never forget

There doesn’t seem to be much on TV this year about 9-11.  I suppose 14 years does make a difference.  However, I want to see live footage.  I want to feel the rage and the resolve I felt that day.  I fear that if I don’t use this day, 9-11-15 and every 9-11 moving forward, I will grow complacent and sloppy.

I don’t want to get over it.  I need my refresher course of outrage dished out yearly.  I will never forget watching TV that night, after being sequestered away from TV that entire day, and thinking out loud, of all the gall!  the nerve! the effrontery!   Then a slow anger came over me that I don’t want to dissipate over the years.

9-11-2001 changed how Americans do business forever.  Our travel will never be the same.  Just getting a driver’s license is different.  Our entire way of proving who we are will never go back to the way we did things on 9-10-2001.  We are a nation now on our guard against terrorism in everything we do.  I so resent that disturbance.

The day before yesterday our house mate came in and told me he saw a woman who was wearing a full burqa strolling her baby down the street.  I didn’t see her but I was outraged over his sighting.  I don’t like the lack of security–I want to know who is walking up and down my street.  I don’t like people hiding their faces.  I see no difference in wearing a burqa and wearing a stocking mask.  If I saw someone walking down the street in a stocking mask, I would call the police.  Why should my risk assessment be different in this case?

Please share your feelings.  Mine aren’t particularly rational but they don’t have to be.  9-11 wasn’t a rational day and no, those of us alive on 9-11-2001 will never forget!

73 Thoughts to “Never Forget: 9-11-2001”

  1. Scout

    As I walk my dogs early this morning, the weather appears to be one of those crystalline, cool precursor fall days that I used to be able to enjoy strictly on their own internal terms, without reference to any external event. Now, however, like Proust’s madeleine, but on a more dramatic scale, this kind of loveliness unleashes a torrent of memories about the unfolding of this day in 2001. Between this early hour of the day and the next five hours in 2001, events unrolled in sequential mayhem and set a tone that still affects us every day. I lost a friend and colleague at the World Trade Center, and a colleague in DC lost his wife on the Pentagon plane. I had seen them at dinner five days before. More to the current situation though, those events started a spiral of decisions, the initial ones sound, the later ones completely contrary to the interests of the United States, about how this country should conduct itself in a world populated with technically adept, organized, homicidal, medieval fanatics who are excited about killing us at home or abroad.

    1. Thank you for a very personal share, Scout. I get creeped out every time it is a beautiful crisp fall day, regardless of season. I instantly think of that 9-11.

      You are right. Today is one of those beautiful fall days.

      The film footage is on TV now so I am getting furious. I need to be furious.

  2. Jackson Bills

    and on the eve of 9/11 Senate Democrats voted to lift sanctions on the worlds greatest state sponsor of terror. That’s today’s Democrat party for you…

    1. That nuclear agreement includes a lot more than lifting sanctions. Is the world safer with a verifiable agreement or having nothing in place. Look at the big picture and what the young people of that country want. Furthermore, we are not alone.

      Did you have a better idea about keeping nukes out of the hands of the Iranians?

      I think realistic Democrats probably realize that War and bombing for a decade might not be the best way. It destabilizes the entire region.

  3. Cargosquid

    Since the agreement will not allow outside inspectors and everything relies on the Iranians being honest…I believe having nothing in place is safer. It means that sanctions are in place and they are short $150 billion.

  4. Cargosquid

    This is something I’ve written elsewhere. My heart goes out to all that lost people.

    This will be my only post about 9/11.

    It has been 14 years. This nation is at war. Still.

    Our nation refuses to accept this.

    Our nation refuses to identify an enemy. Osama Bin Laden is dead.
    We are still in Afghanistan….for no observable purpose.
    Al Qaeda has metastasized throughout the globe.
    Islamist jihadists advance their causes.

    We are back in Iraq. For what purpose? We will not fight ISIS. We condemn their enemy, Assad. We supply and support HIS enemies….which then join ISIS. We see the barbarians. Yet, our response is lukewarm.

    We are kowtowing to Iran. Our government is giving them 150 billion dollars. With the passage of the Iran deal, with votes by our representatives who have taken Iranian money, we enable more terrorism. They are our enemy. They declared war on the US in 1979, Nothing has changed.

