I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
So the fact that we've created even more terrorism is "a good thing". But Friedman, and many others, just don't see it that way; they seem to think there's a finite number of terroists in the world and if we just attract them somewhere and shoot them (assuming we can) that'll be it -- no more terrorists.
Do these guys even have a glimmer of a clue? Do they really think there are only so many terrorists in the world and that they don't attract others to their cause? Don't they realise that events like the one we engineered in Iraq are precisely the recruiting tool terrorist organizations use to gather new members?
I got your "Big One" right here, Tommy boy.
I got sick about 1/3 through tom friedman's column. the man may as well be one of those Fox News morons that he thinks he lambasting - he can no longer distinguish between his delusional assumptions about reality and reality itself.
"We may fail because to win The Big One, we need an American public, and allies, ready to pay any price and bear any burden, but we have a president unable or unwilling to summon either."
I don't think that's true at all. It seems to me Bush is continually asking the American people to pay the price only, when we do, he just gives all that money to his corporate cronies leaving the American people, the Iraqi's, our military, and everyone else baring the unbelievable burden of his inability to show the slightest sign of compassion or insight.
Greedy bastards!
When was the last time Bush made a sacrafice for anything in his life?
We may fail because to win The Big One, we need an American public, and allies, ready to pay any price and bear any burden, but we have a president unable or unwilling to summon either.
HELLO! Where did people like Friedman come from? "Ready to pay the price and bear any burden"?
For the right reasons, yes. Not for this. This isn't a cause for which every American should be willing to pay the price or bear the burden.
Tom Friedman is out of control. He needs help.
Very nice, Atrios, especially for a first shot at this form.
Friedman's column was sensible up until the last sentence. Any price and any burden? Ugh.
Bird dog, you're not so bad after all.
Just had dinner, thanx 'Trios...
65.5 on the bike in the NE sun with my buddy...
We watched Moore's BFC last eve, and it was the centre of topic today, quite often, I must say...
So then I peek in and see the pedophile was whacked in Boston (http://tinyurl.com/kzab), and Thomas Friedman should be too... (With a ruler, across his ass, till he promises not to write what he is incapable of understanding...)
This Blog, and similar efforts like it will supplant mainstream media one day...
Nite-
When does the "you or your child must serve" rule kick in?
This will bring some honesty to the policy.
So then I peek in and see the pedophile was whacked in Boston
Yeah.
Can someone give me a clue as to what planet this is ocurring on?
They know this war is about Western powers, helped by the U.N.
um, interesting interpretation. In the original, unrevised history, I could have sworn the Western powers and the UN were like, pretty much unanimously against it.
A Pulitzer?
Tom Friedman, August 24, 2003:
... this war is about Western powers, helped by the U.N., coming into the heart of their world to promote more decent, open, tolerant, women-friendly, pluralistic governments by starting with Iraq ...
Tom Friedman, June 4, 2003:
The "real reason" for this war, which was never stated, was that after 9/11 America needed to hit someone in the Arab-Muslim world.
Who is it who doesn't "believe their own propaganda," Mr. Friedman?
As I said in a post I just put up on this column, the war's goal wasn't to project American ideas into the Middle East -- it was to project American power there. And that's what's drawing the fierce reaction.
but you don't understand--- THIS IS THE BIG ONE!!!!!!!!!
Tom F#cking Friedman lives in a parallel universe where common sense has been replaced with Bushista demagoguery and propaganda.
The first time he lost me in his article is when he says:
"They know this is not a war for oil."
LOL. Given the priority the Bush administration gave to securing oil fields and energy resources, while the rest of Iraq was looted, I'm surprised there are people out there like Tom Friedmoron who actually believe this wasn't about OIL!
Also:
"They know this war is about Western powers, helped by the U.N., coming into the heart of their world to promote more decent, open, tolerant, women-friendly, pluralistic governments by starting with Iraq"
As they pointed above, that's bullcrap. The UN and Western powers (except US and UK) opposed this war.
The hubris of this guy is worrisome.
I see it two ways, either Tom Friedman has become the ultimate Mr. Myopia Utopia (he really really really believes this crap no matter all the evidence to the contrary) or else he is the ultimate "The Irrepressible Me" (meaning this is all about his reputation: he has wagered his credibility on a faulty view of the middle east that he will take us all down with him to give himself a chance of being right.
Either way, it's pretty disgusting. Frankly, I think Friedman and the Rummy crowd are the biggest Utopians we've had in a long time. They are living in a dream world and refuse to wake up.
God, why didn't you make stupidity a terminal disease? Why God?
Friedman writes ...Western powers helped by the U.N.
Like a falling down drunk, he can't give up the bottle.
Friedman continues to confuse his delusional utopian reason for the war with those of Bushco. Come on Mr. Friedman, why are you unable or unwilling to admit that Bushco's reasons for this War of Choice against Iraq are vastly different than your own. Once you can do that Tom, you won't continue to write editorials ending with ridiculous thoughts such as...we need an American public, and allies, ready to pay any price and bear any burden, but we have a president unable or unwilling to summon either. Did you ever wonder why the president isn't doing this Mr. Friedman? Can you say hegemony and PNAC global world dominance Mr. Friedman?
