Gore Vidal talks about terrorism and the American Empire - Page 2

joyfulgirl · 07-10-2002, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by z edge

Let me guess, you live in one of the blue states?

Guess again.

I live in a state just north of you that nearly always votes Republican but in 2000 we were a swing state. I voted for an honorable third party candidate and Gore carried the state.

However, the city I live in is so liberal (I prefer the term 'progressive') that you, my friend, would think you had died and gone straight to hell.

Sorry for the digression, folks.

z edge · 07-10-2002, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by joyfulgirl

Guess again. I live in a state just north of you that nearly always votes Republican but in 2000 we were a swing state. I voted for an honorable third party candidate and Gore carried the state.

Kansas? Don't give me anymore reasons to make fun of you

Quote:

However, the city I live in is so liberal (I prefer the term 'progressive') that you, my friend, would think you had died and gone straight to hell.

Well, I don't really know exactly how to say this. But Oklahoma is so conservative it is even a bit frightening to someone like me. Well not necessarily frightening, but rather the conservatives here seem satisfied with the status quo and I think we need more balance here. I bet even Danospano would agree with me here

I think for our upcoming governor election, I lean towards Dem. Vince Orza or Ind. Gary Richardson over the wonderful Rep. Steve Largent.

*I better go hide from my brothers for saying this

speedracer · 07-11-2002, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by deep

You don�t have to agree with him, but he is a brilliant writer, essayist, and commentator.

Perhaps, but this interview isn't one of his finest.

sulawesigirl4 · 07-11-2002, 09:21 AM

Quote:

[The government] plays off [Americans'] relative innocence, or ignorance to be more precise. This is probably why geography has not really been taught since World War II -- to keep people in the dark as to where we are blowing things up

This was my favorite line. I wonder if we're not being taught good math so that we can't count how many countries we have been blowing up since World War II as well.

joyfulgirl · 07-11-2002, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by z edge

Kansas? Don't give me anymore reasons to make fun of you

Well, I don't really know exactly how to say this. But Oklahoma is so conservative it is even a bit frightening to someone like me. Well not necessarily frightening, but rather the conservatives here seem satisfied with the status quo and I think we need more balance here. I bet even Danospano would agree with me here

I think for our upcoming governor election, I lean towards Dem. Vince Orza or Ind. Gary Richardson over the wonderful Rep. Steve Largent.

*I better go hide from my brothers for saying this

uhh....i thought you lived in texas...
never mind

rafmed · 07-11-2002, 09:55 AM

Great article Dano, I think reflects the thinking of people outside the USA, and I even think inside it.

Bubba, of course this man is not gona be loved by everyone, anyone that is this critic, and try to see things in the best unbiassed way, (IMO), obviously will find detractors, I don't think that this rest value to his comments and work.

Like someone to blame · 07-11-2002, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Danospano

I hope you don't believe those figures. Don't you know how the polls are rigged? It's simple. After 9/11 the country was really shocked and terrified. [Bush] does a little war dance and talks about evil axis and all the countries he's going to go after. And how long it is all going to take, he says with a happy smile, because it means billions and trillions for the Pentagon and for his oil friends. And it means curtailing our liberties, so this is all very thrilling for him. He's right out there reacting, bombing Afghanistan. Well, he might as well have been bombing Denmark. Denmark had nothing to do with 9/11. And neither did Afghanistan, at least the Afghanis didn't.

Gore is exactly right. I wish more people in our society had the balls to call a spade a spade. Gore's take on our society and this administration is only "radical" to those who choose to ignore the possibility that what the mainstream media shoves down our throat is the truth. The media today has no guts to ask the tough questions or to follow up on promising leads. If they would, then Gore's thoughts on 9/11 and this administration wouldn't appear so "radical."

We as Americans need to take back our country from the egalitarian community running things now. Sign me up for the next Constitutional Convention...I'm ready! And thanks to Gore Vidal for championing the concerns of the voiceless in our country.

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 02:05 PM

At what point, in the paragraph you quoted, is Vidal even remotely right?

First, there's the insinuation that Bush isn't actually doing anything when it's becoming more and more clear that Saddam Hussein's days are quite numbered.

Then, he implies that Bush is happy in what he's doing because it's A) profiting the Pentagon and "his oil friends" and B) eroding our liberties. (B) is wrong to begin with, but even if (A) is true, it is deeply, DEEPLY cynical to suggest that Bush is putting American soldiers in harm's way just to help his friends' business interests. It's a vicious, slanderous comment that requires a hell of a lot more proof than ANYONE has provided.

After all that, he then goes on to suggest that our actions in Afghanistan were completely unfounded.

(First, which is it? Is Bush a do-nothing President, or is he doing too much? Gore Vidal seems incapable of deciding, instead taking both sides to slam Bush.)

Even if his hair-splitting in mentioning "at least the Afghanis" is true, we're fairly certain of the following fact: the terrorists responsible for 9/11 were following orders of a terrorist group (al Queda) with a large number of training facilities in Afghanistan, facilities that were protected by the thugs running the country (the Taliban).

If Vidal doesn't think Afghanistan is relevant, then WHICH country? He does not say. If he admits that the Taliban-protected al Queda within Afghanistan were responsible, how else do we get to them? (Would bombing a different country somehow help?) Again, he does not say.

Gore Vidal is not speaking for the voiceless. He is speaking for the brainless.

rafmed · 07-11-2002, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Achtung Bubba

First, there's the insinuation that Bush isn't actually doing anything when it's becoming more and more clear that Saddam Hussein's days are quite numbered.

When was the first time I hear a Bush say this.....
1991 ???

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rafmed
When was the first time I hear a Bush say this.....
1991 ???

So he's going to finish the job his father didn't.

(I've noticed that many who now bemoan the fact that Hussein is still in power didn't even want Desert Storm to occur - and they certainly didn't want us to go into Bagdad.)

What I wonder is, what's your point? The current president is facing the same enemy his father faced. SO?

rafmed · 07-11-2002, 03:53 PM

I'm not a supporter of Sadam or anything close, imo, if the so called alliance was inside Iraq in 1991-92, they should have finsihed what they started, in any case, all this talk about the good and evil and Sadam, is only that, talk, propaganda.

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rafmed
I'm not a supporter of Sadam or anything close, imo, if the so called alliance was inside Iraq in 1991-92, they should have finsihed what they started, in any case, all this talk about the good and evil and Sadam, is only that, talk, propaganda.

"All this talk about the good and evil and Sadam, is only that, talk, propaganda."

What does that mean, exactly?

That Bush really has no intention of dealing with Iraq? That Hussein isn't really evil? Or what?

rafmed · 07-11-2002, 06:32 PM

I think I'm clear.

I don't know if Bush will deal with Sadam or not, I would not be surpriced if Sadam is still rulling Irak by the time Bush is leaving the White House. Maybe he will if its good for the economy.

About the talk of good and evil, it just reminds me a bad cowboy movie, and who is more evil in any case of Bush and Sadam, is to be debated.

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rafmed
About the talk of good and evil, it just reminds me a bad cowboy movie, and who is more evil in any case of Bush and Sadam, is to be debated.

How many people has George W. Bush gassed?

To equate Bush with Hussein takes such a deranged mind that I see no point in arguing the point. But if you'd like to rejoin us in the real world, please do.

rafmed · 07-11-2002, 06:45 PM

Obviosly there is sarcasm.

But I think in the eyes of the world there is no much diference, maybe not fair, maybe not based on his past, but certainly on how dangerous they are, and where they can take our world.

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 08:48 PM

I think you need to be more clear when you're using sarcasm, because it was not at all obvious that you were being sarcastic.

speedracer · 07-11-2002, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Achtung Bubba
I think you need to be more clear when you're using sarcasm, because it was not at all obvious that you were being sarcastic.

How about like this:

[SARCASM]Genius.[/SARCASM]

z edge · 07-11-2002, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Achtung Bubba

To equate Bush with Hussein takes such a deranged mind that I see no point in arguing the point. But if you'd like to rejoin us in the real world, please do.

