Blogcritics Comments on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Comment by Jordan Richardson on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:54:25 EDT

I was going to reply to this, but I was distracted by Tremendous Reporter Cleavage.

Comment by Christopher Rose on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:13:26 EDT

Ruvy, as usual, you are making little sense. for a start it simply isn't possible to have encyclopaedic ignorance. That would be like saying you will follow logic rather than dogma - simply impossible! Debkafiles is an online newspaper and a partisan one at that. Its reporting is no more valid than anybody else's. The majority of evidence I can find via Google indicates that Hussein's regime stopped making WMDs in 1991 and never had any nukes at all. The majority of its WMDs were given it by the USA for use against Iran. I didn't say I didn't believe that Iraq never had any WMDs or that they had been sent to Syria. I said that if that were true, Syria had shown restraint by not using them or allowing them to be used by others. Again, a newspaper report isn't proof, so I doubt that Iran has nukes - yet. Even if they got them, I don't believe they will use them. Britain and France have their own large and established nuclear arsenals - legally obtained, not criminally like Israel's own - and will certainly not tolerate an Iranian nuclear attack. I never feared a Soviet nuclear attack during the Cold War and I don't fear an Iranian one now. Nor am I willing to live my life in fear and paranoia like some. History has shown that Iran has always chosen pragmatism over dogma and the literal interpretation of its political statements you are so fond of - at odds with the love of interpretation and divination you apply to your faithist views - is simply naive. Finally, you appear to believe that your government and army don't care to protect their own people but this unsubstantiated god of yours does and will. Good luck with that.

Comment by Ruvy on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:45:20 EDT

Chris, your ignorance of the Middle East is encyclopedic. Debkafiles reported in January of 2003 that Saddam Hussein had moved his missiles out of the country to Syria at night on trucks, and they were stored in the Beka'a. Whether you believe this or not is irrelevant. They are there, and our intelligence has confirmed their presence. In addition, Debkafiles has reported that the Iranians have developed a nuclear device to fit onto the Shihab 3 missiles they have, missiles that can reach Europe - where you live. That you haven't the sense to be concerned shows the depth of your ignorance. Finally, the Iranians are attempting to rebuild their empire - and have a four front missile command in western Asia. Their restored power and glory are not bargaining chips for them, but the fact that you would even think so shows how ignorant you are of how people think here. A powerless Arab loudmouth threatening us with extermination is one thing. It's just the background noise against which we Israelis think, kind of like Muzak. A government with nuclear weapons threatening extermination is quite another issue. The "wiser heads" you refer to "running" this country are mainly concerned about getting their asses into a bunker when the missiles do hit here. They are yellow cowards not worth the bullet it would take to kill them, and whose cowardice would stain the rope used to hang them for their treason. And unless Israel strikes first and strikes hard, the missiles will hit here. I don't rely on America, a pitiful helpless giant. And frankly, I don't rely on the IDF, whose honor and fine reputation has been stained beyond repair by cowards like Rabin, Barak, Mitzna, Sharon, Olmert, Netanyahu, Livni and Peres. That leaves the G-d of Israel. On Him I do rely.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:58:21 EDT

Chris, I do recall the UN weapons inspectors' insistence that there were no WMDs, which meant that Bush 'n' Blair's insistence that there were had to be correct, because as everyone knows, the UN is always wrong about everything. [/sarcasm]

Comment by Christopher Rose on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:47:58 EDT

Al, It was a reasonably held belief that pre-invasion Iraq had WMDs? Could you substantiate that, because I don't recall it that way? And no, Iran getting nukes is not a real and grave danger to the world or the USA. If it did have them and did use them, both debatable in themselves, the response would be little short of catastrophic for Iran. Ruvy, if it is true that Iran is developing nukes, it is highly unlikely that they would use them as anything other than a bargaining chip, as the risk of the country being turned into a glassified wasteland if it did is so high. Similarly, if Iraq had WMDs, which has never been proven as far as I know, and they were actually sent to Syria, then it shows that Syria is capable of restraint as they haven't been used. All the people of the countries within Israel's nuclear attack radius live under the the shadow of actual nuclear attack, not a possible attack in the future, which is your situation. Furthermore, as you are not involved in running Israel, you don't need to worry yourself about the possibility of such a future attack. There are better informed people doing that for you...

