So many civilians died to get Noriega as we tested our new stealth bombers in Panama. A war on drugs or a war against the truth coming out?
Heath@DeanTV.org | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 12:28 pm | #

This is a good post, but couldn't you go farther? Terror is the fear of death. As long as people are afraid to die, then terrorism will be an effective tool.

On the other hand, humans have an overwhelming instinct to survive. Things must be really really out of whack for them to want to die.

The way to solve the Islamic terrorist problem is to try to solve the political problem the Islamic Middle East has with US policy. I can say that Sept 11 happened because of a breakdown in communication between the Islamic world and the USA. I can say the USA stopped listening. Of course I understand how Dean can't say that.

But by concentrating on solving the political problems (Israel/Palestine, the world's oil supply) Dean has shown he can make real progress on the political front.

I'd recommend this article about the US plan to seize the oil fields in 1973. What we're seeing is a replay of that, where our political discussion was formed around this issue. What is happening is a drawn-out version of the quick posession they didn't do back in 1973... it's not a plan, but an inevitable result of our confusion over that time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/0...ast/ 02DOCU.html
wellbasically | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 12:32 pm | #

Our involvement with supporting and meddling with Middle-Eastern and South-American dictatorships for our own needs is is long and vast -- from Noriega to Shah to Saddam to Saudis.

Americans are deeply conditioned to see this as the natural state of things, and while I don't know how Dean feels about all of this, I suspect that Dean's presidential bid wouldn't be such a great time to try to educate Americans to our duplicity and complicity in supporting dictators and terrorists.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 1:10 pm | #

Dana, great post. And I thought maybe I was the only one thinking about how the terror alerts were conveniently being used at times of pressure on the administration. Thanks for putting this up.

And you're right, the only way we can fight is to continue to hope and strive for sensible, bipartisan efforts to make a world community rather than an 'Us' and 'Them' situation.

Great post.
Joe | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 1:19 pm | #

btw --

inspiring post dana. I concur.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 1:24 pm | #

On some level, the support of the old dictators line plays to the direction of Bush's story. What were they supposed to do back then? And is moral purity really worth anything when it's only used by those in power for their material ends, after all.
wellbasically | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 1:46 pm | #

"the only thing we have to fear is dear itself." -FDR
anna | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 2:06 pm | #

So, uh...y'all going to forgive me for the "Heathers" debacle?

No, didn't think so...but worth a shot.
Dana Blankenhorn | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 2:59 pm | #

Hey, Dana, I have a lot of problems with a lot of what you say. But I am more than happy to admit and acknowledge when I agree with something you say. And again, super post.
Joe | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 3:11 pm | #

Great post Dana, thank you
I'm sure a lot of people feel this way
Here's an article worth reading

Threats to democracy at Code-Red level
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/op...=1&searchdiff=2
Barb | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 3:24 pm | #

Joe: I'm pleased that the audience here isn't a bunch of ditto-heads, but thinking individuals like yourself.
Dana Blankenhorn | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 5:08 pm | #

Bill Press is a Heather!

Juuuuuuuuuussssst Kidding. Ha ha

HE
Heath@DeanTV.org | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 5:12 pm | #

So, read this article ("homepage") and tell me why I would be safer with Mr. Dean as President. Truthfully, I can't be too critical of his actions (or inaction) because I know firsthand how tough it is to get a coordinated effort going among various government agencies and the private sector. What this shows, however, is that we really do have problems getting the kind of focused, single-minded effort the country needs, and that all leaders, including Mr. Dean, can look inept and clumsy at times trying to get the job done.
On the subject of alerts, I personally don't mind them. We may not be any safer now, but we certainly weren't any safer during the Clinton years when an unchallenged Bin Laden churned out thousands of operatives in his training camps without any significant repercussions.
DP | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 5:27 pm | #

Let me preface what I'm about to say by pointing out that I agree with Dana 100%.

I don't think it's constructive, however, to harp on the current regime's fear-mongering tendencies.

