.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Is the US losing the war on terror?

I think that may be a question on the political shows tomorrow.
The United States is losing its fight against terrorism and the Iraq war is the biggest reason why, more than eight of ten American terrorism and national security experts concluded in a poll released Wednesday.

posted by mikevotes at 9:51 PM

9 Comments:

  • Mike,
    I am not surprized one iota that we are losing. We alienate everyone on the face of the earth, we are the bully and small countries are tired of it..if they band together they can screw us up pretty badly..between our need for fossil fuel and loans to stay afloat..we are periously close to insolvancy..I swear..we are out on a limb and the guys on the tree have a very sharp saw.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 12:41 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger QuakerDave, at 8:42 AM  

  • The War of Empire against Iraq has done nothing but breed more terrorism. Rather than snuffing out those responsible for Sept. 11 when we had the chance, our government launched a war based on pretense and lies, fueled by feelings of anger and revenge, against a country that had nothing to do with those attacks. Our national ignorance of our own history, and our refusal to acknowledge that our own foreign policy had a hand in starting this whole mess in the first place, both just make matters worse. We remain fat, dumb, and happy while having to make no sacrifices to maintain the status quo of big cars, big houses, and big profits for big corporations, while thousands die, in our name and because of our failed policies.

    We are going to get hit again. And it's going to be worse. And this bunch has done nothing BUT make sure it will happen, while they do nothing to prevent it.

    And whose fault is it, really?

    By Blogger QuakerDave, at 8:43 AM  

  • Dusty, That's the overarching theme of this blog, that the US is sliding from its hyper hegemon position to become one nation among many. It is the failure to recognize this reality, or maybe more precisely, the effort to stem the inevitable movement in this direction which is my main criticism of this administration.

    The concept of a "New American Century" was flawed in its conception. If you read the propaganda from the now closing group, the fact that such a "New American Century" was only attainable and sustainable through force belied the general concept. Fighters and tanks cannot hold back the forces that are making this shift happen.

    At this critical point, we need extremely shrewd government. Instead we've got these guys who through self admission prefer concept over reality.

    Also, the revolt, or maybe better said growing resistance, of small nations to the Imperial power is just a repeated stage in the downfall of empires. The middle east is the US's India.


    Dave, I think it was Animal House, "Fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son."

    I think you're right. And in my more cynical moments think that these costs are considered by the administration as "the costs of doing business."

    As for wars of empire, I think that's a big point as I mentioned above.

    Mike

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 8:59 AM  

  • i don't usually get jet lag either

    INTERNATIONAL STRANGENESS DAY

    By Blogger michael the tubthumper, at 9:51 AM  

  • Given the strange dynamic between Karsai, the Taliban and Packistan I'd say the US really had an uphill battle to even understand this war on terror, never mind winning it.
    The alliance, and fractures among these people don't work in the same way as we might be used to.
    Anyone of these 'allies' or enemies can switch in a blink - then switch back.
    The bottom line is; why should they have any loyalty to the west when they are not loyal to each other?

    By Blogger Cartledge, at 10:36 AM  

  • I would modify your question a bit.

    Why should they have loyalty (fear) of the US when it has proved in Iraq that it is no longer effective?

    What's the hammer behind the negotiations for assistance when the US can't even control a country where it has 135,000 troops shooting at anything they want?

    What could the US really do to Pakistan when it can't even put down Afghani rebels?

    Mike

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 12:58 PM  

  • Just another bunch of wrong-headed experts, like the experts who warn about burning fossil fuels. Bush'll just sic Cheney and Rove on 'em.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:16 PM  

  • Yep. Maybe outside groups though more like the Swiftboaters. That's far more effective because then Bush doesn't have to answer any questions.

    Mike

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 1:49 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home