Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Bush invokes 'Godwin's Law' in the "War on Terror"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bush invokes 'Godwin's Law' in the "War on Terror"

    Bush compares Bin Laden to Hitler

    President George W Bush has compared Osama Bin Laden to Lenin and Hitler in a speech to US military officers.

    "Underestimating the words of evil and ambitious men is a terrible mistake," he said as he quoted extensively from Bin Laden and other al-Qaeda figures.

    He said the world had ignored the writings of Lenin and Hitler "and paid a terrible price" - adding the world must not to do the same with al-Qaeda.

    Mr Bush has been defending his security strategy as mid-term elections loom.

    His speech on Tuesday - the day following the US Labor Day holiday - coincided with the country's traditional start date for election campaigning.

    "Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them," he said.

    But, he added, the US and its allies could be confident of victory in "the great ideological struggle of the 21st Century" because "we have seen free nations defeat terror before".

    Anti-terror strategy

    The speech covered many of the same themes as his first address in his current five-speech series defending his administration's so-called Global War on Terror.

    He outlined a newly-updated "National Strategy for Combating Terrorism" document, which includes objectives such as preventing future attacks and denying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.

    "The best way to protect America is to stay on the offence," he said.

    Other goals in the US strategy include denying terrorists control of any nation or area they could use as a refuge - an aim he linked to the continued US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    And with less than a week until America marks the fifth anniversary of the 11 September 2001 attacks, he again portrayed US policy in Iraq as part of a broad strategy to maker the country safer.

    He defended the controversial Patriot Act and terrorist surveillance programme, which involves the government listening in on calls between the US and foreign locations without the warrant which is normally required.

    "If al-Qaeda is calling somebody in America, we need to know why in order to stop attacks," he said to the applause of his audience.
    Watch Bush speech
    _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
    _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
    _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
    _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

  • #2
    His (and/or his speechwriters') grasp of world history is absolutely lamentable. How can he compare anybody to Hitler and Lenin? About the only thing they have in common is that George doesn't like either of them. I'm surprised that he didn't squeeze Castro in there while he was at it.

    Then this:
    He said the world had ignored the writings of Lenin and Hitler "and paid a terrible price" - adding the world must not to do the same with al-Qaeda.
    Is just bizarre. Okay, Mein Kampf didn't do that well outside the Third Reich, but when were the writings of Lenin ignored? Surely if you are going to whinge about Lenin, the point is that people took him seriously, read his works and went on to become 'Enemies of Freedom'(c).

    Comment


    • #3
      This talks reminds me of what was said in another thread about shamanism and abuse of langage.

      He " forgets " that the U.S. have been the first to underestimate islamism .......... for ideological and political reasons.

      Comment


      • #4
        Bush should try reading Lenin's "Imperialism - The Highest Stage of Capitalism" . But I think that children's goat story he was so immersed in when the twin towers went down is more his level.

        It's a shame he did have a word with Bin Laden about H1tler when they were business partners. I expect he knows a lot about it, giving that Grandaddy Bush sold oil to the [email protected]

        The problem with all this is that anyone who is aware of the genuine and alarming historical links between Islamism and [email protected] will now just be accused by the Jihadist "Left" of parroting Bush. The word "Islamo-fascism" is out of bounds already.

        But I shall continue to use it.
        \"...an ape reft of his tail, and grown rusty at climbing, who yet feels himself to be a symbol and the frail representative of Omnipotence in a place that is not home.\" James Branch Cabell

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm totally with johneffay re: Hitler v. Lenin. One does not have to ask if there are any literate people in this Administation; the answer is an unqualified "No!"

          Bin Laden is a dangerous sunuvabitch and has caused the US and the world a lot of trouble. But he is no great thinker, he's just a cagey guerilla in the age of instant communication. He is not a philosopher/politician like Lenin, nor a frustrated artist/figurehead/orator like Hitler. He's a diabetic in a turban, hiding in a cave with a videocam.

          To even elevate bin Laden to such a level by comparison is shameful.

          Miqque
          ... just another sailor on the seas of Fate, dogpaddling desperately ...

          Comment


          • #6
            More to say but in the middle of some things...

            Lumping together Hitler and Lenin represents not only his ignorance (and willful ignorance) but also his aversion to details. Broad strokes are easy.

            But this is execeptionally lazy-- Stalin I might understand, but Lenin?

            Comment


            • #7
              Oh I don't know. I can see how Bush might associate Bin Laden with Lenin:





              I mean, you've just gotta watch out for those long-haired bearded bed-lovers, haven't ya?
              _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
              _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
              _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
              _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Miqque
                He's a diabetic in a turban,
                You've got something against diabetics?

                Neither H1tler nor Bin Laden were / are "serious thinkers". Lenin was. All were / are of course at the extreme authoritarian end of the political spectrum, which is where my objection to Lenin comes in, although I would guess not Bush's (look at China - repressive communist regimes are okay nowadays so long as they're, erm, promoting capitalism).

                Still. I'm not so sure that H1tler was anything special. A skilled demagogue, I guess - but would anyone who saw him in his flophouse days have thought he'd amount to anything? It's all to do with being in the right time and place...

                But yes, the H1tler comparison for anyone is jaded, dull and almost pointless. Sad thing is, it plays well with the punters (whoops, I meant voters...). Look at how public opinion was swung on Serbia and Iraq.
                \"...an ape reft of his tail, and grown rusty at climbing, who yet feels himself to be a symbol and the frail representative of Omnipotence in a place that is not home.\" James Branch Cabell

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Mikey_C
                  You've got something against diabetics?

                  Neither H1tler nor Bin Laden were / are "serious thinkers". Lenin was. All were / are of course at the extreme authoritarian end of the political spectrum, which is where my objection to Lenin comes in, although I would guess not Bush's (look at China - repressive communist regimes are okay nowadays so long as they're, erm, promoting capitalism).
                  Of course... Communism! So long as there's money in it.
                  Didn't people gawk at the USSR's development during the early 20th century. Didn't capitalists almost give Stalin a pat on the back..
                  (Thinking about Animal Farm)

                  Everybody today seems so wide eyed about modern day China. They want kids to learn mandarin and chinese culture. It seems like they've forgotten about the Japanese threat during the 80's. Same thing, to my eyes. It's sheer ignorance to not consider that china's economy abides with similar structural problems. Boom and BUST!

                  Originally posted by Mikey_C
                  Still. I'm not so sure that H1tler was anything special. A skilled demagogue, I guess - but would anyone who saw him in his flophouse days have thought he'd amount to anything? It's all to do with being in the right time and place...

                  But yes, the H1tler comparison for anyone is jaded, dull and almost pointless. Sad thing is, it plays well with the punters (whoops, I meant voters...). Look at how public opinion was swung on Serbia and Iraq.
                  Bush... The obscurantist!

                  Hitler was the product of military training in demagoguery.
                  Without it, he wouldn't really have come far enough.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by David Mosley
                    I mean, you've just gotta watch out for those long-haired bearded bed-lovers, haven't ya?
                    Well that reminds me i used to prefer BL back in the days when he used to sing "Morning has Broken"...
                    \"...an ape reft of his tail, and grown rusty at climbing, who yet feels himself to be a symbol and the frail representative of Omnipotence in a place that is not home.\" James Branch Cabell

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Actually, Mikey (love that name) maybe I should have said "immobile dialysis-dependent idiot in a turban".

                      No, have nothing against turbans, either.

                      What worries me is the whole thing about Bush transforming the CIA into a sort of KGB - complete with secret prisons (gulags) and Lubyanka clone. Since there has been no formal declaration of war against a soverign country, I'm not too sure the Geneva Convention (or other treaties) really apply under international law when it comes to gathering intelligence from terrorists. Seems to me the old sodium amytal interview would be a very simple (and relatively safe) method of extracting such data from - basically - untrained people. Sone pro spies have been indoctrinated in how to resist interrogation, everything from pain through brainwashing techniques (that pretty much leave the subject a vegetable - apologies to the vegans). The normal soldier yokel or even those planted as sleeper agents do not have such resistance, and it only takes a fair psychologist to drain their brains. A good shrink, armed with medications and a budget, could do so much more quickly. Yet we have these knuckleheads trying to "break" prisoners into some sort of confession. Cavedweller techniques.

                      I'm really unimpressed and a bit scared at the same time. Seems like severe regression to me.
                      Miqque
                      ... just another sailor on the seas of Fate, dogpaddling desperately ...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        OPINION PIECE FROM BBC WEB SITE:
                        'War on terror' loses clear direction
                        By Paul Reynolds
                        World affairs correspondent, BBC News website


                        In the five years since 9/11, a clear-cut and well-supported "war on terror" declared by President Bush has become confused and divisive.

                        Whereas Le Monde declared the day after 9/11: "We are all Americans now", a placard at a demonstration in London recently read: "We are all Hezbollah now".

                        American policy has had successes. The quick war in Afghanistan toppled the Taleban and has denied al-Qaeda its training bases, which were important to it (base is what the word Qaeda means).

                        Al-Qaeda has lost much of its leadership. It has not toppled governments as it had hoped. Western forces have not left the Middle East, and in particular the government of Saudi Arabia, guardian of Mecca, which is probably Osama Bin Laden's ultimate target, stands.

                        Yet Western and other publics are left in fear, and rightly so. Al-Qaeda is no invention. Its impact - or that of its sympathisers - was seen not only in New York and Washington but in Bali, Madrid, London, Morocco, Istanbul and elsewhere.

                        The power of fear

                        Fear is a powerful motivating factor. Fear after 9/11 led to the Bush doctrine of the pre-emptive strike.

                        But this doctrine has not been endorsed by all.

                        Doubts, divisions and defections have developed among American allies. For many around the world, sympathy for the United States has changed into suspicion and, for some, even into hatred. The prisons at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, the treatment of prisoners, secret prisons and rendition flights all added to this feeling.

                        The changes just announced by President Bush - acknowledging and emptying the secret camps and other moves - might answer some criticism but not all and their overall effect remains to be seen.

                        Pessimism about Western tactics

                        Professor Michael Clarke of King's College, London, is gloomy in the short term at least.

                        "If I was Osama Bin Laden sitting in my cave, I would think I was winning," he said.

                        "I would consider that I am still at large, I have a global movement, I strike a chord with young Muslims everywhere, I am an inspiration not a planner and I have lured the US into wars in Afghanistan and Iraq of my choosing and of my way of fighting.

                        "Nor is the West countering the easy narrative offered by the jihadis. They are, and I agree with the Bush language on this, Islamic fascists, but we are not engaging enough in the war of ideas and are instead dwelling on their actions. They can counter that by dwelling on ours, in a game of moral equivalence."

                        Iraq hangs like a shadow

                        The shadow of Iraq hangs over American policy and the world's view of it.

                        The problem is that many governments and peoples do not see Iraq as part of the answer to terror. They see it as part of the cause. They therefore want to distance themselves from American policy.

                        Not that al-Qaeda's terrorism was prompted by the Iraq invasion. The 11 September attacks preceded Iraq and recently, German trains were the target of an attempted attack even though Germany opposed the invasion.

                        But Iraq has probably been the greatest single factor in producing the confusion that is now evident. Washington declares that Iraq must be won or the war on terror will be lost. Opponents say it has made things worse, though many opponents add that now it must be won.

                        A difficulty for the Bush administration is that it argued differently when the invasion was announced. Then, it was about weapons of mass destruction.

                        Terrorism floated only in the background as a nightmare in which a rogue state might give some terrorist nuclear weapons.

                        Now, Iraq has been declared the frontline which has to be held or it will move to the streets of America.

                        Language changes to reflect policy shifts

                        The extent to which Iraq has influenced events can be seen by looking at the language used by President Bush before and after the invasion.

                        On 31 August this year he told the American Legion in Salt Lake City: "This war will be long... but it's a war we must wage, and a war we will win...The war we fight today is more than a military conflict; it is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st Century."

                        His use of the future tense in "We will win" contrasts with what he said before the invasion. On 26 February 2003, he declared in a speech in Washington: "We have arrested, or otherwise dealt with, many key commanders of al-Qaeda. Across the world, we are hunting down the killers one by one. We are winning."

                        The change of tense shows how far any expectation of victory has been put off.

                        No settled narrative

                        It is perhaps not unlike the debate over South Vietnam. That war, too, was declared necessary for victory in the other long war, the Cold War. In those days, it was said that if South Vietnam went, the whole of South East Asia would go too, in a fall of the dominoes.

                        And nor has Washington been effective in solving another motivating factor for the jihadis - the Israel//Palestine conflict. Its portrayal of Israel as a victim in the war on terror sits uneasily with, say, the Europeans, who generally see the dispute as territorial not ideological and therefore amenable to a compromise.

                        There is therefore no agreed and clear narrative for the "war on terror".

                        Optimism about Western values

                        Professor Clarke is more optimistic in the long term.

                        "It will get worse before it gets better but I expect western policy to win eventually because it offers a superior, political, moral and economic model. However we have not made things easy for ourselves by mistakes, first in Afghanistan by allowing Taleban and al-Qaeda leaders to escape and then on a grand scale in make a strategic mistake by invading Iraq.

                        "This is probably going to take a generation to resolve, until the angry young jihadis turn into tired old men, as the Marxist-Leninists did."

                        http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5319522.stm
                        _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
                        _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
                        _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
                        _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The shadow of Iraq hangs over American policy and the world's view of it.
                          So, Iraq is Mordor? Seems about right.
                          Miqque
                          ... just another sailor on the seas of Fate, dogpaddling desperately ...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            This summer i was in Egypt and spoke with some people.

                            They don' t want to make war to Israel.

                            But each event has incresead the hate for the U.S. and the israelian state, from the tratment of Iraq after the first golf war to the recet libanese war.

                            It is difficult to imagine the feelings of the people.

                            A fair treatment of the palestinian case is an imperative first move .

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              If i understand things, Bush presented to the congress a projected law to " clarify " the rules about torture to legitimate actions by C.I.A. agents.

                              The commission of congress examining the project led by Mac Cain and others rebuked him.....

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X