Americans ARE afraid, and statements that the current regime is making them afraid are going to fall on deaf ears.

Complaining about the Patriot Act is a matter of preaching to the choir. The center wants to know what he is going to do to prevent the development of terrorist cells in the US and abroad. The Patriot Act might be ineffective, misguided and ironcially un-American, but the center looks at it and thinks, at least it's something. These are the same people who were afraid of the communists, the hippies, and the Black Panthers, and discounting terrorists as a threat in any way will sound like he is burying his head in the sand.

What Dean needs to do is articulate what he is going to do to make our country safe in a positive way. He is going to heal our relationships with foreign powers. He is going to foster good will with our allies and build an international coalition that will stand firm and protected against threatening powers. He will foster positive relationships with those countries that house threats. He will respect our military and change things so that the rank and file do not live a life of borderline poverty. At home, he will name an Attorney General who respects individual freedoms, but who will work hard to infiltrate and root out terrorist threats, and keep them from entering the country.

I don't think criticism of the Iraq war is constructive at this point. It's done. Dean needs to articulate a solid exit strategy and a plan to foster democracy there. This is difficult, because I think the fact is that it is impossible to build democracy there in any kind of reasonable time-frame, but Dean still needs to do this.

That said, I like the positive tone of Dana's post, where she (sorry if I'm wrong about your gender, Dana! I'm new here!) quoted Roosevelt (nothing to fear but fear itself). Dean has to emphasize strength, but I think talking too much about the current regime's fear-mongering is bad politics.

The war on Iraq was naive foolishness. The current regime actually believed that Iraq would open their invasion with open arms, a huge error of judgment. The idea that they would see us anything but invaders, and that we would be doing anything but throwing them into civil war, was unbelievably arrogant and self-unaware. But what's done is done, and in the coming ten months, with Saddam Hussein having been captured, people are going to view the war as a success, and probably view it as a positive step toward protecting us from terrorism. I think there is little that Dean can do to turn this misconception around in the minds of the center.

Dean was against the war, and the current regime will use that against him. He can't be forced into defending
mcgovernforprez72 | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 6:33 pm | #

Oops, got cut off there -- I guess my post was too long.

Anyway, I was going to say:

He can't be forced into defending his position. Every time that is brought up, and it will be brought up constantly, he needs to turn it around and talk about the future, and make it clear what he is going to do in Iraq and what he is going to do to end the threat of Al Qaeda.
mcgovernforprez72 | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 6:37 pm | #

we certainly weren't any safer during the Clinton years when an unchallenged Bin Laden churned out thousands of operatives in his training camps without any significant repercussions.

I think we were safer in the Clinton administration, actually. Yes, Al Qaeda was in full swing, but have events of the last three years slowed that down? I think Al Qaeda and similar movements have gained ground in the hearts and minds of people in the Middle East, in the wake of our current regime's policies there. Perhaps progress has been made in Afghanistan in terms of reducing the threat there, but what about new threats? The war on Iraq might be the best thing that ever happened for recruiting anti-American terrorist movements.

It's hard to say what's going to happen, because this is a very complex thing that involves a lot of factors not under our control, but I certainly don't think things are any better now.
mcgovernforprez72 | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 6:52 pm | #

There are two elements in overthrowing an incumbent.

First, you must convince people the incumbent is not doing a very good job.

Second, you must convince them you will do better.

There is a limit to what a candidate can do in making the first argument. But given the approval ratings Bush had at year-end, it has to be done.

The second part, which Dean is doing so well, is in articulating an alternate vision, a different direction that's coherent, powerful, and right.

That's not going to be heard much over the next few months, because we have to compete against Democrats whom we mostly agree with.

But every challenger has appeared beaten once they clinch the nomination. And since 1968, half have won.
Dana Blankenhorn | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 7:08 pm | #

>>>>Dean needs to articulate a solid exit strategy and a plan to foster democracy there.
[in Iraq]

mcgovernforprez, Dean already mentioned the Iraqi Shiite leader Sistani's plan for direct elections... I think that's a start, though I haven't heard him bring it up again... in any case, he would have to confront some real problems after that. Specifically the Iraqis don't seem to really want the US military in their country as an offensive force. Also the Iraqis seem to have some pretty strong feelings about what happens to their oil. Also they don't seem too happy about Israel.

