Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan
It takes alot of guts to call a respected author "abstract, idealist poop".
Reread what i wrote, i wasnt refering to her specifically in that statement, but how the AVERAGE person will look at a Nobel prize winner
It really didn't help your argument.
A victim is a victim, it doesn't matter that one died more horifically.
Um, yes it does, and the reason they died. That is why i call it ignorance.
She didn't downplay it at all, she put it in the context of tragedy. Sept. 11th was a tragedy for humanity, so was the IRA, so were the thousands that died in New Orleans, or the hundreds that died in London and Madrid. Yet, in light of this truism, we focus all energy into Sept. 11th.
she is thinking at a global level, i cant argue with that point, but those were all very different things for different reasons at different times with different results, other then death.
The IRA was an English problem that there were dealing with.
New orleans was a corrupt local govt, a big storm with results that had been predicted for at least ten years, yet they didnt act accordingly (locally)
The deaths in london...most closely related yet not nearly the same capacity as 9-11.
Madrid was a close but way different politically undertones and it was succesful in every manner
WE focus on 9-11 becasue of many factors, big attack, terrorist driven, fast and somewhat unexpected. and mainly its ours. and we will take more atcion because it is ours, we feel stringer about it for many reasons becasue it is ours.
When did Pres. Bush say, besides the day after London, that we should attack terrorism in response to The Tube Bombings?
we already were conducting operations and we do not generally take the lead in anti terror operations in ally countries when they are doing the same. it was theres to deal with just like we were dealing with ours and we would help them
She states, correctly, that we cannot be anymore deterred by Sept. 11th than Britiain was during the troubles, et. cetera.
I agree with this portion
In that frame, she is more patriotic than most Americans: she doesn't want terroristic acts to scare us, or to make us act irrationally, or so on.
I agree here in a sense, but additionally, but we need to take action instead of being deterred from living and taking the beating
We can remember without knee-jerk reactions.
we can also take action immediately without it being kneejerk
We can defend without ever-growing war
Wrong, war came to us and will keep coming
, we can prevent through better means than taking shampoo off airlines (when chemical plants are open target, and when LNG is still shipped into Boston Harbor).
I wont get started on Airport security measures, they are a farce, wher ethere is a will there is a way
Lessing was not commenting on Sept. 11, as much as our reaction to it. Not only does it not protect us, it made us more vulnerable.
Some of our reaction was good and appropriate whgile protecting us more, other stuff wasnt. i know a thing or two about terror and anti terror, with this in mind she comes across as ignorant
But we felt better, eh?
I didnt
|