Don't get me wrong, it's good bin Laden was taken out. But we didn't do anything. It was a group of CIA agents who finally nailed down where he was after a decade of our country needlessly killing hundreds of thousands of innocents. Which is why I feel we shouldn't be patting ourselves on the back (or rather shouting and running around stupidly with American flags) and instead have some perspective on everything that led up to this.
Don't get me wrong, it's good bin Laden was taken out. But we didn't do anything. It was a group of CIA agents who finally nailed down where he was after a decade of our country needlessly killing hundreds of thousands of innocents. Which is why I feel we shouldn't be patting ourselves on the back (or rather shouting and running around stupidly with American flags) and instead have some perspective on everything that led up to this.
1) As a tax paying citizen we provide the ability for the CIA and Navy Seals to exist.
2) We didn't kill hundreds of thousands of innocents. Not even close. Those numbers that are often quoted are a combination of the small percentage of collateral (and regrettable) casualties caused by military activity and the high percentage of innocents killed by those we were fighting through IEDs, suicide bombings, tribal warfare, etc. People who want to persuade you that the war was evil claim that the US is just as much at fault for the actions of our enemies as they are, so they give us credit for all of it. There was a post about this a few years ago if I remember correctly...
3) Keep in mind we have no clue if we would have ever gotten Bin Laden without the war, establishing a "beach head" of sorts, capturing enemies and interrogating them, etc. The currently accepted theory in the media is that the intelligence that helped find Bin Laden came from Guantanamo, another morally ambiguous activity.
Which makes me feel sick knowing my tax dollars helped kill so many.
And even if those numbers aren't as high (as a result of direct US killings), it was all to kill one sick man. Other than some relief to the families he took from and a morale boost, what else did his death bring? How many less would be dead if the US didn't feel the need to go balls out trying to get to him? Pretty much every other half-baked terrorist plot by al-Qaeda was foiled since 9/11. And not because of all the strict new regulations either.
To your #3: Does that mean then, those wars were all for nothing since we had the leads to his capture so close to home all that time? That sounds even worse to me.
And even if those numbers aren't as high (as a result of direct US killings), it was all to kill one sick man. Other than some relief to the families he took from and a morale boost, what else did his death bring?
You're misremembering the rationale for going to war in the first place. Even to Bush Bin laden was only a target. One of many. The war was against state-sponsored terrorism. Agree or disagree with it, that is how it was presented and approved.
Quote:
Pretty much every other half-baked terrorist plot by al-Qaeda was foiled since 9/11. And not because of all the strict new regulations either.
The successes had nothing to do with interrogations or wiretapping? And you're sure of this? If so, you have high-ranking sources I am unaware of.
Quote:
To your #3: Does that mean then, those wars were all for nothing since we had the leads to his capture so close to home all that time? That sounds even worse to me.
Only a handful of detainees were from terror-cells in the US. Most were captured in the Middle East during military operations. Again, without the war we have no idea whether or not we would have ever captured Bin Laden.
__________________
Last edited by Professor S : 05-03-2011 at 09:57 AM.
And according to Bush we invaded Iraq because of WMDs. I don't give credence to Bush's rationale for anything.
The foiled ones I was referring to were the those the public knows about. They directly affected security measures though, what with the limit on liquids, removal of shoes, etc. But you're right, I don't know about what might have been countless others.
Once again, one guilty dude's death vs [insert number here] of innocents.
The past is past. Was just saying it would be better to reflect on what brought us to this point and tread more carefully than we have been, instead of mindlessly chanting "USA USA".
I don't have anymore time today to post. Have yourself some pie.
P.S. I would like to have a thread on education in the future if just so I can learn why things are the way they are.
P.S. I would like to have a thread on education in the future if just so I can learn why things are the way they are.