    Our nation spends its time worrying about ludicrous things while there are people trying to kill us.
    Our nation spends its time worrying about celebrities while crooks, charlatans, and idiots seek our highest office.
    Our nation is torn by strife, exacerbated by agenda driven media that fans the flames for ratings.
    Our nation is served by lying politicians whose only goal is self-aggrandizement and power.
    Our nation sends our troops off to fight…… yet gives them no targets.
    Our nation neither destroys whom we fight nor stays out of the conflict.

    Our nation, today, pays its respects to its dead. It is a sentimental thing to do.
    But, unless we use this as a motivator to combat evil, all we are doing is wallowing in sorrow. Shall we mourn our dead forever, with public keening?

    We’ve all seen the footage of the towers being hit.
    Do you need to see it to rouse your rage? Your determination? Your sorrow?

    Our nation wallows in sentimentality, yet refuses to teach our children history. Our nation seeks to whitewash history…..hide it under a drapery of political correct thinking.

    We say “Never Again.”

    Nice sentiment.

    I don’t believe you.

    1. Because if I didn’t say it, I would either forget to be on my guard or I would become horribly cynical like you. Neither are desirable in my eyes.

      Yes, I need to get really furious for one day. Then I can go about my business the rest of the year, with my memory banks refreshed but not on super charge.

      I don’t want to be fueled by perpetual rage. You apparently enjoy it. I don’t.

  5. Cargosquid

    I’m not advocating rage.

    I’m pointing out that we hold a sentimental yearly reminder, then we go about our business. Meanwhile, we ignore the fact that we DO have an enemy. Our government and a large proportion of our society rejects this idea. I list the problems.

    That is why I don’t believe the statement “Never Again.” Because we are doing nothing to prevent it.

    1. I don’t think I was being sentimental. I was openly discussing my feelings about reinvigorating rage.

      Many terrorist attacks have been thwarted. To say otherwise ignores facts.

    2. I feel like you live rage and always have a list of mental enemies. To me, that just uses up too much energy when there is only so much to go around.

  6. Pat.Herve

    The agreement DOES allow inspectors – take the Natanz facility, it will have 24 hour video monitoring and daily access by inspectors. How is that not allowing inspections?

  7. Lyssa

    I thought that’s what terrorism is – perpetual rage.

    People go to church every Sunday and come out swinging – same thing. But if anger, a narrow mind and resentment is your worldview, everyone looks the same. When it’s not your worldview, it looks and feels very different.

  8. blue


    Please go to: and then hit the highlighted areas for additional information.

    1. This is all political–part of the we hate Obama program.

      who is Kevin McCarthy? Why should I listen to him?

  9. Pat.Herve

    blue :
    Please go to: and then hit the highlighted areas for additional information.

    I have not gone to the link – does he address that there IS 24/7 video monitoring of the Natanz (and other) facilities? Or does he just not address the parts of the agreement that is good?

  10. Pat.Herve

    Unfortunately 9/11 happened. We took our eyes off the ball. The Clinton Administration warned the incoming Bush Administration about UBL, but they were more focused on Saddam.

    We did not go to war – our soldiers did! We got a tax break, a spending refund, a housing bubble and no changes to our lives. Our soldiers on the other hand went to War against Saddam who had very little to no involvement with 9/11. Our soldiers paid the price with their lives and being maimed (physical and mentally). We continued about our daily routine with no notice other than the complaining about TSA, Phone meta data (NSA) and the Patriot Act.

    I think we need a constitutional amendment that when Congress declares war, it must also fund the war that it has just endorsed – that will at least give financial pain to those that do not serve.

    Where are all the squawkers about the AUMF?? They raised hell about it last year – but no word on the new AUMF – that is a disgrace.

  11. Kelly_3406

    The lesson of 9/11 should be to remain vigilant and avoid repeating mistakes of the past. So how are we doing? We are signing a nuclear deal with Iran that is very similar to that signed with N. Korea with various economic enticements, IAEA inspections, and which proved to be spectacularly unsuccessful. And then we go out of our way to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees without much screening, even though ISIS has vowed to embed terrorists among them. How quickly we forget that the 9/11 hijackers entered the country without proper screening.

    It appears that we have learned nothing.

