The Slander of 'Blowback'

[TaftFan]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...n-d-williamson

Williamson is making a point that needs to be said and the whole article is worth reading.

I feel like the stuff coming out of RPI reads like this, "Kid A stuck his tongue out at Kid B, and as a result Kid B threw a rock at Kid A. This is due to blowback. If only the kid would not stick his tongue out, this would have never happened."

While RPI and such do not justify the attacks, they essentially assign blame to the initiator of provocation.

As Williamson says:

Ron Paul is more of a traditional political thinker than he lets on, in the sense that every story must have a villain in a black hat, and that villain is the United States and/or Israel....He’s a surgeon with one instrument in his bag, what The Economist used to call “whataboutism.”

But as libertarians should know, you don't have a right to not be offended. Offending someone does not make you wrong.

Most everything can be narrowed down as blowback of some kind. People do things for a reason. It is certainly important to understand blowback, so that is can better help you plan your actions. But it shouldn't necessarily dictate your actions.

More from the author:

Does U.S. and European foreign policy — bad policy and good — play a role in provoking the enemies of the United States and Europe? Of course — how could it possibly be otherwise? But what is the conclusion to be drawn? Never do anything that might rub Mullah Mohammed Omar or like-minded men the wrong way? Give any entity willing to bomb pizza shops as a mode of political discourse effective veto power over U.S. policy?

While we should not underestimate the role of foreign policy in motivating jihadists, we should not exaggerate it, either.

The root problem with Muslim extremism are the radical, violent teachings of Islam. Insomuch as our foreign policy actions make extremism appealing, we should try to curb that, but not necessarily at all costs.

[The Gold Standard]

You and the author are (mod edit). If I stick my tongue out at you, the blowback I can expect is what? If you really get mad, a middle finger? What kind of blowback should I expect if drop a bomb on your house and you come home and bits and pieces of your family are strewn all over your yard?

[pcosmar]

Williamson is making a point that needs to be said and the whole article is worth reading.

Bull$#@!.

Not worth wrapping fish,, marginal as a fire starter.

[CaptUSA]

But as libertarians should know, you don't have a right to not be offended. Offending someone does not make you wrong.

Um, you realize our government is literally bombing their families? That can do a little more than offend someone.

They ain't blowin' themselves up in Switzerland.

[TaftFan]

Um, you realize our government is literally bombing their families? That can do a little more than offend someone.

They ain't blowin' themselves up in Switzerland.

You and the author are (mod edit). If I stick my tongue out at you, the blowback I can expect is what? If you really get mad, a middle finger? What kind of blowback should I expect if drop a bomb on your house and you come home and bits and pieces of your family are strewn all over your yard?

I don't think you read what I posted.

Blowback causes many to radicalize. I completely acknowledge that. But it isn't the cause of violent, radical Islam itself. If it were all simply about retaliation, then there wouldn't be a religious component.

Blowback from interventionism didn't create Sharia law. Radical, violent Islamic terrorism predated the United States.

[pcosmar]

I don't think you read what I posted.

Blowback causes many to radicalize. I completely acknowledge that. But it isn't the cause of violent, radical Islam itself. If it were all simply about retaliation, then there wouldn't be a religious component.

I DID. I have read your $#@! often. Runny anal secretions that they are.

Islam was radicalized by direct efforts of the CIA and other agencies. Radicalized Islam did not exist prior to our involvement.
It simply did not exist,, until it was created.

Radicalized Islam is not Blowback.

It is a deliberately planned and ongoing program.

Some particular events are Blow-back. A reaction to an actual assault.. and there have been more than enough assaults in that area to justify the leveling of the entire US,, and most of Europe.

All that the Muslim world could do is nothing compared to what God will do when Christ returns.

[The Gold Standard]

I don't think you read what I posted.

Blowback causes many to radicalize. I completely acknowledge that. But it isn't the cause of violent, radical Islam itself. If it were all simply about retaliation, then there wouldn't be a religious component.

Blowback from interventionism didn't create Sharia law. Radical, violent Islamic terrorism predated the United States.

Perhaps blowback didn't create radical Islam. But it sure as hell is helping it grow. It is such a small minority that without U.S. help it would have been stomped out of existence by now.

Blowback also made enemies out of them instead of being some movement going on elsewhere. I have no interest in butting in on other people's wars.

