[lbo-talk] Asking the Wrong Questions: Journalistic andAcademicNaivete

[Carl Remick]

>From: "Wojtek Sokolowski" <sokol at jhu.edu>
>
>Carrol quoted:
>
>****  The current bombing campaign is killing innocent people,
>creating a relief crisis in a destitute country and further
>destabilizing an already-perilous region. It is dangerously limitless in
>its scope and military insiders are expressing serious concerns about
>whether it will even accomplish its goals. Yet given that terrorism is
>an immediate and continuing threat, protesters must be able to discuss
>alternative approaches to national security. ...****
>
>I'm curious whether anyone on this list would still consider this to be
>a sensible comment?
>>
>[WS:] It is a sensible comment inasmuch as it asks for a specific and
>constructive policy that can offer an alternative to the current neo-con
>warmongering  ...

Au contraire, I think this comment -- "... given that terrorism is an 
immediate and continuing threat, protesters must be able to discuss 
alternative approaches to national security" -- is as senseless a remark as 
any I've seen that actually link a subject with a predicate.  The implicit 
assumption that terrorism arises from external causes is twaddle.  Blowback 
is the only causal factor worth taking seriously.

You want my "alternative approaches to national security"?  Here y'are:

* Abolish imperialistic capitalism and institute socialism.

* End dependence on foreign oil supplies.

* Force the US professional military to go out and get honest jobs by 
reducing the Pentagon's budget to the itsy-est of bitsy levels.

* Break all military, diplomatic, trade and foreign-aid ties with Israel.

Presto, there you are -- a prosperous, safe and happy US.

Carl

_________________________________________________________________
Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the i’m Initiative now. 
It’s free. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_MAY07