    1. From everything I have read, the Syrian refugees will be vetted and that is why it will take so long to bring them here.

  12. I am watching 9-11: 102 Minutes that Changed America. It is graphic and a montage of different people’s film footage. It is horrify, just horrifying.

    That dust and those chemicals and pollutants. Who would have ever said there was no danger from breathing them 4 days later? I am surprised anyone who lived through that day in NYC is still alive.

    Definitely getting my hate refueled. At some point, we must admit at least that 9-11 is a solemn day for the nation.

  13. Scout

    Kelly – what’s the basis of your statement that Syrian refugees will be admitted “without much screening.”?

  14. Cargosquid

    As for being sentimental….this piece is not directed at any particular group….. unless the shoe fits….then wear it. But we are just flailing along…doing nothing, except feeling sentimental.

    No one worried about Pearl Harbor until AFTER the war was over.

    1. Since I wrote the post without any lengthy quotes from an outside source, I assumed you were speaking of me or to me.

      Who else would you be talking to under that post?

      What do you mean, “No one worried about Pearl Harbor until AFTER the war was over.”

      Pearl Harbor was a continual battle cry. It was right up there with the Alamo.

  15. Cargosquid

    The Iranians have stated unequivocally that they will NOT allow inspectors into their bases.
    The Iranians, per the agreement, will be the ones providing test samples.

    As for 9/11….. What exactly was that warning? What was Bush supposed to do? Unlike Clinton who was HANDED Osama Bin Laden and rejected him, Bush’s warnings were vague.

    As for the authority, I don’t have any problem with Congress declaring war. Oh..look..they bent over backwards NOT to declare war, but gave the authority to commit war. I believed that Obama should have gone before Congress and asked for a continuation or rejection of the war powers. This way, Congress is forced to be held accountable.

    As for paying for it… was paid for. Just like every other program. Who paid for the $1 trillion “stimulus” package? That, by itself, was the cost of the Iraq theater.

    If you are going to criticize Bush, you had better criticize Clinton. HE started the ball rolling.

    1. Bush had very credible warnings in his morning briefings. He ignored them. On the other hand, what good does it do to look back now.

      Don’t let facts get in the way of the “I hate Democrats” rant.

  16. Scout

    It’s a little arbitrary to say that this started “right here” and at no other place. I would think that a good case that it started with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th Century and was accelerated by the carving out of Israel after the Second German War (historian A.L. Rouse’s term for WWII). No matter how supportive one is of the security of the Israeli state, it is an unavoidable reality that its external imposition on Britain’s Palestine Mandate is a fuel source that keeps the brushfires (that sometimes flare into mighty conflagrations) burning. In my lifetime, I think the soundest Mideast policies have tended to come from the Republican side – Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush I (although the Mossadegh fiasco of the Eisenhower years pretty much pre-ordained the snap-back reaction of the Ayatollahs 2+ decades later). All were able to maintain some degree of “honest broker” status between Israel and Arab states. To do that, all of those administrations occasionally had to engage in some serious chest-bumping with the Israeli government over this or that. The last two administrations, however, have been disastrous beyond words – Bush II for allowing itself to chase shadows with huge effusions of American blood, equipment, treasure. Obama for failing to deal productively with Syria, a situation that is so completely bad in terms of viable policy choices, that it appears virtually unsalvageable at this point.

    1. That’s probably a fair assessment, overall. I would give much of the blame to Great Britain after WWI.

  17. Cargosquid

    Apparently, my muse is forcing me to make one last 9/11 post, even though I told myself to do only one.

    America changed on 9/11.

    “Are you guys ready? Okay! Let’s roll!”

    In 108 minutes, the eyes of America were opened.
    In 108 minutes, aircraft took off and crashed into the Towers, the Pentagon, and …….a farmer’s field.

    Think about that.

    “Are you guys ready? Okay! Let’s roll!”

    In 108 minutes, the new weapon of war was made obsolete. It was made obsolete because brave men and women, informed of the other aircraft strikes, were able to decide on a path of action and act.

    108 minutes. That is all it took.

    Today, our nation has forgotten that free citizens took down the terrorist. Our nation has forgotten that we hold our fates in our own hands, even if all of the choices are bad.

    “Are you guys ready? Okay! Let’s roll!”

