I'll respectfully disagree again. I do think the world is different post 9/11, but only because the terrorist organizations finally succeeded rather than tried and failed. It's not at all unique NOW that there's a determined, nongovernmental group out to get Americans. And frankly they're not out to get just you guys, they're out to get Western Society, and Canada and Europe fit that mold pretty darn well. You're just more aware post 9/11. Jeez, when I was traveling back in the 1980s (y'know, when we had to fly on propeller airplanes) America was largely despised abroad (and it still is). People couldn't tell Canadians from Americans, but once they found out we weren't from the US, almost invariably we received an apology for assuming we were Americans because we sound similar (think about the difference between New Zealanders and Australians in spoken word). It's a fact. Why? People always hate the "team" in power and since the early to mid part of the last century that's been the US. Previously it was England. But as for any difference, it's only because they succeeded. They busted a group of about 20 radical Muslims in Canada last year that were trying to duplicate Oklahoma on a scale roughly four times as large. It ain't all about the US. Naturally Canadians feel we're not part of the target group, but that will change once someone blows up something on our soil.
I can respect that. I've always been able to avoid being lumped into the category of the "stereotypical American" when traveling overseas because a.) I don't look American, whatever that means, and b.) I'm ethnically not American. But I do agree that it's the "in" thing right now to bash Americans in most countries for our foreign policy, however I maintain that, particularly the Westerners who do this, are selling us short. Like you said, the Canadians, British, French, Spanish etc. are just as much in this as we are. And you're right, the fact that 9/11 was a success for the terrorists has opened many of our eyes when they should have been opened before.
But events that have followed 9/11 are truly what I believe have made America more dangerous. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have pitted Muslims all over the world not only against us, but also against each other. It's rekindled jihadist movements all over the world - in the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, the Middle East, Central Asia - and now, more worrisome, in Europe. Sure, there was always Chechnya, but only the most dedicated jihadists cared to join the never-ending movement there. There is no denying that Islamic terrorism has become a far more dedicated, interconnected, and global movement than it's ever been in its history.
Actually yes it does, but your perspective is to view only actions directly affecting your country. There are spillover consequences of those events. By the way, how exactly is Vietnam in the category of civil war or genocide with respect to the US? The average age of American combatant in Vietnam was 19 or so and the death rate was higher than Iraq. You're the one that brought up Iraq/Afghanistan as being relevant to this generation, why isn't Vietnam the same?
You're mistaken. I really try my damndest to look at things from a global perspective. I've even lived close to 10 of my 25 years outside the United States. But I'm trying to make the argument that the world has become more dangerous by refuting your assertion that the presence of civil wars is proof the world has always been just as ******. Perhaps I can't do that, since it's a matter of opinion. Maybe I'll amend my statement to this: "The world has become more dangerous for Westerners, particularly in the last decade." Do we agree?
You might know about it from a historical perspective, but you didn't live through it. You said you're 25, meaning you were born in 1982/83. The Berlin Wall came down in '89 when you were maybe 6 and the Iron Curtain fell fully in '91 when you'd be about 8. Now you may have been a lot more precocious as a child than I was but I'm doubting that you were really that aware of the Cold War as a child. So I very, very seriously doubt that your age is helping you understand the cold war. There weren't any bomb drills or bom shelters when I was a kid, but the specter of mass destruction of humanity was very, very palpable and real for those of us living it.
To avoid uncertainty, I was born in October 1981 (in Arizona), but moved back to our family's dacha north of Moscow in mid 82. I may not have lived through the Cold War as you know it, but I certainly was affected by it. Just as I was getting old enough to realize what was going on in the world, the war in Afghanistan was going poorly (1986 or so), and everyone was wondering why thousands of men weren't coming home, yet the news always reported the latest victory over the mujahiddin and the latest advancement of our forces. Nobody was allowed to say anything, and they didn't. I remember waiting in line for hours to get milk, even though our family was privileged by Soviet standards, and I even remember seeing tanks and ICBMs rolling through Red Square on one of our many Victory Day trips to Moscow. I also remember my dad having to scurry us back to the U.S. in early 1990 because it was obvious things were going nowhere but down. Remember, the "Cold War" meant something else to Russians.
When our troops finally pulled out of Afghanistan, when our economy was crushed, and when the same political and economic system that we had banked our livelihood on (albeit not by choice) collapsed, it was a moral shock of immeasurable proportions. Perhaps my age isn't helping me understand the Cold War, but I'd wager just about anything somebody who lived through the collapse of the Soviet Union - young or old - at least has some idea of what being on the losing side of the Cold War was like. In a word - devastating.
Oh, and we didn't have the advantage that you do: hindsight. It was over before you had your first real erection; none of us knew how the story would end or that it would end happily. Don't kid yourself. No one living through either World War knew how it would end either, but we all know how those stories end too, don't we? Might happen is pretty frickin' real when you're living it. Doesn't the notion of Middle Eastern countries having nuclear capabilities scare you? It's not in the news on a daily basis. What if it was?
Fair enough, but this argument started when you called out Nathan for being callous about reported events. You grew up in the 60s and 70s. Did you never once tune out all the rhetoric about the possibility of nuclear war because you'd heard it so many times? Did you never once get complacent?
For the record, a nuclear armed Middle East scares the **** out of me. A nuclear Pakistan is bad enough.
I think your fear is real and justified, especially because you're far more involved than I'll ever be. But don't assume that because I've never worked in an intelligence field like you that I'm ignorant of what happens. Don't assume that you understand what previous generations lived through. It's the same mistake Nathan made with his statement about things not happening the same in decades previous. Information is faster now, but it's not that much faster. The media lives to scare the snot out of us, it's how they get our attention; it's how they get advertisers; it's how they make money. Always have, always will.
I don't assume you're ignorant, however I do have the misfortune of knowing a lot of things about the war on terror that few other people know. At first it was cool knowing about a plot that was foiled, knowing how it was foiled, knowing who we used to foil it, and how we got them to foil it. Of course, for the safety of everyone involved, these things are kept secret 99% of the time and no one gets any recognition. Fine - we all knew that was how it has to be when we signed on. But one of the first things I was told when I started was this: if the public knew about everything going on, they'd never be able to sleep at night. I always thought that was the stupidest thing to tell a new recruit. I believe if the public really knew about every success we had in the war on terror, or the war on drugs, they'd forget that occasionally we're bound to screw up and not be able to connect all the dots in time, and innocent people are going to be killed. They'd become complacent.
This is becoming a problem already, more than a half decade after 9/11. And, morgbug, you can't honestly tell me it's only the young whipper snappers who are bitching at the airport when they have to take their shoes off.
