Originally Posted by Titus

The Left has proven itself capable in the past of putting aside the sorts of differences you have just reminded me of, to face a common foe. (Or have you never heard the term 'Popular Front'?) OTOH, I, like BB54, strongly doubt that the Global Religious Right (Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc.) would be at all capable of doing likewise, for the very reasons BB54 outlined above - rigidity, intolerance, and judgmentalism.

Skimming the above line, and having an interest in naval history, my first reaction to "BB54" was to ask which US battleship carried hull number 54? Was she ever launched? A short spin on the internet identified my namesake as the USS Massachusetts, named for my home state. Construction started in Quincy Massachusetts, but BB 54 was scrapped in 1920 due to the Naval Limitations Treaty that limited construction of new capital ships between the World Wars.

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

. . . Still, our domestic Reds are a century or so ahead of the foreign reds . . .

By saying this I'm not saying that our "Reds" don't have something to contribute to our future, but I really like your comment above. But I would increase "a century or so" to "centuries". Our Reds are a combination of Enlightenment (yes, there was some) and Reformation religiosity. The enemy is outright medieval.

Agreed, the conservatives in any crisis positively contribute something in any crisis, attempting to conserve the best of what came before. Still, in attempting to fight progress, the 'red' faction generally loses any given crisis conflict. The blue faction gets to write the history books, which are not overly flattering towards the reds.

And, yes, I might have been a tad generous to the foreign reds in saying they are only a few centuries behind... but the foreign blues can copy what has been done before in other areas of the world. Fast progress is possible, but not easy.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

. . . Still, our domestic Reds are a century or so ahead of the foreign reds . . .

By saying this I'm not saying that our "Reds" don't have something to contribute to our future, but I really like your comment above. But I would increase "a century or so" to "centuries". Our Reds are a combination of Enlightenment (yes, there was some) and Reformation religiosity. The enemy is outright medieval.

Agreed, the conservatives in any crisis positively contribute something in any crisis, attempting to conserve the best of what came before. Still, in attempting to fight progress, the 'red' faction generally loses any given crisis conflict. The blue faction gets to write the history books, which are not overly flattering towards the reds.

And, yes, I might have been a tad generous to the foreign reds in saying they are only a few centuries behind... but the foreign blues can copy what has been done before in other areas of the world. Fast progress is possible, but not easy.

Bob, I've given my post some additional thought.

Just musing here: What if the Islamic Resurgence is similar to the Protestant Reformation in that it is profoundly conservative religiously (emphasis on "the word", etc . . . ) yet highly radical in the it imbues a powerful individualism and rebellion against corrupt secular forces?

Indeed in keeping with the analogy, the Westernization of the Middle East in the 19th and 20th centuries (up to c. 1978) could be seen as having the same affect Humanism had on the West in the 15th century engendering both the corrupt secularism to rebel against and the enthusiastic individualism to rebel with.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Just musing here: What if the Islamic Resurgence is similar to the Protestant Reformation in that it is profoundly conservative religiously (emphasis on "the word", etc . . . ) yet highly radical in the it imbues a powerful individualism and rebellion against corrupt secular forces?

Indeed in keeping with the analogy, the Westernization of the Middle East in the 19th and 20th centuries (up to c. 1978) could be seen as having the same affect Humanism had on the West in the 15th century engendering both the corrupt secularism to rebel against and the enthusiastic individualism to rebel with.

Thoughts?

I don't doubt the Islamic Militant movement is focused against corrupt secular forces, including fascist Saddam, imperialist and capitalist foreigners and local corrupt politicians. I haven't seen it embracing individualism.

I also haven't seen a rejection of local corruption really embraced. Arundhati Roy in India will blast local corrupt officials as much as Americans exploiting her country. Al Ahram in Egypt is pushing for the need to reform their government and industry as well. They know it has to be done, but they haven't got the collective will to do so. There is a reform movement in Iran as well, but it has been roadblocked by the clerical hard liners. Reform is a word oft used, but seldom acted upon. Much of the anger and energy is being focused towards Israel and America. Little energy is left for refining their own societies.