    Universally, search engines and Wikipedia describe the passengers of Flight 93 as victims.

    Are soldiers victims? Are fallen heroes….victims?

    Americans, realizing the danger, took matters into their own hands and ended the threat of hijackings.

    However, we have forgotten that we have the power. Our government does everything it can to make us dependent and powerless. It subjects us to indignities while accomplishing nothing. It infringes our rights, treating all of us as possible criminals.

    “Are you guys ready? Okay! Let’s roll!”

    America needs to regain that innate strength of character, dignity and sacrifice. America needs to regain that confidence. We need to decide what our fate should be. We have serious choices to make in the next 13 months. We choose who is flying the plane.

    “Are you guys ready? Okay! Let’s roll!”

    1. Those of Flight 93 were victims. Some of the victims fought back. They were still victims of an unspeakable crime.

      I don’t see Americans without strength of character, dignity and sacrifice. Many people flocked to recruitment centers to enlist, including my friends son who was killed in the middle east. I have always criticized the Bush administration for engaging in a war that required no sacrifice from the American people other than from military and their families.

      The passengers of Flight 93 didn’t really change their fate, they just changed the outcome of what that plane hit.

  18. Cargosquid

    I’m not a Carter fan.

    But I applaud his success with Camp David. He deserves respect just for that alone.

  19. Pat.Herve

    Cargosquid :
    The Iranians have stated unequivocally that they will NOT allow inspectors into their bases.
    The Iranians, per the agreement, will be the ones providing test samples.

    What country allows foreign countries unfettered access for samples to their Military Bases? Name One. What about Natanz – there is 24/7 monitoring (video, electronic and inspectors).

    As for 9/11….. What exactly was that warning? What was Bush supposed to do? Unlike Clinton who was HANDED Osama Bin Laden and rejected him, Bush’s warnings were vague.

    Bush took his eyes off of UBL – to watch Saddam. This is well documented. Yes, Clinton regrets not getting UBL, but the CIA would not certify the strike when he was there – I believe there were too many civilians present (and in a foreign sovereign nation too).

    As for the authority, I don’t have any problem with Congress declaring war. Oh..look..they bent over backwards NOT to declare war, but gave the authority to commit war. I believed that Obama should have gone before Congress and asked for a continuation or rejection of the war powers. This way, Congress is forced to be held accountable.
    As for paying for it… was paid for.

    It was borrowed. We got a tax cut. Our soldiers fought in two wars – and we enjoyed life over here. We did not give any pain for these wars. Where is the AUMF to fight ISIS – our Congress is failing us at every turn.

    Just like every other program. Who paid for the $1 trillion “stimulus” package? That, by itself, was the cost of the Iraq theater.

    The stimulus has nothing to add to this conversation. The cost of the Iraq War is much more than $1 Trillion.

    If you are going to criticize Bush, you had better criticize Clinton. HE started the ball rolling.

    The ball started rolling way before Clinton. It really got rolling after the CIA back Coup of Mosaddegh back in 1953. The US and UK meddling in Iran over oil (doing the dirty work of oil companies).

  20. Scout

    Fair point, Cargo, and I agree with you about that.

  21. Cargosquid

    Every country that makes an agreement to not develop nukes. The Iranians are supposed to be agreeing to the IAEA inspections.
    That video? Woopdedoo. They have MULTIPLE sites.

    Bush didn’t take his eyes of UBL. We just added Saddam…. because he DID have a nascent nuke program waiting for end of sanctions. And it was believed he has WMD. He could not be trusted. He had stopped allowing inspections….sort of like the Iranians.
    Clinton was handed UBL by the Somalians. They offered to hand him to us. Clinton choked and said no.

    It WAS borrowed. Guess what? EVERYTHING that is not entitlements is borrowed. Our entire domestic tax base pays for our SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlements. 62% of the budget. The Entirety of the rest is paid for with borrowing. The “stimulus” was borrowed.

    Tax breaks boost the economy. And it did. We had a true 5% unemployment rate and a GDP growth of 4%.

    The Cost of the Iraq war, according to various google searches is between 1 to 1.7 trillion bucks.
    You were saying?
    The “stimulus” is an example of outrageous spending with no income to pay for it….and THAT was just in ONE year. There is a reason that Obama DOUBLED the national debt in 6 years.

