ParanoiA

I couldn't agree more actually. With all of the repetitious "we're creating more terrorists" it just seems like everyone is dilluting themselves with CNN sound bytes that aren't very thoughtful. I'm totally all about the ninja's though. They're always a good investment. But I don't think you can do anything without fanning the flames. Although, I'm sure we could turn down the velocity...

Personally, I see nothing evil in fighting for profit. Profit is the means by which we "hunt and gather". You see money, I see meat and medicine. But, I had to say something considering all the negativity toward the US and the idea that oil is a poor excuse for war. It's not exactly the stuff comic book heroes are made of, but preservation of life takes many forms...

Yes. When your thoughts are validated by others, it helps to rationalize the act. More armchair psychology.

And yet they did get riled up enough to commit suicide on 9/11 despite no invasion. They've been attacking for 3 decades. They've never had a problem recruiting. I agree in that you don't want to help recruitment in that regard, but your points seem to imply that without our invasions that recruitment would be nil. If it was nil...we wouldn't be talking about this right now. 9/11 and 3 previous decades of terror attacks on the US wouldn't have happened in the first place. They don't need our actions to produce propaganda material - they do just find without any truth at all. Also, why do you think that increases in terrorism and recruitment means you shouldn't fight back? No one has replied to this point yet. The logic "we're creating more terrorism" seems obviously tied to fighting back in the first damn place. Are we not supposed to lift a finger? And, how do you fight back without creating more terrorism? And what's the point of the statement anyway? That we shouldn't fight back at all? Just take the terror attacks and suck it up? Sorry, I'm not that pacifist. Anything you do will result in a more ferocious campaign by Islamofacist murder cowards. That doesn't mean your actions are wrong. That just means the bully got pissed when we started thumping him back. Oh, and have you done any reading on sanctions and the kind of misery you spread with that supposed "diplomatic" effort? Only the civilians suffer, not the regime. With physical war, some civilians suffer and all of the regime.

You're kidding right? So how is that different than warring for oil? Interesting how profit is a PC motivator for everyone else. Granted, they're not "warring" per se, but they're using military force to exact order. Same thing we're doing in Iraq, after the regime extermination.

Well if that's not oversimplifying things... What about the fact that countries harbor these criminals? What's your terrific idea to deal with that? Since Bush is such an idiot, you must have a smart alternative plan yourself right? I'm on board with not calling it a war. But Afghanistan was justified. War or not, nations that produce and harbor these criminals should be held accountable - which includes military force. Otherwise, they can attack us with essential immunity as long as their group stays protected by a nation state that won't cooperate with the countries they're attacking. Think about it. That's the best of both worlds for these countries. They have an army that is attacking the enemy, that they are not responsible for. They get the benefit of this army, without the liability that goes with it. You support that? Got any ideas on that one? Sanctions cause mass death to innocent civilians (more than war), so that's not a better option than war.

I agree with your basic attitude, but....what is the line with parodies? How far can you go before "lighten up" is an understatement? Can I just do anything I want or say anything I want, as long as it's a parody? I don't mean legally, I mean socially. That said, I absolutely love Borat. Ali G is cool, but I haven't seen too much of that show.

I initially thought the same thing, but looking it over I don't notice anything out of order.

That's exactly what I'm worried about. The day of the shooting they were already talking about conceal and carry laws on local radio. Although, most admitted that even people with conceal and carry licenses aren't likely to carry guns on campus and they're surely prohibited in the first place.

That's my favorite...

Terror extermination? Everything we call a war, other than actual wars, never goes away.

Actually I hear plenty of good hip hop on the radio. It's mixed up with the crap though, of course. But, you're right, most of us have no idea, but then not being a listener, we have ourselves to blame. Keep in mind though, we're only kicking on the really bad stuff.

What about references to "the game"? I've heard so many cliche lyrics that touch on that after the negative like "that's how it goes when you play the game.." As if the drug game was perpetuated out of necessity. No one has a choice. You either deal drugs and prostitution or....something horrible...like...a...job...a minimum wage job... aaahhhh!!!! Is that negative or positive? I'm not really sure. They use "the game" to define their degree of bad assness, while they appear to draw negativity to it describing the death or some similar consequence of it.

Ok, that's twice now. 3rd time, we're dualing at 10 paces... Nice try... NIN with no rhythm? I don't think so...

Not regularly, but I enjoy all kinds of music. Rap has never really grabbed me. Rythym without melody is hard for me to appreciate. Also, I've always been turned off by the "attitude" factor - basically somebody rapping about how bad ass they are, song after song after song. That's just not my thing. Any music with that approach is going to be hard for me to listen to, but I do it because I'm always looking for something new. That said, I'm still fairly ignorant to most of the artists being talking about here. It might be all of those things you said. If nothing else, I think we can at least deduce it's indicative of the interests of our youth. Now that I'm a parent, that matters alot... BTW, anyone heard the new NIN yet?

I love that last sentence. You know what's so hard for me about this thread? Music is my life. I LOVE "**** the man" music. I've got CD's full of "**** the man" music - that I wrote myself. My favorite musicians are the rebels - John Lennon at the top. I still have that childish anti-establishment mentallity musically. The stuff I'm writing now is directed at religion and any human conditioning that restricts free thought and logic. So, I absolutely sympathize with the counter culture presented in this stuff. I just wonder if it's gone too far, OR, if I'm being intolerant based on the misogyny and promotion of violence. Well I'm not either. A co-worker has recently revoked my "ghetto card" when I mistook "Hen" for "chicks" instead of "Henessee Whiskey". But, what I'm talking about is kind of hip hop that's all about slapping and pimping bitches and ho's, crack and 'the game', pro gang, pro violent lyrics. We're not talking about Eminem - he cracks me up. Seems to be more of a self depricating kind of humor. I'm not attacking rap - nor it's propensity for shock language. That's all good in my book. Just the stuff that abandons art or poetry of any kind and promotes the worst of human behavior and bigotry. You can't accept that and fire Imus. At least not without being a flaming hypocrite.

Right...glad you're on board. In this thread we're talking about if the gangbanger hip hop music industry is really any different than the "**** the man" music we listened to in our youth. True, but how can they shock us when we've practically wrung all of the shock we can muster up til now? I'm not advocating that, I'm just suggesting that maybe these three categories are the line we're drawing - whereas our parents had similar black and white lines drawn that divided our music. They probably used similar terminology and passion behind their arguments. Hmmm..maybe they were right? Maybe 100 generations ago we shouldn't have pushed any further and we wouldn't be at this point? Just a thought...

Ah' date=' you misinterpret. Priorities is the secret here. Is capitalism perfect? No. It could be better. But should we mess with it right now? Hell no. We've got about million other issues that are more important. But to say that nothing is perfect, and therefore we shouldn't try is a copout. Your pointing out the "well intentioned liberal" failure. I totally agree. I completely agree with your premise - up until the absolute idea that perfection is impossible. You have no idea that 40,000 years from now, humans may very well be perfect. They won't be until they try though. Now is that kind of perfection even reasonable today? Hell no. We've got that list of a million things I was talking about that need to be dealt with. We're probably a millenia or two away from the point where perfection could even be a reasonable goal. [i']But[/i], it's still possible. And yes, I do have a bright son. That's why he's such a pain in the ass...

Thank you. Thank you again. How do you know it will never be perfect? And why shouldn't we try? Any ideology that draws that kind of absolution is feeble in my mind. Excuses not to try, nothing more. My teenage son says similar things... Because greed is the greatest motivator of all? I disagree. Survival is the greatest. A system that harnasses the fear of death could defeat a system that merely harnesses greed. Not convinced. In the spirit of blind devotion, sure. But more importantly, why does it matter? Most issues are deeper than right or wrong. Terrorism for example: It doesn't matter who's right or wrong, it is what it is. Maybe America is a geat country, completely in the right, and doesn't deserve this treatment - because we're "right". That doesn't mean that war and invasion is the right way to fix it. Justified? Maybe, but irrelevant as to the fix. Thank you, yet again...

I didn't mean that they were bad, except for the last characteristic - the gangsta music. That was the point I was trying to make. Middle class white kids copying this black gang culture. Kids that haven't experienced the crap life that helped to foster this culture in the first place. So, can the music really be said to "represent" them - such as in the way of metal, that I grew up on? I think they're drawn to it due to the "counter", and not really much else. I mean, how does it relate with them? The music I listened to was reflective of my personality - the fighting with my parents, the anti-establishment - the ole "plastic world" theology. Drugs and sex find their way into everything in the youth and I associate this aspect of it as reflective - including its role in hip hop. But the "ho's" and the violence..geez. There was no part of my personality that wanted to demean women or kill people. So any music that did such, never really fit. Have I answered my own question, effectively? Are kids nowadays just really attracted to thoughtless violence and misogynistc bigotry? And so naturally this music compliments their personality?

In light of the wholesale attack on the gang culture hip hop music industry... Ok, so I can't help but to remember when my mom and dad shook their heads at my music - heavy metal. Lyrically speaking about death, politics, manipulation, drugs, sex and etc. And we did do drugs and sex and carried a fatalistic attitude about everything. But, without heavy metal, I still would have done the same things - music was a compliment to my attitude, it didn't shape it. And, arguably, I needed an outlet to my frustrations being a teenager and all ( Hey, it's tough when you know everything but grown-ups won't listen to you...) My position has always been that music doesn't influence us, but rather fits with us. Why does rap not feel the same? Am I being a hypocrite for not granting the same opinion here? Without rap, there would still be the same anti-establishment, pro-drug, pro-crime, anti-intellect, self defeating culture - it was there before rap got popular. But does it not draw some people into that mentallity that otherwise wouldn't? After all, middle class white kids are running around with pants around their ankles, hoodies (in summer), crooked ball caps and the classic cool cat strut with gangbanger rap music as their centerpiece. These kids haven't been wronged by "the man". They have zero history with crooked cops and getto life - they seem to just enjoy the "anti" culture. So, are some of us being old, tight assed adults, resistant to change and disgusted with "the next generation", misplacing and misunderstanding our youth the way we were misunderstood? Or is rap truly different - destructive - beyond the "anti" cultures in the past??

Well let's see...if we go in and do something we'll be called imperialists and the western media will say we're creating more terrorists. The terror sponsored states will use this to further their propaganda goals. When we finally get things under control, if we get things under control (I'm not convinced terrorism won't rise in the area) our thanks will be in the form of protests and rallies to get us out of there...yeah, you're welcome... If we don't go in, we're heartless jerkoffs that only fight wars when there's money or similar such "material" assets to spill blood over.. Seems like an easy decision to me. I'm sorry they're suffering, but we're damned if we do and damned if we don't so why bother? Less negatives associated with sitting here watching them die. That's what the international community has taught me. I watched and I listened to them. Without the latest few years of events to judge from, I might be inclined to be stupid and advocate going in and helping those people....

There's a ton of dynamics that come out of that POV, and I agree with it 100%. When I listen to Rush, I roll my eyes everytime he starts sentences with "liberals...". In my mind, I change it to Liberalism. Because, the ideology itself can be discerned by observing the major players, but no single player embodies all of liberalism - for precisely the reason you mention. I'm sure I do the same thing, although I don't mean it. Liberalism and conservatism, as ideologies, can be simplified, generalized and so forth without too much inaccuracy, imo. It's when you start assuming all these ideological attributes to individuals that you run into trouble. I would love to put together a similar template for libertarianism, but there are still elements I don't understand and large chunks I just all out don't agree with - particularly free trade internationaly in exchange for strong military. The more I chew on this issue, the more I tend to agree. At first I just figured it as part of the war. But, I'm losing the passion behind calling it a war. It clearly isn't a traditional war - not even close. I guess I'm getting liberalized on this one... PNAC doesn't help either...

I knew you spun that story bombus... Yes, and you conveniently left out that Arbenz was aligning with communism. At that time, communism was the most feared adversary. We had been declared "crushed" by a ruthless soviet leader and all of this coming off of the heals of WWII. Again, it's easy to sit here now, in 2007 and judge people's fears and insecurites in the late 50's. Diane Stanley, a former US diplomat and a daughter of an employee of UFCO, mentions the benefits, typical of capitalism: Most accounts about the banana company have also failed to describe the significant contribution that United Fruit made to Guatemala's human and economic development. In addition to providing employment to tens of thousands of workers and paying them the nation's best rural wages, the Company also offered its employees excellent medical care, rent-free housing, and six years of free schooling for countless children. By clearing and draining thousands of acres of jungle that are today among the country's most productive farm lands, United Fruit converted Guatemala into a major banana producer, thereby ending the country's unhealthy dependence on its exports of coffee. The Company's pioneering work in eliminating malaria and other tropical diseases early in the twentieth century also demonstrated that Guatemala's sparsely inhabited coastal areas offered rich, previously unexploited agricultural zones. Ultimately, the taxes and salaries that the United Fruit Company paid, and the millions of dollars of foreign exchange earnings that it annually generated, impacted in an important way on Guatemala's economy. Now that's just taken from wikipedia. And the only subsequent point here is that there really is two sides to every story. We're not a bunch of evil capitalists that roam the earth devouring resources and pillaging innocent people without a care - all for money. We're also not a country full of do-gooders that roam the earth showering resources and replenishing food and life all over the world without a care for our own well being. Instead, we're just like you...we are good and bad, and we try to be better. We want to be helpful, but we expect to eat. We are selfish in our preservation and development, hungry for security - just like everyone else on the globe - but we'll lend a hand to help in times of catastrophe and give back just enough to feel good about ourselves. Look in the mirror and you'll see us...

Oh, well in that case it's perfectly fine to redirect your anger due to logistics right? Gee...you know...it almost sounds like they're not in the majority huh? We only put sanctions in place for dangerous regimes that have shown aggression - we learned that from watching europe allow hitler to grow and slaughter thousands before lifting a finger. We kind of have this thing now about letting aggressors get big and bulky before we start doing something about it... Nice try, but your spin is making me dizzy. These people that have a problem with doing business with the west seem to be in the minority - so why should anyone support or expect them to have their way? That's silly. Screw what the majority of their countrymen want, just concentrate on the pockets of extremists?? What on earth would be righteous about that? My point still stands. They have a problem with their own government that they're redirecting towards the west - that's propaganda at work. Talk about the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing...or not caring rather... No couldn't solve the world's problems with that and would not remove a single argument for terrorism. The US gives aid, money AND actual labor, people, supplies, equipment and etc. We don't get jack squat for that. Nobody even knows we do it, or cares when we do. If I had my way, I would give the proverbial finger to the middle east and withdraw completely from that region of the world and leave them for you to deal with. They would still attack us too...and your country would probably enjoy it too. And you would still have resentment misdirection arguments to justify it all... I completely agree. Now, if you would turn and yell that towards the south, there's a continent of racist murderers that could stand to hear that. They won't care, but it would be fun to watch you try to convince them. I think this kind of reasoning is aimed at the west because they know we're the only ones that could possibly listen......sorry, but it takes two.