the dynamite politics thread

[Lina]

Ah yes, I guess I was registered. Duh. Sorry, rahvin.

 

[hyena]

@lina: the pre-election polls were forecasting a victory of the Popular Party (conservative, the party of the former prime minister Aznar). It seems that a great many Spanish voters swung left in the wake of the terror attacks. What you say about the high disapproval rate for operations in Iraq is correct, but generally speaking the population of Spain was satisfied with their government, because it managed to restart the national economy after a bleak period.

I'm otherwise completely terrified by what you say.

 

[rahvin]

Does anyone here know what pollsters were predicting the outcome of the election would be before the attack took place?

they predicted the opposite of what happened: that the right-wing coalition would win.

i'll read the article now, and thanks hyena for posting it.

edit: late again.

 

[Lina]

@lina: the pre-election polls were forecasting a victory of the Popular Party (conservative, the party of the former prime minister Aznar). It seems that a great many Spanish voters swung left in the wake of the terror attacks. What you say about the high disapproval rate for operations in Iraq is correct, but generally speaking the population of Spain was satisfied with their government, because it managed to restart the national economy after a bleak period.

Ah, thanks. Interesting. Just like here, the election will swing on whichever is more immediately important at the time -- terrorism or the economy. I should've known.

I'm otherwise completely terrified by what you say.

That's funny, I've gotten the impression you're the one to fear around here.

 

[hyena]

fear me? come on, i'm as innocuous as a clockwork teddy bear.

 

[rahvin]

well, i certainly agree with the main point of the article, namely that any behaviour that might make terrorists think that their actions are working should be avoided on top of any other political choice.
still i don't find lina's counterpoints that fearsome, except for one.

If that's the case, how do we go about fighting a "war" with them? It's a neverending, unwinnable proposition. I'm not saying we should cease and desist, I'm just annoyed how conservatives think we can simply kill them all "one by one," problem solved.

i agree with that, as in: it's simplistic to think that a "seek & destroy" approach is going to work. there needs to be more military and diplomatic intelligence involved. provided, however, that we agree on the fact that the extermination of the threat is our final goal. if we tergiversate cuddling the thought that other, peaceful and long-term solutions are viable, i think we lose track of the menace and we end up fucked badly.

"Most aggressively antiterror party" being, in his eyes, the Republicans (which is ludicrous). I'd argue instead that the American public would rally behind the president, whichever party he is from, and only out of blind patriotism. I'm not sure that's any more praise-worthy than a knee-jerk response against the status quo.

that's also probably quite true, but i don't find it such a problem aside from the relative, technical lack of competence shown by this or that president/chief of state. i'm inclined to believe in this case said incompetence was rather manifest in some stages of the intervention, yet we don't know about the other side. it could even be a matter of personal skills, although i tend to trust more the political faction that doesn't exhude an aura of meek forgiveness.

Prodi's observation is absolutely correct. It is Brooks who assumes that is an endorsement for "capitulation and negotiation." Again, more defensiveness on the part of conservatives, rather than have an intellectual policy debate. (And maybe there's nothing to debate, maybe the situation is just that impossible, but come on, enough with the macho "charging full-steam ahead" attitude.)

ok, this is the point i find terrifying. charging full-steam might be macho and technically inefficient, but going around three days from a 200-people killing saying that fighting the culprits was a mistake is pure shit, in my humble opinion. if some strategies have to be revised, you don't revise them feeding the population some instrumental words about how everything your political adversaries have done turned out to be utter crap. prodi wants to be praised for geopolitical insights he's never had, in order to try and fuck up the italian government (who indeed deserves it, but for other reasons) and would with exactly as much ease say the very opposite if it had any chance to end up in its favour.
everything that doesn't go in the direction of building a solid opposition to terrorist strikes is capitulation and negotiation. intellectual debates are more than welcome, but not when one side - and supposedly the most intellectually equipped, at least in europe - just gives in to a populistic new-age attitude that forgets hundreds of years of european history to feed the new trends of passivity and debauchery.

 

[hyena]

what the little guy said, except for the part where the current italian government should be replaced - in theory it should, but the alternatives are a bit depressing IMO.

we don't have any donald rumsfeld, here. which makes me wish for yet another teddy bear.

 

[Malaclypse]

omg please tell me you don't want a rummy as your president. i think i'll have to shoot myself.

 

[Lina]

well, i certainly agree with the main point of the article, namely that any behaviour that might make terrorists think that their actions are working should be avoided on top of any other political choice.

Agreed.

still i don't find lina's counterpoints that fearsome, except for one.

:Shedevil:

that's also probably quite true, but i don't find it such a problem aside from the relative, technical lack of competence shown by this or that president/chief of state. i'm inclined to believe in this case said incompetence was rather manifest in some stages of the intervention, yet we don't know about the other side.

To whom are you referring as the other side?

ok, this is the point i find terrifying. charging full-steam might be macho and technically inefficient, but going around three days from a 200-people killing saying that fighting the culprits was a mistake is pure shit, in my humble opinion.