    Heck, if you want to talk about ancient history, we have to go back before WWI. But if you want to keep it to a relavent time period…the war stared in 1979, when Iran committed an act of war against us at the embassy. If you want to talk about Iraq and that theater of war, Clinton was intimately involved. Or did you forget the airstrikes?

  22. Cargosquid

    I’m speaking of the circus that we have become. There is no sense of sacrifice now. Its all about “ME!” Cops are being hunted. People require “trigger warnings” to study Shakespeare. We have fools running for office and the populace votes them in or they support them.

    The Americans with dignity and sacrifice seem to be the exception now.
    Blaming Bush for not requiring a sacrifice……
    And where is your blame for the media and the Congress?
    Or the American people? Do they have to be told to “sacrifice? What sort of sacrificing did you want them to do, as a group?

    Americans on 9/12 had the right idea. THAT is when we pulled together and had clarity of purpose.

    The passengers of 93 absolutely changed their fate….if you believe that stopping the strike on DC is considered a change. Instead of being passive passengers along for the ride into DC, they forced the plane down. They sacrificed. Their intentions were to stop the terrorists and live…but were willing to die trying.

    Kurt Schlicter says it better than I do.
    At the end of the day, 9/11 isn’t about “love” or “family” or “peace” or any other hack clichés. That gooey, maudlin nonsense is designed to obscure and distract from the brutal, bloody truth. The lesson of 9/11 is that we must choose to fight or choose to die.

    1. That last sentence was pretty maudlin actually. “choose to fight or choose to die” pretty much is the tough guy form of sentimentality.

      John Wayne-ism at its worst.

      The passengers fate didn’t change one bit. They were going to die anyway, and they did. What they did do, was to change other people’s fate, perhaps. They were victims, the minute they got on that plane.

  23. Cargosquid


    Tough guy-ism?
    That’s what you see?

    Okay then.

    1. Yes, remember I am a baby boomer. I grew up with that kind of talk.

      When the American people are asked to make sacrifices, then they do. I am one of those people who think that if we go to war, then everyone must make a sacrifice. Perhaps then we might grasp the seriousness of war, as a people.

      This is especially important in post-draft wars. No one is impacted but the military. That just isn’t right.

  24. Cargosquid

    I agree….. but then the sacrifice you are talking about should be what? We didn’t need to sacrifice the economy? Higher taxes would have dragged down the economy….. and both parties were worried about that.

    So, again, what kind of sacrifice are you talking about?

    Schlicter and I are talking about attitudes. You also appear to be talking about attitude. So, if Schlicter’s statements are true and you have to make those choices, with forethought and consideration, then your idea of sacrificing is a natural result. Otherwise, you get what we do have now… as usual with no serious thought about what is actually going on in the world.

    1. Everyone donate phone minutes. Volunteer in some area that helps vets. Is technology so advanced that there is nothing private citizens can do to help the war effort? How about a war tax? War bonds? Something to involve the population in the war effort.

      I bet you there are people out there who simply were unaware that we are/were at war. I think there should probably always be a war tax. That would get peoples attention.

  25. El Guapo

    I still remember. I was living in Arlington at the time. I had an appointment to (oh this is embarrassing) leave a semen sample. I was supposed to go play with myself in a clinical setting. I was watching the Today Show, and at the end they reported the attacks on the WTC. Then, just as we were leaving for the doctor’s office, we heard the plane go right over our apartment building. We heard the windows rattle when it struck the Pentagon. Mrs. Guapo was wondering what had happened that made the windows rattle like that. Then when we got outside we saw the smoke coming up from the Pentagon. It was just like a movie.

    When we got to the doctor’s office, I didn’t feel like playing with myself. We reschedule the appointment. One of the nurses’ husbands worked at the Pentagon, and she was very upset. She couldn’t net a call through to see if he was ok. When we got back to our apartment, we saw people walking home up the street like a sea of ants. By afternoon, the whole area was like a ghost town. That was a wild day.

    1. So, did it work out the way you intended?

      I felt the entire day was like a movie also.

  26. Cargosquid

    I happen to agree with you.

