Comment: Cheese-eating surrender monkeys and fire-eating war

There's a comment in today's The Guardian by Timothy Garton (page 23), which might be worth reading to understand the differences between the USA and the UK (Europe) ...

Quote:

Conservative America celebrated July 4 as a country at war; the July 7 anniversary here reveals a very different attitude.

Having just returned to America after a year's absence, I'm pondering this question: Why is it that the United States, which has not suffered a major terrorist attack at home for more than four years, thinks it's at war, while the United Kingdom, which was hit by a major terrorist attack just a year ago, does not?


The evocation of war is omnipresent in the US. Turn on Fox News and you find a war veteran recounting his experiences on Hill 805 in Vietnam. At one point he says: "I had the privilege of storming the machine gun". The privilege. Walk into the Stanford University bookstore and you find a special display marked "Salute Our Heroes. 20% Off Select Patriotic Titles". Imagine that in your local Waterstone's.

Link to online version

Would this liberal slimebag have been more at ease if America was hit more than 4 times in one day?

woiyo wrote:

Would this liberal slimebag have been more at ease if America was hit more than 4 times in one day?

Any special reason, why you call Timothy Garton Ash a "liberal slimebag"?

He might have 'liberal' ideas but certainly not in the way how Americans use this term.

Slimebag? Well, certainly a Professor of European Studies in the University of Oxford, Director of the European Studies Centre at St Antony's College, Oxford, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University can be that.

Most certainly, I think, you are calling him such becausse he got the George Orwell Prize for political writing this year. That truely makes him more than suspecious, a 'liberal slimebag' as you called him.

He is taking a cheap shot at the AMERICAN PEOPLE with his snotty little comment. Yes, many many many AMERICAN PEOPLE wave their flags proudly and demonstrate their support for the efforts of our men and women in uniform daily. We morn the innocents killed on 9-11 and morn those who lost their lives defending this nation overseas. What he sees in the media and on the streets is real and just because the Brist may handle things differently, is no reason to criticize how the American People demontrate their support.

Quote:

He is taking a cheap shot at the AMERICAN PEOPLE with his snotty little comment. Yes, many many many AMERICAN PEOPLE wave their flags proudly and demonstrate their support for the efforts of our men and women in uniform daily. We morn the innocents killed on 9-11 and morn those who lost their lives defending this nation overseas. What he sees in the media and on the streets is real and just because the Brist may handle things differently, is no reason to criticize how the American People demontrate their support.

It isn't a cheap shot to ask why we believe we are involved in a war, or examine how our people have been manipulated by the media and the government into believing this.

He isn't criticizing the flag waving, he is criticizing the entire attitude that we are somehow sitting around in the midst of an armed conflict. The War on Terror isn't a war at all.

Cycloptichorn

What the "F difference does it make how many times we have been hit or when?

woiyo wrote:

What the "F difference does it make how many times we have been hit or when?

With what measures would YOU compare the actual British situation one year after the attack with that in the USA four years after the attack when you wanted to point at the differences?

I do not know since I have not visited their country. Nor do I care how they feel, as individuals, towards this great nation of mine. I respect their culture, their govt and I respect my right to criticize any individual who makes snippy comments about "me".

Manipulated by the media? How shallow of you to think poeple can not make a reasonable decision on their own. I could say the same for you and your opinion being formed by CNN, NY TIMES et al, since you are too stupid to form your own decision. However, I do not feel that way about you.

Or maybe its because the US has never had to really deal with the dirty work of a war on its territory.

To claim the US did the dirty work in WW1 or WW2 is to completely ignore the real facts. The US came late to both wars and didn't lose nearly as many troops as many other countries did.

woiyo wrote:

What the "F difference does it make how many times we have been hit or when?

With what measures would YOU compare the actual British situation one year after the attack with that in the USA four years after the attack when you wanted to point at the differences?

woiyo wrote:

I do not know since I have not visited their country. Nor do I care how they feel, as individuals, towards this great nation of mine. I respect their culture, their govt and I respect my right to criticize any individual who makes snippy comments about "me".

This has nothing at all to do with having visited a country etc but only with academic standards.

And that's exactly what Timothy Garton Ash does ... like all historians, wether they are in the USA, the UK or elswewhere.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

woiyo wrote:

What the "F difference does it make how many times we have been hit or when?

With what measures would YOU compare the actual British situation one year after the attack with that in the USA four years after the attack when you wanted to point at the differences?

I think the scale of 9/11 leads to it being counted as an act of war.

Had the UK been faced with the death of 3,000 people and the destruction of a landmark, I suspect they'd think of it as an act of war as well.

Historians are to tell the story based upon fact, not current events based upon one's observation/opinion.