God, why didn't you make stupidity a terminal disease? Why God?
Whether it got that way naturally or by the intervention of some deity, stupidity was a terminal disease for most of the world's history. Human beings, however, have become more enlightened since then, and we now take care of the weaker members of our socieity, including the mentally deficient. Many societies do a better job of it than we do here, of course, and many do a worse job of it. But it's clear that there must be some sense of decency left in a society that takes such good care of its morons that it gives them prominent positions at the most prominent newspaper in on the planet.
Atrios' summary is apt, but I think the reactons here are a bit over the top.
QrazyQat: reread the article, there's no evidence in that Friedman believes there's a finite number of terrorists, OR that we are not creating more. His point, argue to that point, is that this is the big war, and it is a process that will eventually lead to less terrorists.
What if that's true? He may be channeling Morpheus:
Morpheus: This is a war and we are soldiers. Death can come for us at any time, in any place.(Scene switch to the Vigilant under attack). Now consider the alternative. What if I am right? What if the prophecy is true? What if tomorrow the war could be over? Isn't that worth fighting for? Isn't that worth dieing for?
btw, that movie sucked.
pie, I don't understand. Ignore the busco fuck ups. If this isn't about oil, if going forward this is for the liberation of a people, the elimination of hatred and misunderstanding, and a better dialogue and conversation with the arab and islamic world, if it could be about this, as Friedman believes, then why isn't this a war in which Americans shouldn't be prepared to pay any price and bear any burden?
mario, many western powers and the un were against the war. I can't think of a single western power that is for continued chaos in Iraq. I suspect every western power would like to see a democratic nation of some sort form from Iraq.
couldntresist: I think you've asked the real question and formed the real complaint against Friedman. If as he says himself, the president is unable or unwilling to pay the price and bear the burden, how can he suggest the people do so? How can he think there is a good outcome to that?
okay, you can flame me now.
In the leadup to the war I heard Friedman say more than once "in my version of the war". He was living in his own little dream world then and he continues to do so now. He is not recognizing reality as it exists on the ground nor the fact that BushCo do not share his motives. The NYTimes should reserve its valuable column space for hard foreign affairs analysis and not for the wishful musings of a dreamy eyed utopian.
What a complete fucking moron!
This guy claims to know the hearts and minds of the iraqi people when he says..
"They know it's not a war for oil.."
?
That's pretty strong.
MYOB'
Friedman is a moron of the worst sort - one with the occasional intelligent idea, and the world's biggest bully pulpit (the NYT) to spew rational-sounding nonsense from.
I think that when Iraqis see the UN compund completely destroyed, because it is unguarded, while the oil fields are totally secured they are probably correct in assuming that it was about oil.
jerry:
What if that's true? He may be channeling Morpheus:
Morpheus: This is a war and we are soldiers. Death can come for us at any time, in any place.(Scene switch to the Vigilant under attack). Now consider the alternative. What if I am right? What if the prophecy is true? What if tomorrow the war could be over? Isn't that worth fighting for? Isn't that worth dieing for?
This is basically a variation of Pascal's Wager, which is debunked here: http://www.geocities.com/anathei...1/
subpascal.htm
Frankly I'm amazed anyone -- especially a smart guy like Pascal -- ever bought this argument in the first place. Isn't it obvious you could apply the same "but what if I'm right?" reasoning to *any* hypothesis? Hey, I'm convinced we'll have world peace tomorrow if I can sleep with your wife tonight! If I'm wrong, no harm done... but what if I'm right? We'd better play it safe, right?
(BTW, if any of you actually buy this argument, please post a URL with contact information and a photo of your wife. Must be disease-free, not looking for commitment, and in the NYC area.)
btw, that movie sucked.
No argument there.
Snoozer, I love your ending.
His point, argue to that point, is that this is the big war, and it is a process that will eventually lead to less terrorists.
But that could only happen if there were indeed a finite number of terrorists, not a real-world situation where new terrorists are added every day, and double when there's an event like the Iraq invasion done in the way Bush did it. Sure, you kill a bunch, but it's a recruitment campaign at the same time. Does he think we're going to be killing every terrorist and all the members of their families, including, say, infant brothers. If he doesn't, thsoe people grow up resenting the people who killed their older siblings, fathers, uncles, etc.
So I think my critique was sound.
sorry, the allies told Bush NOT to do it . sso why should they pay ANYTHING to clean up after Bush's TURDS?
Pansypoo asks: sorry, the allies told Bush NOT to do it . sso why should they pay ANYTHING to clean up after Bush's TURDS?
You know the old saying, if you break it, you bought it? Even if you were among those who said: hey dummy, be careful, the fact is that the US Army marched into Iraq and destroyed the government. Now it's ours. Not George Bush's. Ours.
It might be nice to turn back the clock and stop the war from happening, but we don't get to do that. There is no government in Iraq but us. Should we just pull out and see what happens? And that would be the moral, liberal thing to do? Shit. If that's the case maybe I should turn in my membership card.
A very good thing would be for the administration to put a hearty helping of crow on their plates and cede some authority over administering Iraq in exchange for international help. This way we might start moving toward an Iraq that has things like electricity, water, and fewer bombings.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