    @El Guapo
    I’m curious….what do you say to those idiots that refuse to believe that a plane hit the Pentagon?
    That is, if you ever come across them, as I do, on the internet?

  27. Cargosquid

    As for Pearl Harbor, it was a battle cry, not a sentimental reminder.

    1. Whoever said it wasn’t? Whoever said 9-11 was sentimental? Why do you keep going on about it being sentimental?

  28. @Cargosquid

    Are you agreeing with involving the population in the war effort and war taxes or that 9-11 was like a movie all day long..a really bad one???????

  29. Cargosquid

    Both. The problem is that “involving the population in the war effort” is such a vague term.

    War taxes would not have dented the cost. War bonds would have been a good idea to get people feeling like they were involved. There is no draft. Putting out calls for free cell phones, “care packages,” etc….would have been good. Using the “bully pulpit” to ask Americans to look after the families of deployed troops would have been good. There were many lost opportunities.

    But expecting a WWII level of sacrifice…. that was not going to happen. In fact, because many economic/political actions happen with an official declaration of war, …such as price controls….. no declaration was done.

    I’m saying that 9/11 is becoming sentimental. We can’t identify the enemy because that offends certain people, but we show this every year to honor the dead. The media is turning it into a sentimental occasion with no meaning. At least Pearl Harbor was used to rally the nation….not merely weep.

    1. I doubt that any war in the future will have the call to arms from the civilian population like WWII. Hell, they were already called over the depression. I think we have to thank FDR for much of the bandwagon mentality that existed. He instilled a sense of patriotism and rallied the civilian troops. He was good at it.

      As for sacrifice, I agree. There wasn’t a house on any block in America that wasn’t affected. Not so much today, dating back to Vietnam. Everyone wasn’t involved. For starters, it wasn’t a global war. Secondly, it wasn’t divided equally across the population. The only reason I knew so many people involved in Vietnam is because I went to college a half hour from Quantico where the officers were trained. Fort Belvoir was another 15 minutes up the road.

      The college boys didn’t want to bust out because they would get drafted.

      Population involvement should be vague. Different jobs for different people. My grandmother andher lady friends did something with bandages, My husband’s family had a victory garden and he remembers being taken downtown to salute the WACs or the WAVES. Other people went down to the railroad stations in Charlottesville to meet the troop trains with coffee, etc, as they came through.

      I know people gave blood, bought bonds, and were reminded to do their fair share. I only know this from people I knew who were older than me. It isn’t something I read about. It starts in the beginning. Bush told us (and I don’t necessarily blame just him) to go about our daily lives but to support our troops. Now that is a really vague term.

      How many of us are around “the troops?” If you aren’t a military family, not many. That Bully Pulpit just wasn’t used to involve the American people. I think that is one reason we have been at war for nearly 15 years.

      There is an old army expression …something about a verb…or getting off the pot…

      Did we really go to war like we meant business or did we fiddle faddle around and give back hills like in Vietnam?

  30. ed myers

    @cargo, Be clear. Coded wording such as “we can’t identify the enemy because that offends certain people” means what? Who is the enemy and what people are offended when we do that? I can guess you mean Muhammad is the enemy and all the Muslims are offended when their religion is attacked. At least Bush had enough common sense to specifically deny that his war mongering was a modern day Christian crusade against Islam.

  31. blue

    @ed myers

    Geezes, Ed. Do you feel better now? It was all Bush’s fault right? But at least, under Bush, we knew who the enemy was and had clear and laudable goals and an opportunity to end the slaverry and economic depression that existied and try to then get something going to free a large number of middle easterners. Who do you think gave that all up?

    1. You are kidding me! Do you live in an alternate reality? No, we didn’t know who the enemy was. We had the head of the snake OBL and his organization in our sites and that was about it. We went after the wrong person, using faulty information. There were no clear and laudable goals that made any sense. I am unaware of any economic depression in Iraq.

      There was a pre-emptive strike on a sovereign nation, going after someone who had nothing to do with 9-11.

      Don’t dare come on here talking about someone being a Bush hater when all some of you all do is come on here pissing on the current president. What a hypocrite you are.

      You are trying to turn a botch job into something to sing about. Trust me, it wasn’t. You are losing all credibility on that one. We shouldn’t have gone into Iraq. Period. It upset the already unstable middle east even more.