We in America to a lesser extent also know we have a corrupt government, bought and owned by special interest money. We're not going anywhere either. A movement of funds from the absurdly rich to the middle and lower classes has to be part of the Crisis solution, but very few countries are actually moving in that direction yet.

The Middle Eastern reformers are still talk. The Islamic militants are driving the spiral of violence seem unconcerned with 'reform.' They are not looking for democracy and capitalism. They are looking for their strong man to establish control. In an autocratic culture, the economic and political mechanics which keep a modern society functional are not considered overly important or relevant. If one just puts a strong leader in charge, it is assumed all problems will go away. The strong leader just says so, and who would dare do otherwise?

Yes, the Protestant Reformation was an important milestone in the development of the West. I'm less certain the current Islamic Resurgence has as many positive aspects. Oh, some of the Islamic militants hate the right enemies for some of the right reasons. I'm just not seeing fundamentalist Islam as creating constructive alternative visions for a better society. Should they win militarily, the problems facing their cultures will still be there.

Al Ahram in Egypt is providing some visions. Arundhati Roy in India is providing some visions. Some of the oil royalty -- in educating their people, and holding elections -- are actually acting on their visions.

But these are foreign blues, the foreign progressives. As you say, the foreign reds are centuries behind the curve. Perhaps it is necessary to tear down before one can build. Perhaps some of the red's actions might be constructive in that sense. Forgive me if I am not enthused.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Just musing here: What if the Islamic Resurgence is similar to the Protestant Reformation in that it is profoundly conservative religiously (emphasis on "the word", etc . . . ) yet highly radical in the it imbues a powerful individualism and rebellion against corrupt secular forces?

Indeed in keeping with the analogy, the Westernization of the Middle East in the 19th and 20th centuries (up to c. 1978) could be seen as having the same affect Humanism had on the West in the 15th century engendering both the corrupt secularism to rebel against and the enthusiastic individualism to rebel with.

Thoughts?

I don't doubt the Islamic Militant movement is focused against corrupt secular forces, including fascist Saddam, imperialist and capitalist foreigners and local corrupt politicians. I haven't seen it embracing individualism.

I also haven't seen a rejection of local corruption really embraced. Arundhati Roy in India will blast local corrupt officials as much as Americans exploiting her country. Al Ahram in Egypt is pushing for the need to reform their government and industry as well. They know it has to be done, but they haven't got the collective will to do so. There is a reform movement in Iran as well, but it has been roadblocked by the clerical hard liners. Reform is a word oft used, but seldom acted upon. Much of the anger and energy is being focused towards Israel and America. Little energy is left for refining their own societies.

We in America to a lesser extent also know we have a corrupt government, bought and owned by special interest money. We're not going anywhere either. A movement of funds from the absurdly rich to the middle and lower classes has to be part of the Crisis solution, but very few countries are actually moving in that direction yet.

The Middle Eastern reformers are still talk. The Islamic militants are driving the spiral of violence seem unconcerned with 'reform.' They are not looking for democracy and capitalism. They are looking for their strong man to establish control. In an autocratic culture, the economic and political mechanics which keep a modern society functional are not considered overly important or relevant. If one just puts a strong leader in charge, it is assumed all problems will go away. The strong leader just says so, and who would dare do otherwise?

Yes, the Protestant Reformation was an important milestone in the development of the West. I'm less certain the current Islamic Resurgence has as many positive aspects. Oh, some of the Islamic militants hate the right enemies for some of the right reasons. I'm just not seeing fundamentalist Islam as creating constructive alternative visions for a better society. Should they win militarily, the problems facing their cultures will still be there.

Al Ahram in Egypt is providing some visions. Arundhati Roy in India is providing some visions. Some of the oil royalty -- in educating their people, and holding elections -- are actually acting on their visions.

But these are foreign blues, the foreign progressives. As you say, the foreign reds are centuries behind the curve. Perhaps it is necessary to tear down before one can build. Perhaps some of the red's actions might be constructive in that sense. Forgive me if I am not enthused.

I will give it some more thought. Thank you for mulling it over.

As of 2005, not everybody has been jarred into a Crisis mood, but those who haven't been are being politically marginalized. And of course, their spokesman are all Silents worrying about due process.

I think it triggered a "three and a halfth" Turning.

Originally Posted by dbabbitt

As of 2005, not everybody has been jarred into a Crisis mood, but those who haven't been are being politically marginalized. And of course, their spokesman are all Silents worrying about due process.

Welcome dbabbitt !!!

9/11 sure FELT like it should be a trigger but it has been 3 1/2 years and America is sitting on its collective can, watching the Iraq war on TV. There is no call for sacrifice on the homefront in the form of taxes, conscription, rationing, ... No white guy thinks that he might be dragged out of his bed in the night. Torture is something that only happens to swarthy guys with beards. The latest Harris poll has the nation evenly split about the worthiness and success of the Iraq war. 9/11 has merely confirmed our worst 3T fears - the world is going to hell in a handbasket and there does not seem to be anyone who knows what to do about it. Gotta have Grey Champion.

All this makes George Bush a non-4T president. I simply can not see him as the GC. However, we can always take solace in viewing him as the Herbert Hoover of the Great Power Saeculum. We just have to wait a little longer. Maybe that's a good thing given that the Boomers currently have their finger poised, quivering, over the Button.

Lastly, if something as sobering as the attacks on the World Trade Center/Pentagon are not the harbinger of a change - in what form of calamity will the harbinger visit us? I'm voting for a bursting of the housing bubble followed by a dollar crash and widespread economic disruption. Have a nice day! :?

I'll still maintain that 9/11 was not a shared experience. While the chaotic, under-attack feeling certainly would have transfixed the east coast, I'd dare say most west-coasters found out about the attack after the fact. We just dont get going until 9 am Pacific.

That's not to say the west coasters feel less. Its just that I dont think many of us lived it.

But I could be wrong. Does the mood cover the entire US or is there a coastal bias?

Originally Posted by Arkarch

I'll still maintain that 9/11 was not a shared experience. While the chaotic, under-attack feeling certainly would have transfixed the east coast, I'd dare say most west-coasters found out about the attack after the fact. We just dont get going until 9 am Pacific.

That's not to say the west coasters feel less. Its just that I dont think many of us lived it.

But I could be wrong. Does the mood cover the entire US or is there a coastal bias?

I was vacationing on the Gulf coast at the time and felt pretty vulnarable at the time.

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

I think it triggered a "three and a halfth" Turning.

I still like that phrase (and agree).

Originally Posted by scott 63

9/11 sure FELT like it should be a trigger but it has been 3 1/2 years and America is sitting on its collective can, watching the Iraq war on TV. There is no call for sacrifice on the homefront in the form of taxes, conscription, rationing, ... No white guy thinks that he might be dragged out of his bed in the night. Torture is something that only happens to swarthy guys with beards. The latest Harris poll has the nation evenly split about the worthiness and success of the Iraq war. 9/11 has merely confirmed our worst 3T fears - the world is going to hell in a handbasket and there does not seem to be anyone who knows what to do about it. Gotta have Grey Champion.

All this makes George Bush a non-4T president. I simply can not see him as the GC. However, we can always take solace in viewing him as the Herbert Hoover of the Great Power Saeculum. We just have to wait a little longer. Maybe that's a good thing given that the Boomers currently have their finger poised, quivering, over the Button.

Lastly, if something as sobering as the attacks on the World Trade Center/Pentagon are not the harbinger of a change - in what form of calamity will the harbinger visit us? I'm voting for a bursting of the housing bubble followed by a dollar crash and widespread economic disruption. Have a nice day! :?

Remember, its not the characteristics of the event that make it a catalyst, its the alignments of the generations. The same event (9/11, for instance) happening 1 or 2 years from now, or even now as opposed to 2001 would be handled differently because all of the generations have advanced further and their attitudes are different.

IMHO, 9/11 was not it, because the generations were not aligned properly yet. We are Ready Now, or maybe in a year or 18 months when the Boomers (the main drivers) reach elderhood at 63 yrs old.

Originally Posted by takascar2

Originally Posted by scott 63

9/11 sure FELT like it should be a trigger but it has been 3 1/2 years and America is sitting on its collective can, watching the Iraq war on TV. There is no call for sacrifice on the homefront in the form of taxes, conscription, rationing, ... No white guy thinks that he might be dragged out of his bed in the night. Torture is something that only happens to swarthy guys with beards. The latest Harris poll has the nation evenly split about the worthiness and success of the Iraq war. 9/11 has merely confirmed our worst 3T fears - the world is going to hell in a handbasket and there does not seem to be anyone who knows what to do about it. Gotta have Grey Champion.

All this makes George Bush a non-4T president. I simply can not see him as the GC. However, we can always take solace in viewing him as the Herbert Hoover of the Great Power Saeculum. We just have to wait a little longer. Maybe that's a good thing given that the Boomers currently have their finger poised, quivering, over the Button.

Lastly, if something as sobering as the attacks on the World Trade Center/Pentagon are not the harbinger of a change - in what form of calamity will the harbinger visit us? I'm voting for a bursting of the housing bubble followed by a dollar crash and widespread economic disruption. Have a nice day! :?

Remember, its not the characteristics of the event that make it a catalyst, its the alignments of the generations. The same event (9/11, for instance) happening 1 or 2 years from now, or even now as opposed to 2001 would be handled differently because all of the generations have advanced further and their attitudes are different.

IMHO, 9/11 was not it, because the generations were not aligned properly yet. We are Ready Now, or maybe in a year or 18 months when the Boomers (the main drivers) reach elderhood at 63 yrs old.

Quite right. 9/11 is a textbook example of an event that SHOULD have been the catalyst; had all the elements of a catalyst but... failed to spark the crisis because the generational dynamics did not allow it.

Originally Posted by takascar2

Originally Posted by scott 63

9/11 sure FELT like it should be a trigger but it has been 3 1/2 years and America is sitting on its collective can, watching the Iraq war on TV. There is no call for sacrifice on the homefront in the form of taxes, conscription, rationing, ... No white guy thinks that he might be dragged out of his bed in the night. Torture is something that only happens to swarthy guys with beards. The latest Harris poll has the nation evenly split about the worthiness and success of the Iraq war. 9/11 has merely confirmed our worst 3T fears - the world is going to hell in a handbasket and there does not seem to be anyone who knows what to do about it. Gotta have Grey Champion.

All this makes George Bush a non-4T president. I simply can not see him as the GC. However, we can always take solace in viewing him as the Herbert Hoover of the Great Power Saeculum. We just have to wait a little longer. Maybe that's a good thing given that the Boomers currently have their finger poised, quivering, over the Button.

Lastly, if something as sobering as the attacks on the World Trade Center/Pentagon are not the harbinger of a change - in what form of calamity will the harbinger visit us? I'm voting for a bursting of the housing bubble followed by a dollar crash and widespread economic disruption. Have a nice day! :?

Remember, its not the characteristics of the event that make it a catalyst, its the alignments of the generations. The same event (9/11, for instance) happening 1 or 2 years from now, or even now as opposed to 2001 would be handled differently because all of the generations have advanced further and their attitudes are different.

IMHO, 9/11 was not it, because the generations were not aligned properly yet. We are Ready Now, or maybe in a year or 18 months when the Boomers (the main drivers) reach elderhood at 63 yrs old.

Quite right. 9/11 is a textbook example of an event that SHOULD have been the catalyst; had all the elements of a catalyst but... failed to spark the crisis because the generational dynamics did not allow it.

Had 9/11 been delayed by another three or four years, though,...

Had 9/11 been delayed by another three or four years, though,...

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Had 9/11 been delayed by another three or four years, though,...

Another three years. hmmmm. Here we are three years later. What would it be like if it had happened this past Summer - just before the election? Certainly W would be "The President" again. I am not sure we would have been in Iraq, however. That would have been a tough sell in Congress without 9/11. Maybe the Euros would have gotten sanctions lifted by now. It wouldn't make a big difference because all of Sadams WMDs existed only in his (and the neocons) fevered imagination. Plenty of aluminum artillery rockets, though!

It's hard to imagine what the reaction would be now. Bush would not be getting another term and would probably not have Colin Powell to interfer so maybe he would react more forcefully :shock: and plunge the World into a crisis.

Who or what has changed in the last three years to make us vulnerable at this time to a catalyst? What Silent political fiqures have passed from the scene? What Boomers have ascended (or fallen) who might make the difference in leadership? What life events are occurring to Xer's across the land that would cause them to throw down their shades and take up the cause? Are there enough additional Millenials ready to shout "Geronimo" and charge in whereever they are told?

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Had 9/11 been delayed by another three or four years, though,...

Another three years. hmmmm. Here we are three years later. What would it be like if it had happened this past Summer - just before the election? Certainly W would be "The President" again. I am not sure we would have been in Iraq, however. That would have been a tough sell in Congress without 9/11. Maybe the Euros would have gotten sanctions lifted by now. It wouldn't make a big difference because all of Sadams WMDs existed only in his (and the neocons) fevered imagination. Plenty of aluminum artillery rockets, though!

It's hard to imagine what the reaction would be now. Bush would not be getting another term and would probably not have Colin Powell to interfer so maybe he would react more forcefully :shock: and plunge the World into a crisis.

Who or what has changed in the last three years to make us vulnerable at this time to a catalyst? What Silent political fiqures have passed from the scene? What Boomers have ascended (or fallen) who might make the difference in leadership? What life events are occurring to Xer's across the land that would cause them to throw down their shades and take up the cause? Are there enough additional Millenials ready to shout "Geronimo" and charge in whereever they are told?

Originally Posted by scott 63

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Had 9/11 been delayed by another three or four years, though,...

Another three years. hmmmm. Here we are three years later. What would it be like if it had happened this past Summer - just before the election? Certainly W would be "The President" again. I am not sure we would have been in Iraq, however. That would have been a tough sell in Congress without 9/11. Maybe the Euros would have gotten sanctions lifted by now. It wouldn't make a big difference because all of Sadams WMDs existed only in his (and the neocons) fevered imagination. Plenty of aluminum artillery rockets, though!

It's hard to imagine what the reaction would be now. Bush would not be getting another term and would probably not have Colin Powell to interfer so maybe he would react more forcefully :shock: and plunge the World into a crisis.

Who or what has changed in the last three years to make us vulnerable at this time to a catalyst? What Silent political fiqures have passed from the scene? What Boomers have ascended (or fallen) who might make the difference in leadership? What life events are occurring to Xer's across the land that would cause them to throw down their shades and take up the cause? Are there enough additional Millenials ready to shout "Geronimo" and charge in whereever they are told?

Of course, this also brings back the"Wither the Grey Champion" discussion .

Originally Posted by scott 63

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Had 9/11 been delayed by another three or four years, though,...

Another three years. hmmmm. Here we are three years later. What would it be like if it had happened this past Summer - just before the election? Certainly W would be "The President" again. I am not sure we would have been in Iraq, however. That would have been a tough sell in Congress without 9/11. Maybe the Euros would have gotten sanctions lifted by now. It wouldn't make a big difference because all of Sadams WMDs existed only in his (and the neocons) fevered imagination. Plenty of aluminum artillery rockets, though!

It's hard to imagine what the reaction would be now. Bush would not be getting another term and would probably not have Colin Powell to interfer so maybe he would react more forcefully :shock: and plunge the World into a crisis.

Who or what has changed in the last three years to make us vulnerable at this time to a catalyst? What Silent political fiqures have passed from the scene? What Boomers have ascended (or fallen) who might make the difference in leadership? What life events are occurring to Xer's across the land that would cause them to throw down their shades and take up the cause? Are there enough additional Millenials ready to shout "Geronimo" and charge in whereever they are told?

Of course, this also brings back the"Wither the Grey Champion" discussion .

I?m always surprised how many people on this board argue 9/11 hasn?t started the fourth turning. Mostly they say : "If we really have a crisis, were is national unity, a stronger state, etc. etc." I think some people expect the end results of a crisis at their beginning. It?s a bit like when somebody in the USA in 1933 would say: "If we really have a crisis since 1929, why no US-troops are landing in the Normandy."

Originally Posted by freivolk

I?m always surprised how many people on this board argue 9/11 hasn?t started the fourth turning. Mostly they say : "If we really have a crisis, were is national unity, a stronger state, etc. etc." I think some people expect the end results of a crisis at their beginning. It?s a bit like when somebody in the USA in 1933 would say: "If we really have a crisis since 1929, why no US-troops are landing in the Normandy."

Which War Is This Anyway?

Originally Posted by Mr. Tom Engelhardt

Back in November 2001, introducing the term World War IV ? he now says "tongue-in-cheek" ? Eliot Cohen wrote: "Political people often dislike calling things by their names. Truth, particularly in wartime, is so unpleasant that we drape it in a veil of evasions, and the right naming of things is far from a simple task."

The right naming of things. As Cohen says, it's no small matter. And since he wrote that passage, this administration of lexicographers has spent startling amounts of time, dictionaries in hand, renaming and redefining terms ranging from our country or nation (now "the homeland") to the outsourcing of torture ("extraordinary rendition") ? always, not surprisingly, to their advantage. Either in its baldest form as World War IV, or as the slightly milder GWOT, this particular renaming of our moment ? in a sense, the largest renaming of all ? has many advantages.

At the simplest level, each term provides an umbrella of meaning for what otherwise might be experienced as remarkably disparate events. Both are convenient catch-all terms that implicitly advance political programs and so are remarkably useful. World War IV, in particular, places whatever is happening now in an ancestry that descends from World War II or the "Good War" (World War I is really just an add-on) and what's now called "the greatest generation." As a name, it's also instantly alarming, fitting an American sense that something cataclysmic, apocalyptic, and completely singular happened to us on September 11, 2001 and that any response to it should be in a similar cataclysmic, singular, and even apocalyptic vein. (After all, a quarter of Americans in a recent Gallup poll claimed themselves ready and willing over three years later to use nuclear weapons to "attack terrorist facilities.")

Originally Posted by TE

In fact, as research for this piece by the Center on Law and Security at NYU School of Law suggests, just about all the major captures of significant al-Qaeda figures (or figures claimed to be significant) have been made not by the American military (a blunt instrument indeed when it came to the capture of men like Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, or countless others) but by law enforcement. Here is a listing of a number of the alleged terrorist figures, large and small, who were captured in the post-9/11 years (arranged by name, place and time of apprehension, whom apprehended by [LA stands for "Local Authorities"], and current custody if known):

John Walker Lindh, Afghanistan 12/2001, US, US
Yasser Hamdi, Afghanistan, 12/2001, US, US
Mullah Fazel Mazloom, Afghanistan, Northern Alliance, US
Mullah Abdul Wakil Muttawakil, Afghanistan 2/2002
Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, Afghanistan, US
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Pakistan 3/2003, US, US
Ramzi Binalshibh, Pakistan 9/2002, Local Authorities (LA)
Abu Zubaydah, Pakistan 3/2002, Joint Pakistani police, FBI, and CIA team, US
Yassir al-Jazeeri, Pakistan 3/2003, LA
Ibn Al-Shaykh al-Libi, Pakistan/Afghanistan, LA
James Ujaama, US 7/2002, LA, US
Richard Reid "shoe bomber," US 12/2001, LA, US
Jose Padilla, US 5/2002, LA, US
Zacarias Moussaoui, US 8/2001, LA, US
Enaam M. Arnaout, US 4/2002, LA
Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, Undisclosed, LA, US
Mohammed Haydar Zammar, Morocco, LA, Syria
Abu Zubair al-Haili, Morocco
Ali Abdul Rahman al-Ghamdi, Saudi Arabia 2003, LA (surrendered himself)
Ahmed Ibrahim Bilal, Malaysia, LA
Abu Anas Al-Liby, Sudan 3/2002, LA, Sudan
Mohamedou Ould Slahi, Mauritania, LA, US
Omar al-Faruq, Indonesia 6/2002, LA, US
Imam Samudra, Indonesia 11/2002, LA, Indonesia
Mohsen F, Kuwait 11/2002, LA
Najib Chaib-Mohamed, Spain 1/2002, LA, Spain
Atmane Resali, Spain 1/2002, LA, Spain
Ghasoub al-Abrash al-Ghalyoun, Spain, LA, Spain
Abu Talha, Spain, LA, Spain
Bassan Dalati Satut, Spain, LA, Spain
Mounir al-Motassadek, Germany 11/2002, LA, Germany
Ibrahim Mohammed K, Germany 2005, LA, German
Yasser Abu S, Germany 2005, LA, German
Ahmed Ellattah, Belgium 2002, LA
Tarek Maaroufi, Belgium, LA
Nizar Trabelsi, Belgium
Djamel Beghal, UAE, LA, France
Kamel Daoudi, France, LA, France
Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, Iran 7/2003, LA, Unknown (possibly Iran after Kuwait refused to take him)


As you'll note, with few exceptions, these men were taken by "local authorities." While the Bush administration has used our military to turn Iraq into a terrorist hot spot in the Middle East, police forces around the world have taken terrorists down. This is one reality that lies behind the "global war on terrorism." Had the post-9/11 focus been on international police work (backed up by military force), we might be in a far different situation today.

Originally Posted by freivolk

I?m always surprised how many people on this board argue 9/11 hasn?t started the fourth turning. Mostly they say : "If we really have a crisis, were is national unity, a stronger state, etc. etc." I think some people expect the end results of a crisis at their beginning. It?s a bit like when somebody in the USA in 1933 would say: "If we really have a crisis since 1929, why no US-troops are landing in the Normandy."

In this case, the interpretation is not based upon the "winds of war" so much as the winds of power in Washington (ie., who has the reigns of power). The Democratic Party, long in the wilderness of the post-Civil War era, nearly destroyed the Republicans in the early 1930s. By 1937, Democrats held sway in Congress, with an activist president, to a historic tune of 3/1 on the metronome scale. The music played during "this time of crisis" was about the sweetest thing Democrats had heard since Andrew Jackson told the "economic royalists" where to stuff it during the 1840s.

Democrats have been longing for a return of this sort Gray Champion New Deal ever since. And, thus, while those evil Republicans are still in power there ain't no way we be 4T (save for the fact that the 4T will be much like that in Germany during the Nazi reign of horror, if the Republicans do rule).

Now can you understand why I say, "Sieg heil" all the time? :wink:

By this time in the last 4T it was 1933 and we were starting the Hundred Days. Nothing really comparable has happened (and I was one of the fervent "yesers" on this question for a long time).

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

By this time in the last 4T it was 1933 and we were starting the Hundred Days. Nothing really comparable has happened (and I was one of the fervent "yesers" on this question for a long time).

But 4Ts are not created equal. It may be the equivalent of 1931 or 1932 at the moment.