Sunday, May 21, 2006

Presented without comment

Here’s an excerpt from an interview with historian Morris Berman that appeared in today’s Boston Globe:

Q: Isn't the war on terror protecting the American way of life?

A: The real question is where 9/11 came out of. Americans have trouble getting their minds around the fact that what happened on 9/11 was reactive rather than offensive. We had been doing certain things to the Arab and Islamic worlds for decades, and finally they decided they weren't going to take it anymore. That does not mean that it's OK for 3,000 citizens to get slaughtered, of course not. But are we interested in how many of their citizens we slaughter? How could they do this when we're so good? George Bush said. Well, examine the possibility, as Jimmy Carter suggested, that we're not all that good.
Read the whole thing.


Anonymous said...

I have absolutely no desire to 'read the whole thing' from someone so dense as to think this way.

Surely if 'good' is a relative term, as it must be, then any honest comparison would show that the US is a great deal more 'good' than our Islamofascist opponents.


Dan M said...

Yea, "why" do I want to read this bilge?

What am I suupposed to get out of it? What new insight does this anti-American have, that we haven't heard before, and haven't heard anytime, over just about any topic, since the mid-Sixties?

We have a limited amount of time every day, so why would you suggest that we expend some precious, limited time, on this lefty?

Anonymous said...

Well Dan M. aren't you the one that thinks the Democrats should be in power the one that thinks Rumsfeld should be fired, the one that thinks Karl Rove was stupid, the one that thinks Republicans should be sent a message? Aren't you one of Polipundit's thread thugs that thinks they have all the answers? Aren't you criticizing a war time President every chance you get?

This is what you're in for people that think like this historian.

You think you're a genius and have all the answers and in the end you are impragmatic.

You're one of those chicken little Republicans that think the sky is falling and that the last thing Michelle Malkin whispers in your ear is the greatest emergency on Earth and so you make it come true, and you have been played for and been proven to be a fool.

Anonymous said...

PS Dan M you have limited time?

You were on Polipundit 24/7.

Brian said...

Gutless liberals. Want to blame America rather than attack the real problem. If we wereisolated from the world the liberals would say our isolationism caused 9/11.

Anonymous said...

Which would still make more sense than the "Saddam caused 9/11" story that the right lapped up.

Anonymous said...

Which would still make more sense than the "Saddam caused 9/11" story that the right lapped up.

Look, tool, the right didn't "lap up" that story. The fact that you repeat that canard just means either you believe your own mendacious political fellow-travelers, which shows you to be incapable of critical thought, or a liar yourself.

Anonymous said...

If 9/11 was reactive, why aren't liberals enraged at Clinton?

Anonymous said...

...the "Saddam caused 9/11" story that the right lapped up.

WTF? That's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. If we thought Saddam had been responsible for 9/11, we would have gone into Iraq first.


Anonymous said...

Heh, heh! Well rebutted! Now tell us how Democrats are angry fanatics.

Anonymous said...

You are missing the point: nobody on the right ever accused Saddam of being behind 9/11. If we believed he was behind 9/11, he would have been taken out before the Taliban was. How are we supposed to prove to you that we don't believe something?

During the year-long "rush to war", the point was made very clearly that the strike on Iraq was intended to be preemptive.

Anonymous said...

Take that namby-pamby, wink-wink, Bush-and-Rice-and-Cheney-never-quite-said-that spin, and share it with the other 29% who still believe what the White House wants them to. You live by the inference, you die (politically) by the inference.