  32. Kelly_3406


    My statement “without much screening” reflects the fact that there is no central government in Syria to coordinate regarding criminal records or terrorist activities. It also seems unlikely that the U.S. has a significant intelligence footprint in Syria. So there will be very little information available to properly vet incoming refugees from Syria.

    1. Well, you are probably right. Of course, how did we know we weren’t sneaking in communists during the boat people migration?

      There are no easy answers on this one.

  33. Kelly_3406

    Moon-howler :
    You are trying to turn a botch job into something to sing about. Trust me, it wasn’t. You are losing all credibility on that one. We shouldn’t have gone into Iraq. Period. It upset the already unstable middle east even more.

    It is certainly fair to argue about our initial reasons for going into Iraq. But Iraq was on a stable path in 2008 and it initially had very little to do with the instability in the region. The current instability has far more to do with the Arab Spring, which was encouraged by the current administration, and the power vacuum in Iraq, which resulted from the US withdrawal. Obama supported the overthrow of Qaddafi who also had nothing to do with 9/11. A power vacuum was created there even quicker than Iraq. Obama owns most of this.

    Just think how different the strategic situation would be if Obama spent the same effort to get a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq as he did to get a nuclear agreement with Iran.

  34. blue

    Well let’s see Moon, me thinks your memory may be getting a bit shaky. Kuwait, yep we knew that Saddam was the enemy and Democrats were in that it would not stand; 911, yep, it did not take long to find out it was Al Qaeda and OBL and Democrats were in; Afganistatan, yep, we had the Taliban and refuge for Al Qaeda and OBL and only in some alternatie reality were the Democrates not in; Iraq invasion, yep, we knew that Saddam had violated the treaty and both the Arab states and Democrats were in – he had to go – he was shooting at our no-fly patrols. Do the surge to secure Iraq, yep, Republicans and our military Generals were in but Democrats were headed for an election of lies; Abandon Iraq and no the Republicans and many Democrates and all of our Generals were not in; Libya, well, that was a UN deal to stop crimes against humanity but here again Obama ran left that new government hangining. Syria, Republicans and some Democrats were in as were the Generals, but as if to make a point that he was in charge, the red line was crossed. Want to go over giving Iran the bomb again?

    1. Blue, do you drink while blogging?

  35. Lyssa

    Are we finished honoring those that died in the 9-11 attacks?

  36. Lyssa

    Are we finished honoring those who died in the 9-11 attacks?

    1. Apparently! tear down those memorials!!!

  37. Cargosquid

    @ed myers
    Since you need it spelled out, the enemy are the islamists. There ya go.

    As for “Bush’s war mongering,” you appear to have forgotten 9/11.

    Yes we knew who the enemy was. Saddam was an additional enemy. The enemy was not just OBL. Political islam…..the islamist movement, is the philosophy of the enemy….just as the enemy in WWII was the Germans…whose philosophy was nazism.

    You ignore that there are valid reasons to complain about Obama.

    The attack on Iraq was not a “preemptive strike.” Clinton started the ball rolling with his Iraq Liberty Act and the missile strikes. Bush followed up because Saddam refused to comply with the treaty and was suspected, actually known, to have WMD.

    “as he did to get a nuclear agreement with Iran.”

    Based on the nuclear agreement we got…… it was about it the same effort. 🙂

    Everything Blue stated was succinct and accurate. Short, cogent summation.

    1. A concept isn’t an enemy. It might represent a repugnant concept but it isn’t a political enemy.

      Blue sounded like he had had one too many scotches. No, he made no sense. I guess I didn’t have my dog whistle ears on.

      I think its pretty fair to say that Saddam, Quidaffi and a whole host of other dictators were our “enemy” but…they weren’t actively attacking us at the moment. You can’t go wipe the world free of your enemies.

  38. Cargosquid

    Those that support an barbaric ideology are the enemy. Not the concept.

    Saddam….. was the enemy…in that he was not complying with international treaties and fomenting terrorism.
    Qaddaffi WAS, but then, joined our side, until Obama decided he needed to go for some reason.
    Assad almost became the enemy but the Congress, for once, took its collective head out of the feed bag to notice the idiocy about to happen.

