Thursday, January 05, 2006
Thursday, August 05, 2004
You know...this bugs me
Taken from an article on CNN.com:
The Bush press secretary said he "hopes the Kerry campaign will join us in calling for an end to all unregulated ads." Asked whether the campaign will demand the ad be pulled from the air, he said, "We are calling for a cessation of all unregulated ads and hope the Kerry campaign will join us."
I start to see the point of two things here. First, I see the point of why some people want to open up the airwaves to anyone who's got 100000 bucks to kill on a political Ad...the other point I see is why people want to regulate ads, in general. This kind of stuff does nothing to help the discussion and is really smearing at its heart.
Here's an idea...since the FCC controls the airwaves overall, why don't they require the major networks to allow, during an election year (for feasibility, how about after the two conventions are over), at least one 60 second spot per hour between 6pm and Midnight Eastern Time to each candidate's campaign for a nationally broadcast campaign message? Totally ban all other advertisements that specifically attack, promote, or discuss specific candidates. Nothing wrong with a group buying an ad that says: "We're so and so representing the children of so and so's everywhere...we believe in these values..and that's why we put our support behind *insert party* candidates everywhere...." *shrug* that's not the best idea out there, but it's better than these smear attack ads that get launched by the detritus of the left AND right.
Monday, July 05, 2004
Iraq, Al Qaeda, Etc.
This topic is a doozy and I don't really know where to start, so I'll ref something I got involved with this morning. Here. That's a link to my friend Bonnie's blog. The discussion is centered around a post that she made regarding Islamic Extremists.
I guess I'll start off with a skeleton and flesh in my opinions later.
Iraq: We shouldn't have gone in the way we did. I'm not going to argue that Saddam didn't deserve the ass kicking he got because, frankly, he did! The problem is that we did it in such a way that we alienated the rest of the world. The focus around the world was on terrorism at the time, and we had at least the lip service of other governments in our efforts to track down Al Qaeda. When our illustrious leader sent Colin Powell (not a bad chap...despite what the leftists say about him!) down to the UN with the "caught red handed intelligence" and had him fight to sell the UN on miltary action against Hussein, he did it without proper follow up to verify the information. Then when he didn't get their immediate support, we start planning to go in alone.
This alienated many of our allies (whether they're GOOD allies or those whiny, aggravating, jealous ones - you know who) or, at the very least, put them at odds with their citizens. This effectively undermined their ability to support the war on terror, as the "flavor du jour" was anti-US-ism.
Once the war was in motion and then over...we began finding things out. Things like: "well, maybe Iraq didn't ACTUALLY HAVE the means to attack us with missiles tipped by nukes or chems or biotics!" or "Iraq hadn't sent anyone to Africa in years looking for uranium!" etc. If those statements had been true we could, at least, have been able to claim a threat. However, once these assertions were called into question, it made us look like we'd only gone to war because we hated Saddam.
My conviction, ever since the 2003 State of the Union address, has been that if we'd simply told the world that "Saddam is evil, he murders his citizens, he ignores UN resolutions, he has waged war against his neighbors, and he's working to rebuild his military and special forces...we are of the conviction that he must be deposed," we'd have been ok! I don't think that anyone was saddened when Saddam was captured or when the Iraqi army capitulated and Saddam's statue came down! I sure wasn't! Those were Iraqis tearing it down! :-) Good for them!
We have a problem, though...our credibility has been sorely strained with the rest of the world over these issues. It needn't have gone this way. The end DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS! We have to work now...as we have begun to do...to heal the rifts between our nations and confront terrorism (and its roots!!!) as a unified team.
Al Qaeda:
These guys are quite spectacular assholes. Their ringleaders are, perhaps, our greatest national enemy right now (after an un- or under-educated population and lack of basic necessities for those less-well-off in our society). They're good at stirring up resentment and planning eye-poppingly violent attacks. We need to find them and BRING THEM DOWN!
But, al Qaeda itself is difficult to deal with in its entirety. How do you snuff out a brush fire? That's the basic problem we face with Al Qaeda...they don't sit still to be hit and their ranks are filled by angry, bereaved victims of middle east violence (that's violence perpetrated by US as well as by others!). That anger can be harnessed and it is, by these charismatic leaders of al Qaeda.
This is where I've disagreed vehemently with Bonnie on her blog about how to deal with the spreading fundamentalist movement. We can't afford to ignore it, but if we don't make it a movement to bring peace (not just eliminate radicals) and long lasting stability to that area, then we'll just be fighting this war for another twenty years!
This one's a toughie, no doubts...but we have to go in with the sword, the pen, AND the loaf of bread if we're going to emasculate and dry up extremism and terrorism! Make their grievances immaterial and the support for them will dry up.
Happy 4th of July
Happy Independence Day to all US Citizens out there! :-)
Let's all take a moment to reflect on the past and the present as we celebrate the next year of our country's existence. We've gotten to where we are through risk, blood, strife, war...but also art, science, entrepreneurial sprit, determination, resilience, and plain old fashioned toughness.
Let's make the next year of this country's past a good one!