I think Dean can do well with the difference he has shown so far. Bush and his side are scared to death of direct elections of anything in Iraq. If Dean really confronted the root problems I outlined above, he would be much closer to not just solving Iraq, but also the generalized war on (Islamic) terrorism.
wellbasically | Email | Homepage | 01.03.04 - 7:16 pm | #

Good points, Dana, but I think there is a subtle difference here that I haven't done a very good job of articulating.

In summary, I think Dean needs to go back and carefully review the first Gore/Bush debate from 2000. It was here that I think Bush lost too much of the swing vote. Specifically, look at the discussion of Bush's proposed tax cuts. Gore came out on the offensive by pointing out how most of it went to incomes in the 99th percentile.

Bush's response:

"My opponent thinks the government -- the surplus is the government's money. That's not what I think. I think it's the hard-working people of America's money, and I want to share some of that money with you, so you've got more money to build and save and dream for your families."

After you're finished retching from reading that obvious BS, consider what a brilliant tactical maneuver that was. First, he made a clear philosophy statement that was very appealing, and did so with only a fairly underhanded attack at his opponent. Second, he forced Gore into a corner, forcing Gore into the boring and pedantic position of having to explain the rationale behind progressive taxation, which made him look bad, and no one was going to pay attention to. Gore, of course, was flummoxed.

Dean needs to take a page right out of Bush's book and follow that tactic. I think he should come up with a way to couch every issue in those sorts of terms.

In other words, it's not so much a matter of pointing out what a bad job Bush has done, it's a matter of using broad strokes to characterize Bush's motivations, and then stating his plans in appealing terms.

It's too early, but so far I have no been impressed with the way Dean has done that. Granted, he is engaged in a fight for the nomination right now more than a fight against Bush, but in the end he will have to beat Bush at his own game in order to get the center on his side.
mcgovernforprez72 | Email | Homepage | 01.04.04 - 5:44 pm | #

oops, I meant "Gore lost too much of the swing vote", not Bush!
mcgovernforprez72 | Email | Homepage | 01.04.04 - 5:45 pm | #

wellbasically, I think you've hit the nail on the head regarding our challenges in Iraq. I really think we've screwed the pooch and we are going to take our lumps, even if Dean is successful. He'll merely be left with the mess, as was Clinton. The fact is, what models exist in the Middle East for the establishment of democratic Arab states?

(sound of crickets chirping)

The people of Iraq might have hated Saddam, but as a whole they hate the US and Israel even more. I have serious doubts about our ability to affect any kind of positive change there. Certainly, any kind of positive change will have to involve the US getting the hell out of their country.

What the US has been able to do is throw piles of money at certain middle eastern nations to get their governments on our side and protect our oil interests and maintain some degree of peace, in Saudi Arabia for example. Of course, this has done nada for protecting us against terrorism, in fact it's made it worse, and it is not a surefire means of protecting these governments from being overthrown.

Overall, I'm satisfied with what Dean has said regarding a plan, although I only believe it's a better plan than the exacerbation the Reagan/Bush regime is engaged in. Since the Reagan/Bush regime's plan seems to be based on fantasy and not thinking more than a week ahead, this should be a position of strength for Dean, if he can sell it to the center, which currently believes that the current regime is successful in Iraq.
mcgovernforprez72 | Email | Homepage | 01.04.04 - 6:04 pm | #

Bush better make sure the Iraqi people have "FREEDOM" like he promised before the election. If he doesn't, he's going to have a lot of explaining to do to the American people when they start paying attention to the Presidential Race!!!

CLOCKS TICKING BUSHIES!!!!


BUUUUUUUUUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
Bush Whacker | Email | Homepage | 01.05.04 - 2:58 am | #