    1. Not sure I am ready to take Qaddaffi off our enemy list.

      Obama joined with the Brits who were actually the leaders of the Libya operation, unless I am really on another planet here.

      I believe the middle east is really a hodge podge of blurred lines. Too much theocracy, disparity of wealth and general corruption.

    2. The problem is that the ideology knows no borders or boundaries. The ideology is a subset of a major world religion. It really has no official leader. It is a multi-headed snake.

      That’s what makes it so difficult. If you go after a religion, you are wrong. If you go after a country or government, you are wrong. The sieve is much more complicated than it used to be.

  39. Cargosquid

    At the time, Qaddaffi was actually cooperating with us against Al Q, having voluntarily admitted to having and turning in HIS nuke program.

    Obama did join with the Brits…..and the US did most of the heavy lifting. If Europe wants to attack a country, we don’t need to be the “muscle.”

    If we go after a political philosophy, we are right…and that is what Islamism is….a political system.

    1. How do you go after a philosophy?

  40. Ed Myers

    Containment. Let the sects/tribes fight it out among themselves. Save our powder should a strong victor emerge. Help on the periphery….aid to Turkey, Greece but try to prevent the internal battles from destabilizing neighboring countries. Sunni, Shiite, Wahabi == Calvinism, Lutheranism, Catholicism. It took Europe from 1500 to 1800 of constant fighting before figuring out that a secular government that defended religious freedom was a better approach than government sponsored religion. Islam will figure it out too and faster if we let it be an inner struggle (jihad) for the soul of Islam and not a fight between Islam and Christianity. This is a lesson the adherents need to learn themselves; we cannot teach it to them.

    1. Ed, you have given me something to think about. I hadn’t looked at it from that point of view.

  41. Cargosquid

    Same way you go after the nazis, fascism, and the Japanese warrior ethos that sent them careening through the Pacific.

    If they act up and start killing people….you kill them back until they realize that their misbehavior will not be tolerated.

  42. Cargosquid

    @Ed Myers

    Too late.

    Europe just let millions in. Are you going to forbid Muslims from entering the US?

  43. ed myers

    @Cargo, you assume that the culture of violence is because of Islam. I don’t. Muslims are welcome in the US. Violent Jihad against infidels is not. We have millions of peaceful Muslims living among us. A few more isn’t a threat. What we need to contain is the size of the territory devoted to letting all those islamic teenage boys with testosterone poisoning come and kill each other. The next generation can come back and resettle the land laid waste by the idiots and hopefully bring with them some better governmental and religious institutions developed while in exile in the west.

  44. Cargosquid

    @ed myers
    You misread me.

    I said IslamIST. That is a fundamental Islamic belief, involving political belief as well, that Islam should be supreme, and that violent jihad is well regarded.

    We cannot contain the size. The invasion has already occurred. The “refugees,” most of them military aged men, have arrived in Europe. Arms being smuggled in boxes destined for the refugee camps have already been found by customs in Greece.

    1. There have been terrorist cells based on radical Islam for decades.
      That horse was long out of the barn.

      what would YOU have done with all those refugees? Shot them at the border? I hope not.

  45. Cargosquid

    I would not have made a popular call for them to come to my country, like Merkel did.
    I would have installed border controls.
    I would have set up camps with “triage” and accepted certain people first.

    If Europe truly cared about the “refugees,” they would have assisted in defeating the cause of the crisis. If Assad is the cause…..defeat him. If ISIS is the cause, defeat them.

    By law…refugees are only refugees once they reach a safe state. Thus…. the people reaching Germany should not be treated as refugees.

    Able bodied men…..especially, would be last. If at all.

    The infamous father that lost his family by drowning was not a “refugee.” He was trying to get somewhere with generous welfare benefits after living in Turkey for three years. Many of these “refugees” are not refugees.

    1. There is a remarkable story in the WaPo today about what its like to be a refugee and why people flee their homes with only the shirts on their backs. Yes, they do look like middle class people. Why on they on the run? It has to be dire circumstances.

      On the other hand, I don’t have a solution. what is to be done with all these people. I notice they didn’t run to Russia. Don’t blame them.

      I wouldn’t differentiate by sex. Able bodied men are needed to support their families once they arrive at their destination. Able bodied men get killed just as often, if not more so, than old ones.

Comments are closed.