[TaftFan]

I DID. I have read your $#@! often. Runny anal secretions that they are.

Islam was radicalized by direct efforts of the CIA and other agencies. Radicalized Islam did not exist prior to our involvement.
It simply did not exist,, until it was created.

When all else fails, make baseless accusations against the CIA.

[CaptUSA]

Bull$#@!. You said:

I feel like the stuff coming out of RPI reads like this, "Kid A stuck his tongue out at Kid B, and as a result Kid B threw a rock at Kid A. This is due to blowback. If only the kid would not stick his tongue out, this would have never happened."

We are talking a whole hell of a lot more than sticking out a tongue. Just like in most religions, there are those that use it for nefarious purposes. No one is saying the US caused radical Islam. We are saying that the actions of our government increase the likelihood that radical Islam will be encouraged and visited upon us.

[Southron]

I think blowback is overused to some degree but one reason it is brought up so much is that it is so hard to get Americans to admit it even exists.

If you can agree, like the author, that it does exist then we have a duty to find out how to minimize it.

[TaftFan]

ISIS is not trying to defeat Islamic enemies and establish a caliphate in order to retaliate against the U.S.

Boko Haram is not trying to establish a Sharia state in Africa in order to get back at Israel.

[green73]

Taftfan siding with NRO over Ron Paul. Is anybody surprised?

[TaftFan]

Bull$#@!. You said:


We are talking a whole hell of a lot more than sticking out a tongue. Just like in most religions, there are those that use it for nefarious purposes. No one is saying the US caused radical Islam. We are saying that the actions of our government increase the likelihood that radical Islam will be encouraged and visited upon us.

In the case of Hebdo...the context in which this whole RPI controversy was started...my statement is just about accurate.
I don't presume that religions must be non-violent. From what I understand, violence is not an extreme interpretation of Islam. I agree that our foreign policy is a problem-in terms of blowback as well as power vacuums that we have created. But for RPI, that is the default explanation of Islamic outbursts, not necessarily the correct position..

[TaftFan]

I think blowback is overused to some degree but one reason it is brought up so much is that it is so hard to get Americans to admit it even exists.

If you can agree, like the author, that it does exist then we have a duty to find out how to minimize it.

When the term gets abused, it causes Americans to dismiss it out of hand. RPI is it's own worst enemy.

[TaftFan]

I think blowback is overused to some degree but one reason it is brought up so much is that it is so hard to get Americans to admit it even exists.

If you can agree, like the author, that it does exist then we have a duty to find out how to minimize it.

When the term gets abused, it causes Americans to dismiss it out of hand. RPI is it's own worst enemy.

[The Gold Standard]

ISIS is not trying to defeat Islamic enemies and establish a caliphate in order to retaliate against the U.S.

If not, then WHY THE $#@! ARE AMERICANS THERE DYING? If you want to go, then go. Leave my money in my pocket and let anyone over there that doesn't want to die for Syria come the $#@! home.

[TaftFan]

Taftfan siding with NRO over Ron Paul. Is anybody surprised?

NRO is a quality publication with professional writers of diverse opinions, unlike RPI.

[TaftFan]

Taftfan siding with NRO over Ron Paul. Is anybody surprised?

NRO is a quality publication with professional writers of diverse opinions, unlike RPI.

[acptulsa]

ISIS is not trying to defeat Islamic enemies and establish a caliphate in order to retaliate against the U.S.

Boko Haram is not trying to establish a Sharia state in Africa in order to get back at Israel.

You've interviewed every one of them, have you? Know Farsi, do you?

Firstly, it's their land. They have a right to be offended, and we have a right to go home.

Secondly, I'm tired of seeing blood and treasure spilled in every oil producing country that ever sneaks a little oil out the door for something other than petrodollars. If the Fed want to increase demand for their product, and the oil companies want control of the oil fields, I don't see why they aren't making enough money to handle those costs of doing business. Better them than my grandchildren.

They have a right to be offended by all this. We have a right to be offended by paying the costs of the oil companies to do business and the costs of the Fed expanding their market share. If you want to keep bombing brown babies until they're ghettoized, traumatized and pissed at you, fine. Can't you leave the rest of us out of it?

[green73]

NRO is a quality publication with professional writers of diverse opinions, unlike RPI.

Hah! GTFO.