I can't speak on behalf of all populations, but recently I have been researching the hell out of programs like Teach for America (I had some interest). I also am involved in research in a lab where some focus is on the education deficit amongst inner-city populations, and specifically Black and Latino youth. As with most things there are multiple ways to tell the story. One influential factor seems to be lack of parental involvement. Since a lot of inner-city families are poor, parents work 2 or 3 jobs. The parents are never home so kids never get support at home from the parents. Support from parents at home has been shown to be CRUCIAL in fostering positive learning. There are other issues too. For example, someone in my lab is looking at Latino populations. Within that population there is a strong tendency for parents to have the belief that the school is completely responsible for educating their kids. This does not create a supportive environment in the home, which in turn might lead to doing worse in school.
There are other issues too. One theory (controversial) is that there are strong anti-white feelings within parts of the black community. If "being educated" equals "being white" there is a tendency within the black population for blacks to look down upon peers who are educated.
It's just a multitude of socio-economic factors fucking everyone over, at least in the poorer communities.
I think that is a BIG part of it. There are a million and one broad scale issues, issues specifically applicable to the way that the USA does education. And that is where Prof probably should take over.
I can't speak on behalf of all populations, but recently I have been researching the hell out of programs like Teach for America (I had some interest). I also am involved in research in a lab where some focus is on the education deficit amongst inner-city populations, and specifically Black and Latino youth. As with most things there are multiple ways to tell the story. One influential factor seems to be lack of parental involvement. Since a lot of inner-city families are poor, parents work 2 or 3 jobs. The parents are never home so kids never get support at home from the parents. Support from parents at home has been shown to be CRUCIAL in fostering positive learning. There are other issues too. For example, someone in my lab is looking at Latino populations. Within that population there is a strong tendency for parents to have the belief that the school is completely responsible for educating their kids. This does not create a supportive environment in the home, which in turn might lead to doing worse in school.
There are other issues too. One theory (controversial) is that there are strong anti-white feelings within parts of the black community. If "being educated" equals "being white" there is a tendency within the black population for blacks to look down upon peers who are educated.
It's just a multitude of socio-economic factors fucking everyone over, at least in the poorer communities.
I think that is a BIG part of it. There are a million and one broad scale issues, issues specifically applicable to the way that the USA does education. And that is where Prof probably should take over.
You hit the nail on the head. Thomas Sowell actually does a great job of explaining how events unfold to create subsidies for lowered expectations and performance (fast forward to 2:30, but the whole dialogue is good):
During the Great Depression families were paid more assistance if they did not have a male head of household. Also, the NRA sent workers to jobs far away from their families. Add to the this the endemic racism prevalent in the government at the time and you have your modern ghettos where black workers were housed in the worst areas and segregated. Meanwhile, at home, an entire generation of African American children were growing up without a father figure.
Ever wonder why white poverty is concentrated in the mid-west and black poverty is concentrated in urban areas? ITS NOT A MISTAKE. It's what happens when your government stops serving you and starts controlling you.
__________________
Last edited by Professor S : 05-03-2011 at 11:32 AM.
And according to Bush we invaded Iraq because of WMDs. I don't give credence to Bush's rationale for anything.
I was referring to Afghanistan. You are correct about Iraq.
Quote:
Once again, one guilty dude's death vs [insert number here] of innocents.
Again, I reject the supposition of your argument, so there is little to argue about here. We are talking about two different things.
Quote:
The past is past. Was just saying it would be better to reflect on what brought us to this point and tread more carefully than we have been, instead of mindlessly chanting "USA USA".
In the long run, of course, but I think America can share a brief shared sigh of relief before the "boo birds" start chirping. Its just not good form, IMO.
Quote:
I don't have anymore time today to post. Have yourself some pie.
Pie is delicious, but I'm on Atkins... great... now I want pie.
Quote:
P.S. I would like to have a thread on education in the future if just so I can learn why things are the way they are.
Oh wow, that could take days and it goes all the way back to FDR and the red-lining of districts during the days of the NRA.
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Hybrid Mode