Again, I agree. In my desire for some political verbal masturbation, I picked apart an article that I generally agree with. It's his overtones and the implied meanings behind them, based on his other opinions, that irk me.

prodi wants to be praised for geopolitical insights he's never had, in order to try and fuck up the italian government (who indeed deserves it, but for other reasons) and would with exactly as much ease say the very opposite if it had any chance to end up in its favour.

I don't know enough about him to take his remarks in context, obviously.

everything that doesn't go in the direction of building a solid opposition to terrorist strikes is capitulation and negotiation.

Yes, but the internal political debate here is over how to build a solid opposition. And Brooks is implying there is only one such way -- as Bush says in every speech, to "hunt them down, one by one." I find that oversimplification to be revolting. I don't pretend to have a solution though -- hence why this is verbal masturbation ultimately.

 

[rahvin]

rumsfeld turned out to be quite amateurish in his approach, imo. very poor tactics after all. so yes, i'd take it as a president, considering that the italian president has no powers whatsoever.


@lina: that part about the way bush addresses the population i think we have discussed once before (not, heh, on the forum though...), and i still think that, despite our own intelligence and culture, there is no way in hell any population in the world is ever going to be presented with a version of the truth they can understand. they shall remain, on average, too dumb to get anything beyond "me good. them bad. me beats them up silly."

edit: oh, and the other side = life after de... err, no, wait: the democratic party in the usa, left-wing parties in italy and spain, right-wing parties in england.

 

[Salamurhaaja]

Like Noam Chomsky recently said in a speech and I am quoting freely
as I can't find the document now:
"The only way to win the war on terrorism is stop using terrorism".


We had a hypocritical 3 minute silence on monday due to this (thanks EU,
yet another pointless decision you made). I think it's really sad that people
have to do this crap in order to feel as if they have done something. But
this is nothing but a selfish act, "oh, I was quiet for 3 minutes, now all is ok
in the world again" yet it does absolute NOTHING to anyone but yourself.

I guess this would explain why me and a colleague were discussing work
during the 3 minutes and our boss came to ask if we didn't understand the
email which was sent about this, we kinda looked at him funny hahah


np: kmfdm - wwiii - stars & stripes

 

[hyena]

@vc: president, no. teddy bear, yes. which also puts to rest rahvin's doubts.

@lina: i'd love to debate, but alas in tune with the tide of time i have to go to bed. i'll leave you with a quote for the night: we are going to have to change the way we live. or else, we are going to have to chance the way they live. we have chosen the latter. uttered by forementioned teddy-candidate in sept. 2001, and immediately printed on a very scary (heh) t-shirt of mine. truer words were seldom spoken.

 

[Lina]

edit: oh, and the other side = life after de...

err, no, wait: the democratic party in the usa, left-wing parties in italy and spain, right-wing parties in england.

I strongly disagree when people say, for instance, we have no idea how Gore would've handled the situation instead. There are years of party and individual history to refer to.

NF: Too tired to expound.

 

[Lina]

@lina: i'd love to debate, but alas in tune with the tide of time i have to go to bed. i'll leave you with a quote for the night: we are going to have to change the way we live. or else, we are going to have to chance the way they live. we have chosen the latter. uttered by forementioned teddy-candidate in sept. 2001, and immediately printed on a very scary (heh) t-shirt of mine. truer words were seldom spoken.

Perhaps truer words were never spoken, but more hypocritical actions were never taken then as well.

And yes, 'kin time zones.

 

[hyena]

we'll find a remedy for those damn time zones as well!

ehm... no. maybe i got carried away.

here, have a treat. *handles rummy-teddy* goodnight!

 

[Lina]

*flings rummy teddy into the fire*

*asks for polar teddy instead*

Goodnight.

 

[rahvin]

IThere are years of party and individual history to refer to.

i obviously ignore those concerning the democratics in the states. but i do know something about that of italian's left-wing, and i must say it's no guarantee of how the situation would have been handled now. a phase of italian history that framed two specific position (commonly referred to as left and right) can be traced back to around 50 years ago, but since then said position have shifted and, in some way, watered down. i can imagine what the reaction of left-wing's politicans' forefathers could have been - and i still don't like it - but i can't say how the new ruling class from that side would have decided to react, because they've never been in charge on the occasion of a war yet.
and with that, i'll join the bedtime party.

 

[rahvin]

we'll find a remedy for those damn time zones as well!

ehm... no. maybe i got carried away.

you got my full interest for one second.

*asks for polar teddy instead*

just as long as you don't fling me into the fire, i've had my share of burning for this year.

 

[hyena]

oh, you two... one shows no appreciation for my presents by throwing them into the fire, the other listens to me only if i promise incredible things... besides, rahve, the current left-wing leadership actually handled the kosovo war and it wasn't too bad at it, either. still, they suck.

 

[rahvin]

besides, rahve, the current left-wing leadership actually handled the kosovo war and it wasn't too bad at it, either.

come on, we just sent peacekeepers. you and i could have handled that war inbetween parties at your place.