I'm reminded by a commenter that today is the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. I had never really thought about the date before--it hadn't occurred to me that it took place in the winter in Boston. What did Narragansetts wear in that clime?

Anyway, sometimes, particularly given how little difference there is between the two parties, I think we're overdue for another one.

This little counterfactual (for people who came here via Instapundit) is one of the reasons.

It doesn't have to be that way.

After all, you are only thinking about the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party because of Ron Paul's campaign.

Why not help make the Republican party the party of limited-government, balanced budgets, a strong economy (and currency) and individual liberty once again?

These are, after all, the policies that won us the House and Senate in the first place. The same policies that won Reagan 49 states.

Yeah, sure. First thing we do, let's knuckle under to Iran and begin negotiations -- with a country that has been waging a semi-clandestine war against us all over the world for almost thirty years. Then we can blithely ignore all our other enemies in the Islamic world with a knuckleheaded and unrealistic isolationist foreign policy. Surely THAT will guarantee our liberty for us.

You know what it is when you do the same thing over and over again but expect a different result? We have been doing the same thing over and over in the middle east for fifty years. Maybe we ought to try something different.

"You know what it is when you do the same thing over and over again but expect a different result? We have been doing the same thing over and over in the middle east for fifty years. Maybe we ought to try something different."

Good idea, but the fact is we haven't been doing the same thing in the middle east for 50 years. We have been "giving peace a chance" for 50 years, ignoring the growing belligerence and overt hostility from our enemies. The prospect of peace was more remote than ever when Bush invaded Iraq and finally did something different. The demage to our enemies has been considerable and this is not lost on those standing on the sidelines waiting to see if we could sustain our resolve. For the first time in years, I'm being to feel optimistic.

I wasn't referring to "give peace a chance", I was referring to interventionism and the self destructive alliances we have. When you refer to "our enemies" who are you talking about? Do these "enemies" pose an existential threat to the USA? I don't think so. I can't think of anyone or anything overseas today that poses more of a danger to me than driving a car. I would suggest you glance at this, it might help put things in perspective for you:

http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm

If you and the other war mongers don't die from disease or old age these are the things that are more likely to kill you than an Islamic bomb or Al Qaeda or the Taliban or any war in the Middle East. Forget about "our enemies" and try worrying about something that might do you real harm. You will feel better and live longer, be taxed less and enjoy more freedom.

If you and the other war mongers

We're war mongers? Not the people who cry "Death to America," and deliberately murder kindergarteners? Not the people whose goal is to make us convert or die? If they get hold of a nuke, do you really doubt that they would use it against us? And do you really believe that if we "left them alone," their desire to bring the entire world into the Dar Al Islam would diminish?

these are the things that are more likely to kill you than an Islamic bomb or Al Qaeda or the Taliban or any war in the Middle East.

I'm actually not that concerned about being killed. I am concerned about the destruction of the economy. 911 cost us easily a trillion dollars, and future attacks could be much more costly.

Do these "enemies" pose an existential threat to the USA? I don't think so. I can't think of anyone or anything overseas today that poses more of a danger to me than driving a car.

Are you six years old, and thus don't remember 9-11? Perhaps you missed the recent story of the British school teacher, who allowed her students to name a teddy bear in the name of the founder of their religion. Jardinero, feel free to live your selfish and isolated little life based on the theory that it shields you from other horrors in the world. Others, a little more practical than you, will most likely be around to keep the statistics working in your favor.

Leland, read the link. We could have the equivalent of ten 9/11's a year and you would still be more likely to be killed in a car; four 9/11's and you would be more likely to die from a fall. Don't ask me to waste my tax dollars battling your nonexistent demons.

Rand, I don't know where you get a trillion dollars from, maybe that's the amount we have wasted on Iraqi infrastructure and development instead of American infrastructure and development?

No, it's the cost to the economy of the economic downturn that was dramatically worsened by the terror attack. It prevented a lot of business travel, and required a huge bailout of the airline industry.

I see you didn't answer any of my other questions. I'm not surprised.

You know. This thread started with Mike's comment about not knuckling under to Iran and went astray from there. How close are we to Godwin's law?

Rand, you mention:

"Not the people who cry "Death to America," and deliberately murder kindergarteners? Not the people whose goal is to make us convert or die? If they get hold of a nuke, do you really doubt that they would use it against us?"

