08-16-2017, 08:49 PM
(08-16-2017, 08:37 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(08-16-2017, 03:02 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(08-16-2017, 02:02 PM)David Horn Wrote:(08-16-2017, 09:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:pbower Wrote:When someone from Antifa drives his car into a crowd of right-wingers in a peaceful demonstration, then let me know.
How about when they kill several policement trying to assassinate a congressman?
How about Timothy McVeigh? Come on, these are both lone-wolf cases, just like Dylan Roof. What made Charlottesville different was the context. The violence at Berkley in opposition to Milo Yiannopoulos is more similar.
The guy who killed someone with his car was at that point acting on his own, away from the protest location. His connection was political motivation, but the Congressional baseball assassin was clearly politically motivated too. The parallels are accurate.
Timothy McVeigh was way back in the middle of the third turning, and his target was not an opposing political faction.
McVeigh was responding to a US government policy, but arguably it was a highly partisan policy. I think McVeigh an important element in understanding the spiral of rhetoric and violence.
Also, from my perspective, the Iraq war was set in a crisis period, was potentially a full scale transforming crisis. Bush 43, seeing the US as a sole superpower, attempted a neo colonial pattern. Invade. Build bases, a giant embassy, and establish a puppet state. Once secure, invade again, go for the next country. Stay the course against cut and run was a truly a big deal debate. For a brief time, after the initial formal clash, Bush 43 actually had the Iraqi people on his side. If he had won his war, if what he intended worked with no economic collapse, I'd have to call him a grey champion and acknowledge how much the new values changed America. America's role in the world would be very different.
Of course, Bush 43's new values didn't work out as well as he liked. They died stillborn. I have come to label this a false regeneracy. McVeigh saw this first hand, boots on the ground. What he did was a big deal in America, but detonating explosives and causing mostly civilian casualties was the norm in Iraq, par for the course for Bush 43 and his army.
Anyway, It looks like you are cherry picking. I don't think McVeigh should be forgotten.
If the policy McVeigh was responding to was partisan, which party do you think it was associated with? He was reacting to Ruby Ridge and Waco. Ruby Ridge happened under the Republicans, Waco under the Democrats.
No, the Oklahoma City bombing and the subsequent change in federal policy in the direction desired by McVeigh was just part of the unraveling.
And what does the Iraq War have to do with McVeigh? He was dead before the Iraq War started. Senior moment?