Anyone who pays any attention to the majority of Hollywood elites finds them laughably detached from reality. This can be seen in the countless tabloid papers alleging stories so outlandish as to rival their strangest films. Yet, now and again, the tabloids are right about some of the oddities of these people.
Detached is perhaps the best word to describe them. Tom Hanks, a liberal unto his own, stated this void when on a late night show. His statement was such that in acting Hollywood is supposed to be an accurate depiction of life in the real America. Yet it is well known that Hollywood is over-glamorized and overly crude, not to mention over-sexualized.
Ultimately, such a distortion of the nation has the ability to alter the culture if no one stands up against it. Yet, it is becoming clearer that the nation might be rejecting this aversion to morality. There has been a significant decrease in the revenue generated by film sales both in the theater and in stores. Debatably this could be because of gasoline prices and from newer internet technology. Frankly, I'll let this entire paragraph go to waste because it is not what I intended to write about.
Regardless of how America sees their movies, these actors are regularly exposing themselves to be foolish and removed from reality. Oliver Stone is a well known liberal activist and a director of films that some call magnificent and some call idiotic. Recently he has come out and stated that he is ashamed of America. He states the Bush administration to be participating in unjust war and imperialism.
"We've destroyed the world in the name of security." Oh, I'm sorry Mr. Stone. You see, I thought Afghanistan WASN'T a bastion of museums and laboratories. I thought Iraq WASN'T entirely controlled by the people. I was under the impression that the Middle East has been undergoing genocide, racism and ultra-violent Islamic theocracy. As for the rest of the world, I defy him to provide an example of instability much less physical destruction in any of the rest of the world as caused by the war on terror.
"It's a waste of energy away from things that do matter which is poverty, death, disease, the planet itself and fixing things in our own homes rather than fighting wars with others." Where do I begin with this madness? Frankly, Stone will never see the war on terror as an effective deterrent against terrorists regardless of the stark decrease in domestic terrorism. Yet, I am inclined to point out that well over 60% of the federal budget is spent on social programs (far too much in my opinion). While two billion dollars is being spent every week on the war in Iraq, amounting to $104 billion dollars a year, recall the federal budget is an astounding $2.4 trillion. Perhaps this illustration will put that into perspective. The cost of Iraq is represented by X's. The rest of the budget is represented by O's. The small O is approximately one half of the large O's.
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o X.
In line with this depiction it is best that we take a look at the historic costs of major wars. World War 2, for instance, cost roughly two times the entire federal budget for ALL FOUR YEARS America was involved in it ($288 billion dollars for four years over which the federal budget hovered around $35-$45 billion dollars a year). That is running a 100% deficit every year. To bring these numbers up to date, that would mean our government is spending $5 trillion every year while only taking in $2.47 trillion. Clearly, we are capable of conducting a modern war and foreign/domestic aid all at once. The only reason this tactic is so popular among liberals is that the left wing operates and generates much of its votes by tugging at the heart-strings of the voters, while not giving them the entire picture. Perhaps Stone is unaware that the Bush administration has nearly DOUBLED the amount of foreign aid to Africa EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Additionally, profound donations have been generated from the average American paycheck, providing aid to the victims of hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, landslide, forest fires and droughts. Not to mention the fact that life was anything but pleasant for the people who lived under the regimes of the Taliban and the Husseins. Foolishness abounds.
The quote is awfully long so I shall wrap up the ideas succinctly. Stone rejects the notion of a 9/11 conspiracy that has become quite popular among ultra-left wingers. Yet, he buys into the same end result as these madmen. Following up his torpedoing of the conspiracy nut jobs, Stone stated that the real conspiracy is one to manipulate the "incident" in order to wage war. Again we come to a divide between Hollywood and the real America. One cannot expect to defeat terrorism by stopping attacks while they are being carried out. I laid out the case for change just a few days and a few articles ago. I refer back to that to provide the case for war.
Perhaps the most insane statement Oliver Stone has ever spoken is this, "Terrorism is a manageable action. It can be lived with." If I have to write anything about why this is thunderingly stupid then there is no hope for you. Fortunately, I know that almost everyone in America doesn't need an explanation. I will say this. Many intelligence reports have stated that Al Qaeda have taken note of the open borders we are ignoring and the wall built in Israel has shown us that such a structure is quite effective. Additionally, the right to debate the necessity of a war stops with advocating the position of the enemy. No team that fights against itself can win which is why most civil wars end up changing the entire country or in many cases creating separate countries. We cannot allow protesting in the congress to handcuff the arms of executive authority to conduct a war. As well, I cannot ignore what the Clinton administration and the Bush administration ignored in the beginning. Since the 1970s America has been attacked time and again with no honest reaction to the growing threats. Clearly, police action was not working and intelligence failures were becoming more common. Certainly, we can live with terrorism if we are lucky enough to NOT be in the destroyer bombed or the tower flattened or in the blast range of a future weapon, be it biological or radiological or other.
In wrapping up, Stone admits that America is not the source of evil. Yet, again he falls short of the complete extrapolation of the truth. If 9/11 is an attack conducted by evil then America has a right to seek to purge evil from the regimes that threaten freedom around the globe. Let us not forget the lessons of the past and let us not ignore the calls of our times to seek out and destroy threats to justice and freedom.
