Posted on 02/25/2008 5:21:34 AM PST by jstassis
(last paragraph) When that consensus assumes, for example, that World War II was "good," or that the United States arms build-up "won" the Cold War, it protects the militarized economy, the status of the military-industrial elite, the iron lock of incumbents on office. Any reinterpretation of this salvation history, it is feared, would undermine the economy, disempower the elite, unsettle politics - and deprive the citizenry of meaning in an otherwise meaningless world. Voters may want change, but not change at this level. Yet "national security" is bogus - part ghost story with which the nation scares itself at bedtime, part nightly prayer with which it then goes to sleep.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Where do they find these idiots?
Probably just as well. The author thinks that national security threats, like the Cold War, are invented to keep politicians in power and money flowing to Defense. It’s the old moonbat mantra...
the Boston Post and the rest of Leftist America are a bunch of (plural/Female body part)
In Boston, they grow on trees.
“...In Boston, they grow on trees.”
AND, elect drunk felons and lying fake patriots to the senate.
What an asshat.
Well then....let’s just remove all of the Homeland Security dollars from Boston Harbor.
We can put that money into some really redundant social programs or pour it into the ‘global warming industrial complex’.
Okay, I can go along with his reasoning, to a point. Foreign threats certainly serve as a mechanism of unity within our nation, and politicians use it as a vehicle to increase their power. (The Patriot Act is a prime example. Do you really want that law in place with Obama in charge?)
But when he applies it to the Presidential race, he leaves a gaping hole wide open- a hole as wide as our southern border. Neither Obama nor McCain has any intention of fixing that hole, so the whole debate over national security is hollow anyway.
James Carroll is a fool.
But the bigger fools are those who pay him to write this stuff.
Shame on them all.
The Cold War was fought against the Soviet Union. Let’s examine the “national security ghost story” with respect to the Soviet Union.
The Soviets
o Were as totalitarian a state as they come.
o Had a huge conventional army, substantially larger than the NATO countries combined.
o Had a huge nuclear arsenal.
o Espoused eventual world control and worked diligently towards that goal with many examples possible.
o Killed tens of millions of the peoples under their control.
And yet this was a “ghost story” that we shouldn’t have worried about!?
This author is a complete idiot.
Maybe there’s a reason the 2 flights that went into the WTC were out of Boston.
Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia....
But the bigger fools are those who pay him to write this stuff.
Yeah. Sixty years ago fools like him would be locked-up in a state Insane Asylum. But now days they're given $100K a year jobs writing for newspapers.
She was not running from a ghost of national security. She was running from the real thing.
This writer is full of sh*t. The editor who published this drivel is a fool. And anyone who takes this seriously is a geo-political moron, or a student or professor at Harvard. Ah, but I repeat myself.
Congressman Billybob
The problem is that, since we won the Cold War, morons like this (who never sacrificed anything in their lives) can make suppositions that the whole thing was unnecessary and a huge waste of time. Of course, common sense dictates otherwise, but you can’t prove it. And meanwhile it sounds great to all those potential clients for prescription drugs or whatever.
One of the qualifications for a job in the lib world is “Am I dumb enough”.
I think they have struck gold.
“In this era, humans have been cut loose from ancient moorings of meaning and purpose. “
Translation: Christianity is dead. But the religious have now replaced God with “military worship” (a.k.a. Fascism)
_________________________________________________________
“...when they unanimously promise to strengthen military readiness, they together reinforce the dominant American myth - that an extravagant social investment of treasure and talent in armed power of the group offers members of the group escape from the existential dread that comes with life on a dangerous planet.”
Translation: There are no threats to America, Americans, or even American foreign interests. I use the word myth because I believe these threats are a fairy tale.
________________________________________________________
“Preachers warn of hellfire to offer rescue from it, which is available to those who submit.”
Translation: The only reason you are religious is because you fear Hell. That your perspective on life leads you to believe that it is actually true could never be ther reason why you participate in organized religion.
_________________________________________________________
“Barack Obama, in character as a liberal Democrat, manifests a certain skepticism toward the cult of military power...”
Translation: Although Obama believes in the cult of marxism and human-driven global warming, at least he doesn’t believe in “Peace through Strength”.
_________________________________________________________
“Any reinterpretation of this salvation history, it is feared, would undermine the economy, disempower the elite, unsettle politics - and deprive the citizenry of meaning in an otherwise meaningless world.”
Translation: I don’t like this kind of salvation history, but I do love any salvation history that involves class warfare, demogoguing the wealth earned by acheivers, and ...well...the overcoming of free market capitalism.
So 9/11 was a Hollywood effects shot and the WTC is still there?
National security is “bogus” but global warming is a real threat requiring immediate action and vast transfers of wealth from the private sector to the political sector, and from the US to the rest of the world. And vast transfers of national sovereignty to the United Nations.
Hey Mr. Carroll, try substituting “defense” for “national security” and it will all become clear. It has little to do with how secure one feels and a lot to do with responding to an actual attack.
We just need one sub off shore to keep us safe.
LMAO
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.