[lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape

  • From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:35:55 -0600

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lawrence Helm 
  To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 8:19 PM
  Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape


  We need to oppose the Islamists.  We are in a war with them.  Bush may or may 
not be fighting them as well as he could, but at least he is fighting them.  I 
won't quibble about whether he is doing everything right.  He probably isn't.  
But we do need to fight the Islamists.  We do not need to support the Islamists 
by early withdrawal from Iraq.



  Lawrence




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Andy Amago
  Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 6:11 PM
  To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape



  We ought to be doing a lot of things.  That's why we have leadership, to 
guide and lead us in our oughts.  Why are they not making it clear who and what 
is the case?  Bush is always talking about a War on Terror even as he cuts 
taxes for the ultra rich and vacations at his ranch.  Is he not the clock by 
which we set our watches?  Is Congressional corruption the way to fight 
Islamism?  If you're suggesting we talk a good line, that's a different story.  





    ----- Original Message ----- 

    From: Lawrence Helm 

    To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Sent: 1/20/2006 9:04:30 PM 

    Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape



    We have an enemy: the Islamists.  The Islamists want to conquer us.  We 
need to oppose them.



    If you disagree you should logically argue that we dont need to oppose 
them or that they dont want to conquer us.



    If we arent opposing them as well as we ought, that doesnt detract from 
the argument that we ought to oppose them.  Although I did mention it as an 
aside, the people are being provided with faulty information by the media.  I 
blame the media and the people for that.  The media for being perverse and the 
people for being gullible, but I am not surprised by any it.  We will (as a 
people) eventually learn that the enemy is to be taken seriously  that he does 
want to conquer us.  It took a lot of blood to get us into both World Wars.  We 
probably need to bleed a bit more before we develop enthusiasm for this one, 
but notice that Osama does intend to make us bleed.



    Lawrence




----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago
    Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 5:44 PM
    To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape



    Okay, let's cut the leadership some slack.  It's all the people's fault 
that we lost this war.  Let's blame them instead.  It wasn't Napoleon's fault 
that he lost (or won).  It was the French people, right?   So let me get this 
straight.  This is a necessary war, but not an important one.  Is that right?  
And kindly point out the bothersome non sequiturs.  





      ----- Original Message ----- 

      From: Lawrence Helm 

      To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

      Sent: 1/20/2006 8:38:47 PM 

      Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape



      You are giving me a headache with your non sequiturs.  I didnt discuss 
the importance, but I do believe it is a necessary war.  It can become more 
important if we dilly dally and let them win more than we ought to let them 
win.  You have introduced several tangents which dont seem important.  We have 
an implacable enemy.  We may or may not be fighting him as enthusiastically as 
we ought.  From the fact that so many people want us to withdraw prematurely 
from Iraq (to the delight of Osama) it is clear that millions dont understand 
the importance of fighting this enemy.   So perhaps the people you refer to 
as not doing something right ought to be given some slack for not fighting them 
as well as they might.  



      Lawrence




--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago
      Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 5:25 PM
      To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
      Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape



      Well, if it was such an important war, why wasn't it fought more 
seriously?  Why did the Army have to laugh at their proposal and insist on a 
larger army than what Rove & Co. wanted, and still be nowhere close to what was 
needed?  Why was there no plan for after Baghdad fell?  Why did we go to war 
with the army we had instead of the army we needed (a paraphrase)?  Why cut 
taxes when the money is needed for military spending to fund the army to fight 
this war that we need so desperately?  Yadda yadda.  In short, why was it not 
waged as if it was an important war?  If you say it was the Democrats' fault, 
then you're passing the buck.  The Republicans run the show and he had 
everybody's approval in any case.




Other related posts: