,000 Iraqi civilians have been made to "disappear" by Saddam's secret police.
More than 700,000 people (on both sides of the border and in and out of the military) perished during the Iran/Iraq war.
Combine that with the fact that the majority of civilian deaths now occurring are at the hands of insurgents and al Qaeda -- and you can still attribute them to Saddam Hussein or, at the very least, terrorism.
I have made a post similar to this article many times.
In the eyes of 3rd world countries, terrorism is just a tactic. They fly no flag, they have no army. And even if they did, it would be sheep to the slaughter against the US.
More over, there isnt even a coalition of forces in the world put together that would stand a chance against the full might of the American war machine. All of Europe could ally with Russia and China.
Outside of nuclear arms, it would be , it would cost millions of lives, but America would come out on top.
Our geography is one of, if not the most important assets we have. "From sea to shining sea" isnt just a song lyric, its a military coup. China only has access to the sea on one side. Europe has one option of landing troops on our shores, the Atlantic. America has an unequalled Navy that can reach any enemy from any side. Worst case scenario, the US could "turtle" and cost the world so much pain and death that the counter-attack would be devestation never before seen in the annals of history.
Nevermind the air superiority.
My point is, if a group or country has a military problem with the US, they have no recourse. They never will. But they feel they must do something. Terrorism wasnt born in that, but it certainly flourishes under it.
China, Russia and Europe should be able to beat the USA if they were to team up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