I don't worry about what some group of loons wants to do, I worry about what they can do. What they can do is, basically, nothing. They don't have any ability to deliver their war or their message any meaningful distance. What if they get a bomb? Having a bomb is one thing, effectively delivering it is something else altogether. None of these enemies possess either ability or can be expected to possess it in the near or long term. Until then, they are hapless and impotent except for their ability to psych certain segments of the population.

It is disputable whether the 9/11 attack had any real impact on the economy. The recession of 2001 began before Bush took office and reached its nadir about the time of the 9/11 attack. The economy actually started ticking up shortly after that.

The airline industry goes through chronic cyclical downturns. Nobody had to bail them out. I would argue that part of the airline's problem lies in the fact that the government does bail them out. We lost an opportunity to shed excess capacity and restore some sanity to the airline industry in the last bailout.

What is not disputable are the actual costs of the Iraq war. The insurance payouts for 3500 dead soldiers. The lifetime disability costs for the tens of thousands permanently maimed. The loss of future productivity for those maimed as well as their families. The hundreds of billions on destroyed or spent military hardware and the enormous cost of propping up the impotent Iraqi government and reconstructing their economy. And for what? For what? What's the point? What have we achieved? I quote Andrew Sullivan:

"Let's be clear: we have lost this war. We have lost because the initial, central goals of the invasion have all failed: we have not secured WMDS from terrorists because those WMDs did not exist. We have not stymied Islamist terror - at best we have finally stymied some of the terror we helped create. We have not constructed a democratic model for the Middle East - we have instead destroyed a totalitarian government and a phony country, only to create a permanently unstable, fractious, chaotic failed state, where the mere avoidance of genocide is a cause for celebration. We have, moreover, helped solder a new truth in the Arab mind: that democracy means chaos, anarchy, mass-murder, national disintegration and sectarian warfare. And we have also empowered the Iranian regime and made a wider Sunni-Shiite regional war more likely than it was in 2003."

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/12/ron-paul-for-th.html

Bring the troops home and let the Arabs and the Persians and the Kurds and the Turks and the Shia and the Sunni and all the other factions sort it out on their own. Or let the Russians and the French and the Germans take a swack at it; they think they're so damn smart. Let them suffer the costs and absorb the blowback. We can still trade in the middle east. We can buy the oil and sell them our stuff without having to go through all this.

I don't worry about what some group of loons wants to do, I worry about what they can do. What they can do is, basically, nothing. They don't have any ability to deliver their war or their message any meaningful distance. What if they get a bomb? Having a bomb is one thing, effectively delivering it is something else altogether.

You just keep whistling past that graveyard.

[rest of denial of reality snipped]

Leland, read the link. We could have the equivalent of ten 9/11's a year and you would still be more likely to be killed in a car; four 9/11's and you would be more likely to die from a fall. Don't ask me to waste my tax dollars battling your nonexistent demons.

No, I didn't read the link, because your assertion that the statistics are meaningful is moronic. As for your tax dollars, I seriously doubt you have the intelligence to earn enough money to pay taxes. The people I associate with value individual freedom higher than they do their own lives, which is why they are willing to put their lives at risk to protect those freedoms.

I admire your willingness to understand an argument by examining the facts I linked to. That's a sure sign of a rational mind.

The only liberties that are in jeopardy are the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments and habeas corpus. They have been jeopardized not by any terrorist group or nation state but by the Bush Administration via the PATRIOT Act and amendments to the Bank Secrecy Act.

They don't have any ability to deliver their war or their message any meaningful distance.

Iran has a bunch of IRBMs that it purchased from NK.

Consider also the possibility of nuclear bombs delivered via anonymous jet transport planes, freighters or even trucks.

Your statements about the economic damage caused by 9/11 are simply false. 9/11 immediately erased an enormous amount of value from publicly traded companies. Worldwide tourism didn't recover for years. Airline traffic in the USA alone was severely depressed for a similar amount of time. The Fed had to flood the banking system with liquidity to prevent a severe national recession. Our GDP took a significant hit, much beyond the effects of the mild recession we were already in. All of this is obvious to anyone who isn't blind.

Your contempt for the lives and freedom of non-Americans is similarly noted. Hey, why should we care if the rest of the world is in chaos, as long as we're doing OK at the moment. Look away from the tsunami and it won't affect you.