But they are getting a little better at this Bubba, I mean last week Bush was being compared to Hitler

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by speedracer

How about like this:

[SARCASM]Genius.[/SARCASM]

Brilliant.

<Clap>

<Clap>

<Clap>

Achtung Bubba · 07-11-2002, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by z edge

But they are getting a little better at this Bubba, I mean last week Bush was being compared to Hitler

Yep. The good news is, all I need is a "Nero-Reagan" comparison or a "Bush-Napolean" comparison to be able to call Tyrant Bingo (TM).

07-11-2002, 02:05 PM	#28
Achtung Bubba Refugee Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: One Nation. Under God. Posts: 1,513 Local Time: 09:16 PM	At what point, in the paragraph you quoted, is Vidal even remotely right? First, there's the insinuation that Bush isn't actually doing anything when it's becoming more and more clear that Saddam Hussein's days are quite numbered. Then, he implies that Bush is happy in what he's doing because it's A) profiting the Pentagon and "his oil friends" and B) eroding our liberties. (B) is wrong to begin with, but even if (A) is true, it is deeply, DEEPLY cynical to suggest that Bush is putting American soldiers in harm's way just to help his friends' business interests. It's a vicious, slanderous comment that requires a hell of a lot more proof than ANYONE has provided. After all that, he then goes on to suggest that our actions in Afghanistan were completely unfounded. (First, which is it? Is Bush a do-nothing President, or is he doing too much? Gore Vidal seems incapable of deciding, instead taking both sides to slam Bush.) Even if his hair-splitting in mentioning "at least the Afghanis" is true, we're fairly certain of the following fact: the terrorists responsible for 9/11 were following orders of a terrorist group (al Queda) with a large number of training facilities in Afghanistan, facilities that were protected by the thugs running the country (the Taliban). If Vidal doesn't think Afghanistan is relevant, then WHICH country? He does not say. If he admits that the Taliban-protected al Queda within Afghanistan were responsible, how else do we get to them? (Would bombing a different country somehow help?) Again, he does not say. Gore Vidal is not speaking for the voiceless. He is speaking for the brainless. __________________ DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known for engaing in very long discussions.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-11-2002, 09:55 AM	#26
rafmed Refugee Join Date: May 2001 Location: On the moon's belly button Posts: 1,255 Local Time: 08:16 PM	Great article Dano, I think reflects the thinking of people outside the USA, and I even think inside it. Bubba, of course this man is not gona be loved by everyone, anyone that is this critic, and try to see things in the best unbiassed way, (IMO), obviously will find detractors, I don't think that this rest value to his comments and work.

07-11-2002, 03:53 PM	#31
rafmed Refugee Join Date: May 2001 Location: On the moon's belly button Posts: 1,255 Local Time: 08:16 PM	I'm not a supporter of Sadam or anything close, imo, if the so called alliance was inside Iraq in 1991-92, they should have finsihed what they started, in any case, all this talk about the good and evil and Sadam, is only that, talk, propaganda.

07-11-2002, 06:32 PM	#33
rafmed Refugee Join Date: May 2001 Location: On the moon's belly button Posts: 1,255 Local Time: 08:16 PM	I think I'm clear. I don't know if Bush will deal with Sadam or not, I would not be surpriced if Sadam is still rulling Irak by the time Bush is leaving the White House. Maybe he will if its good for the economy. About the talk of good and evil, it just reminds me a bad cowboy movie, and who is more evil in any case of Bush and Sadam, is to be debated.

07-11-2002, 06:45 PM	#35
rafmed Refugee Join Date: May 2001 Location: On the moon's belly button Posts: 1,255 Local Time: 08:16 PM	Obviosly there is sarcasm. But I think in the eyes of the world there is no much diference, maybe not fair, maybe not based on his past, but certainly on how dangerous they are, and where they can take our world.

07-11-2002, 08:48 PM	#36
Achtung Bubba Refugee Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: One Nation. Under God. Posts: 1,513 Local Time: 09:16 PM	I think you need to be more clear when you're using sarcasm, because it was not at all obvious that you were being sarcastic.