fear

Apr. 9th, 2004 12:08 pm
mojocatt: (Default)
[personal profile] mojocatt
Three anti-dubya posts in one day, a new record maybe.

I think is mostly because for the first time, starting back in early March, I have the feeling that the situation is getting dangerously out of hand. I attempt to mask it with my zany humor, but it is getting to the point where it is difficult to overcome the sorrow of what we are doing. That card site I posted earlier really hit a nerve with me. Even the humorous cards make me angry to look at.

The 9/11 hearings yesterday were nothing. Sure we got caught with our pants down. It happens from time to time.

But the war in Iraq is where we should be holding hearings. No chemical weapons, no nuclear weapon program, no biological weapons, no terrorist links, no anything. Yet we overthrew the goverment and took control, and are now in what is becoming more of a real war as one Marine put it.

I still would like to believe that they would find this proof, proof of a threat to our national security. But as the days pass the lies become clearer, and are reaching critical mass. The Arab world is becoming increasing hostle, many now viewing the war as an occupation and even a crusade by Christians. The Arab goverments are still mostly friendly, but I fear they will not be able to risk ignoring public opinion for much longer. We are starting to look like some serious assholes to the Arab world. Every bullet we fire to bring peace is merely a seed sown, and the harvest could be five fold, ten fold or fifty fold in return, who can tell.

And thats exactly it. Just what the hell are we doing, what is the truth, where is the plan?

I am begining to see the makings of a real war. I can see the events leading to holy war, and even world war. All because a stupid man and his advisors. An almost constant stream of lies, bad intelligence, poor planning, pissed off allies, a economy that is going sour in a hurry, a rising debt by the federal goverment, and for the first time I am begining to view the situation with fear. Fear of what this will become, fear of how we are going to fix all this damage.

I don't want Rowan to have to pick up this mess.

Date: 2004-04-09 11:01 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mojocatt.livejournal.com
Same here, I have reverted to cold war mode. For a short while there, I dropped all that fear that was hardend into apathy. Now I have to rebuild my shell, apathetic brick by apathetic brick. Although I don't think have the same chance of getting nuked as we did in the 80's.

That is a disturbing trend. I find myself in agreement with the Rev. Al Sharpten more than I would like. I'd say I am in agreement with what Al says about 35% of the time. When Al Sharpten starts making sense more than 10% of the time, Houston we have a problem.

Date: 2004-04-09 11:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] drunkencricket.livejournal.com
Although I don't think have the same chance of getting nuked as we did in the 80's.

I don't feel the same. I fear that where there is a will, there is a way. And there is a lot of ill will out there, directed at the United States of America - and since they haven't the military that we have, the only option is to try to inflict as much damage to the general "enemy" populace as possible.

It is completely obvious. The "enemies" will never get the president, nor the vp, and probably not other leaders. It is the populace at large that is in true danger. If you cannot meet an enemy head on, you go for the weakest part of it. Why should someone try to kill a man-eating tiger with a knife in his hand, face to face, when killing it from a distance with a gun is safer? And our enemies haven't got guns, but they are using pit traps, poisoned darts, and snares. Which can be just as deadly, though it may take longer. If those people and groups that hate us so much get their hands on nuclear weaponry, they will use them. And, with the "sell to the highest bidder" process out there, it will happen sooner or later.

Date: 2004-04-09 11:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mojocatt.livejournal.com
What I mean is that they don't have the nuclear capacity of the old USSR. The Soviets could nuke us from shore to shore, and we could return the favor. Even China does not currently have the capacity to do a shore to shore in the US (or the range for that matter).

I don't think its the weapon itself we need to fear, we need to more concerned with the fallout, both nuclear and policical. A single terrorist nuclear weapon could thus be more dangerous than the entire cold war arsenel.

I would speculate that Isreal would fall victim to nuclear terrorism first though. Tel Aviv being the biggest nuclear terrorist target in the world in my opinion.

[Devils advocate = on]
[Insensitive idiot = on]
If Jerusalem got nuked though, it might be fairly nice. No more worries about whos temple is where. The nuke would certainly cause some commotion in the world, but the Jerusalem problem would be solved for the long run.

Date: 2004-04-09 12:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mojocatt.livejournal.com
Did you see this card? This guy seems to share your opinion on the 9/11 incident.



Just a tad inflamatory? I like it.

Different danger.

Date: 2004-04-09 11:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] conandammit.livejournal.com
Although I don't think have the same chance of getting nuked as we did in the 80's.

I agree, sort of. I think the chances of getting nuked in some fashion is higher, but the chance of getting annhialated is almost null. In the 80's, if there was a nuclear exchange, the world would become a wasteland. WTF?

Re: Different danger.

Date: 2004-04-09 11:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mojocatt.livejournal.com
Could be the chance of a single blast is higher. Coast to coast parking lot type action is not likely though.

Profile

mojocatt: (Default)
mojocatt

October 2012

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
2122232425 2627
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 6th, 2025 07:46 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios