I don't know enough to be convinced of anything one way or another. I'm just starving for any sort of depth about the "enemy". I think it's laughable that we are at "war" with a group most American's know absolutely nothing about! Berman may not be correct, but at least he's at the right depth.

And, I must admit, I love the parts slamming Bush for not being able to respond to the threat on any sort of philosophical level. I think he really needs to be called on that. "President George W. Bush, in his speech to Congress a few days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, announced that he was going to wage a war of ideas. He has done no such thing. He is not the man for that."

But, on the other hand, we need to be suspicious of this (Pollock-esque?) liberal society that must be forcibly defended against it's enemy argument. I'm not buying that entirely (and so I'm not "agreeing" with Berman really.) He is painting us into a corner - just like Bush, but not as dramatically - where we'd have to force our ideas on a lot of unwilling people. Either convert the world or lose.

This is rambling, I know. My thoughts aren't together. I just think this article is a good place to start the discussion.

Tom, sorry about forgeting you're Berman piece. Reading it now. Always appreciate you're thoughts, of course. Hopefully I can learn something.
- jim 3-24-2003 6:04 pm





add a comment to this page:

Your post will be captioned "posted by anonymous,"
or you may enter a guest username below:


Line breaks work. HTML tags will be stripped.