wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Ecce,

What other American military operations do you contend that Friedman controls? Let's get a full list from you.

Ecce,

You are really obsessed with this whole Iraq thing. One minute we are talking about India, but all you can say is Iraq. I know they both start with the letter I, but really bro. Israel also starts with the letter I.

Inida
Israel
Iraq

I, I, I. Spooky.

Peter?

Where on earth did I say that Friedman controls the military? Please don't put words in my mouth.

It's pretty clear from reading the posts that the person who most aggressively brings up Israel is you. After you inappropriately bring it into a conversation about Mumbai, other people have to point out that, no, the attacks in Mumbai did not have anything to do with Israel. In the fact that they are responding to your hysteria, yes, they are mentioning Israel. This thread is a great example of that.

And unfortunately, when you bring Friedman into the conversation, you inevitably bring up his absurdist stance on Iraq, which you have expressed in previous posts as sharing.

And no, as an American citizen, I am not the only person obsessed with our fiasco in Iraq. I share this "obsession", or rather, heightened concern, with hundreds of thousands of other Americans whose lives have been affected by the Iraq War. As you may have noticed, the only Dem who made it through the primary was the Dem who was, by virtue of his not being in the senate, unable to vote to authorize the invasion. As you may have also noticed, an experienced veteran such as McCain lost the election - in part due to his vociferous support for the invasion of Iraq.

Ecce,

Do you really believe that America's military is controlled by Thomas Friedman, a staff writer at the New York Times?

Friedman, also advised the Palestinians to reject terror and accept peace and a future for their children, but that didn't work did it?

Oh Ecce, even Friedman isn't that powerful!

Ecce,

Obviously, I disagree. It is about Israel, all the time. Turn on CNN or any random NPR new show and listed to the comments being made, read the other posts here at WNYC, such as the wall of the Brian Leher show. Israel was, and always is, quickly brought into the conversation. The same way that you are clearly obsessed with Iraq and the American military, others like you are obsessed with Israel.

Islamic terror is widely accepted throughout the world because, as many Muslims and Liberals like to say, "Israel is wrong too." The world is obsessed with comparing Islamic terror thugs to Israel. You can blame that on me, but that is just ignores the world outside of this wall.

My views on Iraq having nothing to do with this conversation. That is where you lose all credibility. Why don't you just say, "You don't like coffee with milk, so you must be wrong." Or, you could say, “Oh, you are a Mac user, so your views on terror don’t count.” Or, the path you have chosen, “You must obsess about Iraq like me or I will accuse you of ignoring me and of being irrelevant.” Ecce, you should change your screen name to “The Angler.”

The only person obsessed with Iraq is you. You may want to try having a conversation that doesn’t rest on your “Iraq is the only thing that matters” approach to living. Your obsessions don’t work with me.

Peter,

let me be more specific.

What I never said, and would never say, is that terror is legitimate. And I am liberal and a Democrat. And I don't know any liberals or democrats who believe terror is legitimate. So I have no idea why you are writing that.

And the only person who brought up Israel... is you. This is not about Israel. If the Mumbai attacks are about anything, they are about Kashmir.

So I think the problem is NOT that liberals bring Israel into every discussion, but that you yourself are obsessed with bringing Israel into every discussion.

Weak military? Oh yes. Depleted personnel = weak military. And China and Russia will soon be well past us in terms of military technology. All the while, on Friedman's advice, we've been squandering our resources, our time, our personnel, our equipment in Iraq. Where Al Quaeda didn't live, and where there were no WMD's.

And Friedman, (and yourself, to read the posts), are both incapable of acknowledging that it's been a huge fiasco. At that point, your credibility hits a wall. Actually, your credibility hit a big bump when you immediately brought Israel into a conversation about Mumbai. Not everything is about Israel, and most Israelis and American Jews are, understandably, quite relieved about that.

Ecce,

I did respond to your post, I just don't agree with the assumption you make that a weak military (if that is what we have) is the problem. I don't know if you are angling here or really think that disagreeing with someone is the same as not responding. If you are falling into rhetoric that is a shame.

I know tons of liberals and Democrats who support terrorism. For example, a Palestinian kills a Jewish child in a pizzeria, and liberals line up to say, “That is not terrorism, that is a soldier fighting a war.” Liberals debate militant versus terrorist all the time. A suicide bomber kills a family at dinner and the Washington Post, Slate.com, the New York Times and others go to great pains to explain why this is a militant act and not a terrorist act.

Terrorism exits because it is tolerated by many.

uh, I never said that. I sense that you aren't responding to my post. You're responding to something that wasn't even written here.
Again, can we address the question of how our sloppy response to 9.11 has depleted/exhausted our military personnel?
I don't know any liberals or Dems who think terror is "legitimate."
Do you?

Ecce,

By the way, I support your appreciation of havng strong intelligence, but even the best intelligence can't stop the deterimined and the people who tolerate and aid the determined. Many folks would agree that Israel has the best intelligence agency in the world (especially relative to its size), but even the best umbrella can't stop all the rain.

Ecce,

I am not sure there is a military solution to terror, but there should certainly be a military response to terror.

The truth is, many Muslims support terror or tolerate terror. Many "liberals" or Democrats (and I don't say that in a nasty tone, just a fact as I see it) feel that terror is legitimate. As an American Jew (and liberal Jew in many ways) I am always astonished how acts of Islamic terror are often followed by the statement, “Well Israel does it.” Israel doesn’t commit acts of terror, but unfortunately, many Westerners seem to suffer from white guilt, liberal guilt, imperial guilt, etc. Terrorism can’t be solved by a few strong militaries, but it can be solved by people standing up and saying, “targeting civilian is always wrong.”

Peter, we've exhausted our military forces in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting terror where, in large part, it wasn't, while ignoring safety for, say, our ports, in much the same way India turned a blind eye to warnings.

It's largely about intelligence.

So, no, I don't think the issue is that there is no outcry, as you suggest. (I well remember the years after 9.11 in New York.)

The issue is that the people in charge didn't know strategy from a hole in the ground.

But I agree with your first post, Friedman's point is valid. Sadly, Friedman himself was totally off the mark in wanting to find Al Quaeda in Iraq... and saying we should invade "because we could" is moronic.

The upshot is that we now have a wasted, depleted, exhausted military. Any solutions for that, Peter?

Lance,

You ask, "When will this end?"

When folks stop blaming Israel and Jews for Islamic terror and start holding Islamic terrorists and the countries that harbor and train them as responsible, Islamic terror will end. The bottom line is that Islamic terror continues to occur because it can – because the outcry against it isn’t loud or strong enough.

There are reports that the 10 known terrorists from last week's attack are suspected by investigators to be only part of the cells that were trained and sent to India. There may be another ?13 men and 8 women, and 4 sites in New Delhi could be the next targets.

When will this end?

Thomas Friedman wrote a pretty interesting article on this topic this morning at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/opinion/03friedman.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1228312844-kvjHw6sYAGnu8BgWuuB7Nw

Friedman asks, “When Pakistanis and other Muslims are willing to take to the streets, even suffer death, to protest an insulting cartoon published in Denmark, is it fair to ask: Who in the Muslim world, who in Pakistan, is ready to take to the streets to protest the mass murders of real people, not cartoon characters, right next door in Mumbai?”

Not a bad question.