Comment by Ruvy on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:29:53 EDT

Brother Barger, Bear something in mind, please. The fantasies of the opponents of the fighting in Iraq differ from the fantasies of the candidates in your presidential elections, but the two have one basic point in common. They are fantasies. Yes Virginia, the Iranians ARE working on a nuclear device with which to attack Europe and Israel. And yes Virginia, Saddam Hussein HAD weapons of mass destruction - weapons that he had moved to Syria before the Americans attacked. When you live under the shadow of these threats, like I do, you pay careful attention to them - it could mean your life not to. Does this mean that your soldiers should remain in Iraq? No. THAT IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PAYMASTERS AT HALIBURTON. But, it does work to bankrupt your country, and to slowly but surely transfer your wealth to us - heh heh, Isaiah 60 pops up where you least expect it, doesn't it? Shabbat Shalom, Ruvy

Comment by Al Barger on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:05:43 EDT

Brother Sobel sez: the fearmongering has gone on, and on, and on, long after the erroneous intelligence was exposed That requires a very careful way of taking things to suit you without regard for the other 99% of the picture. That is, you have to take it that the only reason for going into Iraq - and furthermore the only reason for the larger efforts against Islamic militants - was specifically, narrowly, only the widely and reasonably held belief that Saddam had WMDs. There's a little more to it than that. And now would you say that it is illegitimate or demagogic to argue that Iran getting nukes is a real and grave danger to US and the world? Is that just something that W has made up to please the paymasters at Halliburton?

Comment by Arch Conservative on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:01:23 EDT

Obama is playing the politics of fear also. Last week he said in a speech at a campaign evenet that the GOP will say "Did I mention he's black," insinuating that anyone who doesn't support him is a racist. It's still the first quarter and Obama has already grown very cocky and overconfident. He and his supporters had better watch who they're calling a racist because there are a lot of people in this country that are sick and tired of being calld racist because they don't blindly agree with everything Obama says and does.

Comment by Clavos on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:45:11 EDT

@#41: Second that, bliff!

Comment by bliffle on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:42:34 EDT

Obama seems to be an attractive candidate looking for a policy.

Comment by Ruvy on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:37:58 EDT

Well, Bliff, you could start by demanding a little honesty as to who they are. McCain has been stinking up American politics for a while now, but the "angel of change" seems unwilling to produce anything so simple as real birth certificate. Mind you, I support Obama. He is everything America seems to stand for - plastic values, plastic reality, plastic truths - and a generous dollop of Jew-hating, anti-Israel scum to boot. My kind of ~~goy~~ guy, madame.

Comment by bliffle on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:01:27 EDT

We have to demand better of our officials. Agree or disagree with policy, but make them do the work to have policy. Otherwise we endup with a guy who's flying by the seat of his pants, and any pilot will tell you that is disastrous. Just look at GWB. There's a guy without a thought in his head who just does things that he thinks his best friends will like. No forethought, no plan, no discussion.

Comment by Ruvy on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:53:45 EDT

Bliffle, Policies? These clowns don't have policies at all because there are no options for policies in America. You guys are broke, and you're stuck in a swamp in Iraq. That, and all the bad economic consequences flowing from being stuck in Iraq is sure to impoverish you in the not too distant future. Policy, to the degree that it is made, is made by the mass media - like dumbing down the population of the States (and anyone else unfortunate enough to have to listen to or watch American commercial radio or TV) to a level of idiocy and sheeplishness. Just look at the crap called "entertainment" in the American media! If you haven't got time to watch, just wander over to the other sections of this site. How can anybody with his head stuck in dung make an intelligent decision, anyway?

Comment by bliffle on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:34:16 EDT

We are all wasting our time on this. Better we should be discussing the actual policies of McCain and Obama than these distractions.

Comment by Ruvy on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:30:22 EDT

I have a rather low opinion ... of the American public's attention span on the best of days. So do the mass media - as witness the fact that you can't watch a [edited for appropriateness] TV show for ten freaking minutes without it being interrupted for commercials. But it's a chicken-and-egg scenario: are TV programs structured that way because the American public has a short attention span, or have people been conditioned to have a short attention span by the structure of the programs? The mass media in America has created the attention span of Americans. The constant stream of commercial interruptions on radio and TV has effectively shortened attention span. ADHD? ADD? Bollocks!!! It's a great way to addict kids to Ritalin and dumb them down even more.

Comment by Jon Sobel on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:36:49 EDT

Ah, Al, you raise an interesting point. But your analogy of yelling at a kid to get out of the way doesn't hold. In that case, there's an actual, obvious danger to the kid. We're talking about a situation where the fearmongering has gone on, and on, and on, long after the erroneous intelligence was exposed etc. etc. etc. The reason it continued to work, to some degree, is I guess, is related to what Clavos says about the public not paying attention. I say they're paying just enough attention to get the distorted, amplified message that somethin big is out there tryin to git us so we better shut up and do what we're told.