[TaftFan]

If not, then WHY THE $#@! ARE AMERICANS THERE DYING? If you want to go, then go. Leave my money in my pocket and let anyone over there that doesn't want to die for Syria come the $#@! home.

Because ISIS doesn't appreciate journalists exposing their horrors and likes taunting civilization.

The way I see it, the military is voluntary, so I don't necessarily have to go. I think anybody who wants to withhold their money from war should be able to. Of course, I never even advocated putting ground troops in Syria.

But since you bring up Syria...are they attacking Assad because of the U.S. and Israel? No, and it is self obvious.

[pcosmar]

When all else fails, make baseless accusations against the CIA.

One of the CIAs first operations was the overthrow of a Legitimate Government, installing a ruthless Dictator and building a Vicious Police State.
Domestically,, they ran the MKUltra Programs.

CIA crimes are far beyond my darkest imaginings,, and are documented.
not baseless.

[TaftFan]

You've interviewed every one of them, have you? Know Farsi, do you?

Firstly, it's their land. They have a right to be offended, and we have a right to go home.

Secondly, I'm tired of seeing blood and treasure spilled in every oil producing country that ever sneaks a little oil out the door for something other than petrodollars. If the Fed want to increase demand for their product, and the oil companies want control of the oil fields, I don't see why they aren't making enough money to handle those costs of doing business. Better them than my grandchildren.

They have a right to be offended by all this. We have a right to be offended by paying the costs of the oil companies to do business and the costs of the Fed expanding their market share. If you want to keep bombing brown babies until they're ghettoized, traumatized and pissed at you, fine. Can't you leave the rest of us out of it?

It's their land? Really? If I organize a gang and go on a multi-state rampage, is all of that my land? I assume you are responding to my ISIS and Boko Haram references.

I don't support wars for the purpose of conquering oil fields. I don't think that ended up being the case in Iraq; neoconservative ideology was the reason. I would support action if trade routes are being obstructed. That is a legitimate use of force.

If you don't like a pic of Mohammed, you can be offended. If you don't like Israel, you can be offended. But you don't have a right to blow up people because you are offended. And I don't believe people should bend to their bullying. Sure, try to avoid offending them when you can, just on a practical basis. But they shouldn't dictate what governments or free people do.

[TaftFan]

One of the CIAs first operations was the overthrow of a Legitimate Government, installing a ruthless Dictator and building a Vicious Police State.
Domestically,, they ran the MKUltra Programs.

CIA crimes are far beyond my darkest imaginings,, and are documented.
not baseless.

The CIA was founded in 1947. It is a late comer to radical, violent Islam.

[HVACTech]

I don't think you read what I posted.

Blowback causes many to radicalize. I completely acknowledge that. But it isn't the cause of violent, radical Islam itself. If it were all simply about retaliation, then there wouldn't be a religious component.

Blowback from interventionism didn't create Sharia law. Radical, violent Islamic terrorism predated the United States.

Blowback from interventionism didn't create Sharia law. Radical, violent Islamic terrorism predated the United States.

the crusades during the 3rd Roman empire also predated the USA.

[pcosmar]

The CIA was founded in 1947. It is a late comer to radical, violent Islam.

Radical Islam did not exist prior.
Islam did.
and there were small cults within it,, ignored and rejected by most. (much like several cults and sects within Judaism or Christianity)

Radicalized Islam is a product of our meddling in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
It was used as a recruiting tool to bring fighters to Afghanistan.

[The Gold Standard]

But since you bring up Syria...are they attacking Assad because of the U.S. and Israel? No, and it is self obvious.

I don't care why they are attacking Assad. I don't live in Syria and never will. I do know they are doing it with our money and weapons. How far along would they be without that?

See, that is what blowback means. Unintended consequences from meddling in other people's affairs that come back to bite you in the ass.

[pcosmar]

I don't care why they are attacking Assad. I don't live in Syria and never will. I do know they are doing it with our money and weapons. How far along would they be without that?

The fighters in Syria were recruited from all over Europe.. They were Thugs and neerdowells that were paid to come and fight.
There were a few enemies of Assad from Syria that had no means of opposing or deposing him on their own.
The rest were hired mercenaries.

[acptulsa]

But they shouldn't dictate what governments or free people do.

You don't think Hussein had a right, or Assad has a right, to say what 'governments of free peoples' do on the lands they rule(d)?

[pcosmar]

The CIA was founded in 1947.

It has been a curse since inception.