Post by Mutanatia on May 5, 2012 20:40:35 GMT -5
Okay...
One of the things that I do not really like is how 9/11, OBL, etc. has become a political object. I obviously think Obama should take credit for it. But I do not think that it should become overpoliticized. The killing of OBL (As well as the tragedy of 9/11) was a universal event. 9/11 happened, and it effected most people in one way or the other: whether it's from the angle of being afraid of flying, mourning the friends of yours you lost on 9/11, having a family member who died on 9/11 (or anything other situation), the thing is: this is a universal event, and not an event that affected just Republicans or just Democrats (or Conservative and Liberal). In fact, 9/11 was an event that happened on a Republican president's watch, and the "closure" was was on a Democratic president's watch. As such, it really is universal. I don't know one (sane) person in the USA who was not relieved or felt justice had been served when OBL was killed. It really was the entire country proving to the world that we are not be screwed with.
That being said, I admire the steps Obama took to make it clear that OBL was on watch, and that Pakistan might more or less expect something to happen at some point on their soil, starting from his "broadcasting" this at the debate when he was running for President. I admire the way in which he carefully deliberated what the situation was, and ultimately chose to make the right decision.
---
What I really do not like, though, is a certain Republican candidate's response to the question of "would you do it, Mitt Romney? Would you have given the order" to have been "even Carter would do it." Carter was the least successful President and inept at foreign policy. In the matter of the killing of OBL, Obama is no Carter. As such, Romney uses it almost as a devisive issue, to bring up Carter. I find this response to be rather ingratiating.
---
My conclusion is this: Neither side has really expressed what OBL and 9/11 means to America as a whole. From Bush to Obama, each one used 9/11 (and Obama with OBL) for his own political gain. With Obama, his constant reminders are there to have us elect him again; with Bush, there was the Patriot Act. I do not like the idea of elections and controversial legislations carried out "in the name of" 9/11.
My question is this: What parts of 9/11 should be "political," and which parts should be universal and not be made political.
One of the things that I do not really like is how 9/11, OBL, etc. has become a political object. I obviously think Obama should take credit for it. But I do not think that it should become overpoliticized. The killing of OBL (As well as the tragedy of 9/11) was a universal event. 9/11 happened, and it effected most people in one way or the other: whether it's from the angle of being afraid of flying, mourning the friends of yours you lost on 9/11, having a family member who died on 9/11 (or anything other situation), the thing is: this is a universal event, and not an event that affected just Republicans or just Democrats (or Conservative and Liberal). In fact, 9/11 was an event that happened on a Republican president's watch, and the "closure" was was on a Democratic president's watch. As such, it really is universal. I don't know one (sane) person in the USA who was not relieved or felt justice had been served when OBL was killed. It really was the entire country proving to the world that we are not be screwed with.
That being said, I admire the steps Obama took to make it clear that OBL was on watch, and that Pakistan might more or less expect something to happen at some point on their soil, starting from his "broadcasting" this at the debate when he was running for President. I admire the way in which he carefully deliberated what the situation was, and ultimately chose to make the right decision.
---
What I really do not like, though, is a certain Republican candidate's response to the question of "would you do it, Mitt Romney? Would you have given the order" to have been "even Carter would do it." Carter was the least successful President and inept at foreign policy. In the matter of the killing of OBL, Obama is no Carter. As such, Romney uses it almost as a devisive issue, to bring up Carter. I find this response to be rather ingratiating.
---
My conclusion is this: Neither side has really expressed what OBL and 9/11 means to America as a whole. From Bush to Obama, each one used 9/11 (and Obama with OBL) for his own political gain. With Obama, his constant reminders are there to have us elect him again; with Bush, there was the Patriot Act. I do not like the idea of elections and controversial legislations carried out "in the name of" 9/11.
My question is this: What parts of 9/11 should be "political," and which parts should be universal and not be made political.