Comment by Pablo on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:59:08 EDT

big Al, You said: "That's just trying to demagougically scare people with the utterly ridiculous and spurious connection that Bush is supposedly even vaguely like Hitler." Well ummm uhh his grandfather Prescott sure seemed to like him :). Good ole Union Banking Corporation, along with his buddy Harriman were doing everything in their power to assist old Adolph. In fact the newspaper of record in NY at the time even had a headline on the front page calling him Hitler's angel! I personally find many similarities besides his grandfather assisting Hitler in his rise to power, and even into the war iteslf. For one thing extreme egomania, coupled with a messianic complex, and one of his most famous quotes. "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." Connections between the Bush's and Adolf, oh nooooooooo Al, sure bubba, and this coming from a libertarian too, you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Comment by Pablo on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:13:04 EDT

Al, Spoken like a true bulldog. You bare those libertarian fangs ole buddy.

Comment by Al Barger on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:57:40 EDT

Brother Sobel, your basic premise here is just wrong, that it is wrong or evil to use fear to motivate people. Fear is a useful and adaptive part of basic mammalian biology. The propriety depends on how and when fear is used for motivation. For example, if you're playing in the street and someone screams at you and scares you to get you to jump out of the way of an oncoming vehicle, then they've done you a very valuable service. Also, using fear does not at all necessarily constitute demagoguery - if the person in fact believes that there's something to be afraid of. As it applies to Iraq, perhaps we did have scary stuff to be legitimately afraid of. If President Bush in fact believed what he said, then it's not demagoguery - whether you think his fears were correct or not. As to "fearmongering," I'd count your nonsense comments about "Hitler's playbook." That's just trying to demagougically scare people with the utterly ridiculous and spurious connection that Bush is supposedly even vaguely like Hitler.

Comment by Doug Hunter on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:50:23 EDT

"I'm just not sure how, or even why, we should be doing anything more than we are. As I noted, life goes on." How I long for the day when a politician will echo those comments. I'm not holding my breath.

Comment by BA on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:22:14 EDT

Majority of people don't care, in general. Money dictates the way television works in terms of commercials. And I myself most of the time get too involved in my video games to really care or keep up with the news. The last news I watched was about the mine collapsed in utah or colorado, wherever it was, and right when I saw Bob Murray hijack the media like he did, I knew, the first time I saw him, he was just trying cover his a$$. I almost laughed myself to death. And that alone turned me completely off all the 24 hour news channels. I never watch any of them anymore. American media despite what they say about themselves, has no integrity and lacks quality. Wasn't it Mike Wallace who decided Reagan was "The Great Communicator"? Ha, he was also terrible with the economy, the environment, created huge deficits and wouldn't fund AIDS research because it was an obvious sign of the Americans peoples moral decay. I doubt he was really responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union either, like he always gets credit. He probably just happened to be in office when the inevitable happened. And was basically a figure head. And anyway, I rarely if ever watch the regular news either. I get the basic news off the Internet. It wouldn't matter if peoples' attention span is long or not, the networks try to get ratings...period. It doesn't matter if people don't like it or love it, that's the way that is.

Comment by Clavos on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:04:03 EDT

You misunderstand me, B-tone. I'm not saying the American public needs to do anything vis-a-vis the "war on terror." I don't think we do, other than to pay attention to what our government is doing and vote according to our individual wishes in that regard. Personally, I feel no fear nor danger whatever (nor does anyone I know), and I'm of the opinion that the only Americans in real and immediate danger from terrorists are those in uniform and civilians traveling in Muslim countries. Jon is saying that the Bush administration is preying on and manipulating the fears of the public to support their strategy in Iraq. My contention to Jon is simply that the public is not paying attention for a variety of reasons, and that the majority of them are hardly aware, much less afraid.

Comment by Baronius on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:32:15 EDT

I want to say something eloquent about this article, I really do; but it's just stupid.

Comment by Baritone on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:30:19 EDT

Clav, I don't quite understand what you are suggesting, though. What, IYO, should we be thinking or doing? Should we be erecting armed camps? Should we all start packing heat? I'm just not sure how, or even why, we should be doing anything more than we are. As I noted, life goes on. How vigilent can we be? Should people in say, Ogden, Utah be as watchful and wary as, say those within the DC Beltway or in Manhattan? And just what should Big Apple residents be doing? How many times will we experience people crying wolf? I think the color warning system has proven to be more ongoing comic fodder for late nite talk show hosts than it has proven to have any particular efficacy in effecting heightened awareness amongst the populace. Do you find that people elsewhere are, in fact, more vigilent than Americans? If so, where and how? B-tone

Comment by Clavos on Charlie Black and the Politics of Fear

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:51:52 EDT

Well, Jon, now you're positing some sort of Manchurian Candidate or 1984 scenario; and while I know such brainwashing is possible (to a limited degree) on a personal basis, I strongly doubt the Bush crew have the kind of either expertise or charisma to accomplish it. I think the much more likely and reasonable explanation is a combination of apathy, self-absorption and no small degree of stupidity on the part of the public, who when they don't see an immediate effect on themselves personally, invariably "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."