9/11 babies are voters

by Chris Bertram on September 11, 2019

It doesn’t seem like 18 years, but it is. Babies born that day are now voters, among other things. Crooked Timber, 16-years old now, came out of the eruption of blogging that followed 9/11. In the atmosphere that developed after 9/11, many of the ways of thinking, arguing, abusing and obfuscating that we associated with the new populism became commonplace. Those who expressed critical opinions, even people of the stature of Nelson Mandela or Mary Robinson, were subject to character assassination by armies of keyboard vigilantes. Ordinary people who said something critical had no chance: recall Cindy Sheehan? Fake and fakish news and associated panics became part of the landscape. In the subsequent wars, particularly in the Middle East, criticisms of US or Israeli actions were blunted by swarms of amateur online experts comparing and undermining photographic evidence. Maybe we’d have ended up here anyway, but that terrible and murderous day set us on the path to the pit of Trump and Brexit, a pit that will be hard to climb out of.

UPDATE: I’m reminded via twitter that the anthrax scare was about a real thing, even though the anti-Muslim spin that was part of the panic around it was confected. I’ve changed the OP to reflect that.

{ 31 comments }

1

SusanC 09.11.19 at 9:34 am

remember the anthrax scare?

Targetted terrorist attack in which several people died, including journalist Robert Stevens. Probably a false flag attack[*], in that the prime suspect (according to the FBI) was a US government bioweapons expert, and was not actually a jihadist, the letters accompanying the anthrax notwithstanding.

I think I had better not describe the details, but I am aware that certain UK military facilities put in place procedures in case they became the next target.

[*] if we take false flag attacks to include lone crazy individuals or small terrorist groups pretending to be members of groups they don’t actually support, as well as state-sponsored false flag attacks.

Given that this was not a highly contagious epidemic (victims were in direct contact with mailed spores), your individual risk of becoming a victim was pretty low.

2

Susanc 09.11.19 at 9:41 am

A joke from around that time: “People are worrying that the jihadists
have access to anthrax. Of course they’ve got access to anthrax. They’re a bunch of goat herders… all they need is a goat that got sick…’

3

engels 09.11.19 at 10:29 am

The most important difference between that time and now imo is back then the liberal political and academic establishment nearly all jumped on board with Bush’s warmongering, bigotry and authoritarianism whereas now they’re going nuts about Trump. Must be that good old arc of history…

4

ph 09.11.19 at 11:13 am

Bolton Out – Neocon shown the door. (Thank god). So far we’re living during the first presidency this century and most of the last (if we count Kosovo) that has not included starting a new war with another much weaker opponent.

You’re right, Chris, to draw a line from 9/11 to the present, but you seem (frankly) stubbornly indifferent to this simple fact – no new wars by a US president.

That issue alone was enough to ensure I’d never support HRC. There’s enough wrong with western policies in the ME to make total peace unlikely under any president. But what a lot of Trump critics don’t understand is that Trump is hated even more strongly by military power-brokers and profiteers of the permanent class because he’s quite serious about avoiding any new wars.

Trump was elected to end the “sober” response of US and UK elites like Blair-Major-Johnson-Clinton-Bush-Biden who waged endless war in the ME from March 2003. As a Canadian, I felt a palpable sense of relief when I learned that the neo-con in a pantsuit – “we came – we saw – he died – HA-HA-HA” would not in charge of the world’s largest military. Romney’s pissed btw that Bolton’s gone – as are all those investors planning to exploit spiking oil prices had Bolton managed to engineer a military conflict with Iran.

I take it you believe the world would be a safer place were HRC going mano-y-mano against Putin over Syria. Me, I’m delighted Trump wants to be Kim’s pal. He used Bolton to scare others, and then canned him.

The less military conflict the better, that’s exactly the response to 9/11 I’ve been waiting two 8-year presidencies to see. but that’s just me.

5

WLGR 09.11.19 at 12:07 pm

Much more symbolically resonant than voting, 9/11 babies are now eligible to enlist in the military and be called up to fight in the occupation of Afghanistan.

6

Scott P. 09.11.19 at 1:21 pm

You’re right, Chris, to draw a line from 9/11 to the present, but you seem (frankly) stubbornly indifferent to this simple fact – no new wars by a US president.

He’s escalated every conflict the US is currently in, as well as increased tensions with half a dozen states around the world, but all that doesn’t count, I’d guess?

The less military conflict the better,

And yet somehow you support Trump.

7

Brett 09.11.19 at 2:40 pm

@5 WLGR

I read a local piece on that type of thing back in 2017-ish. It talked about how the infant son of a soldier deployed to a certain area in Afghanistan back in 2001 was now an adult who enlisted in the military, and was being sent to that same area.

8

dh 09.11.19 at 2:51 pm

4. Who hired Bolton, you psychotic troll?

9

LizardBreath 09.11.19 at 3:57 pm

Are you sure it wasn’t the Onion? https://local.theonion.com/soldier-excited-to-take-over-father-s-old-afghanistan-p-1819580201

I mean, it could have happened, or might soon. But the timing is still tight for that.

And I’m the parent of a 9/11 baby (he was a month old on the day), who just got a letter from the Selective Service System. Joke’s on them, though, because he’s already in Canada.

10

marcel proust 09.11.19 at 4:31 pm

Maybe we’d have ended up here anyway, but that terrible and murderous day set us on the path to the pit of Trump and Brexit, a pit that will be hard to climb out of.

This pit, and the path to it, is overdetermined. I think that the rise in economic inequality throughout the first world* (along with the GFC (first definition here)) and AGW (here) were already sending us that way, if perhaps a bit more slowly.

*Remember that term? Sounds a bit quaint these days, no?

11

Orange Watch 09.11.19 at 4:43 pm

SusanC@1:

[*] if we take false flag attacks to include lone crazy individuals or small terrorist groups pretending to be members of groups they don’t actually support, as well as state-sponsored false flag attacks.

It would be dangerous not to. Scholars and journalists documenting the last 3-4 decades of far right organizing in the US have documented their tactics to include both remotely radicalizing “packs of lone wolves” and using false flags/agent provocateurs to discredit opponents. If we accept the idea that non-state actors can engage in war (which admittedly is a problematic idea, although frustratingly there are points in favor of doing so even if there are more against it), they can (and do) certainly use false flags.

12

Dipper 09.11.19 at 6:55 pm

set us on the path to the pit of Trump and Brexit”

No. Stop it. The Treaty of Lisbon brought us to Brexit.

13

Matt 09.11.19 at 11:40 pm

And I’m the parent of a 9/11 baby (he was a month old on the day), who just got a letter from the Selective Service System. Joke’s on them, though, because he’s already in Canada.

I’m not sure exactly how serious you’re being here, and what, exactly, you care the most about, but for what it’s worth, assuming he’s a US citizen, or will spend any significant time in the US before age 26, he still has to register, no matter where he lives, and no matter his other citizenships:
https://www.selectiveservicenumber.org/who-must-register

I don’t think they are applied that often, but penalties for failure to register are potentially significant:
https://www.selectiveservicenumber.org/benefits-and-penalties

14

nastywoman 09.12.19 at 9:56 am

.@4
”The less military conflict the better, that’s exactly the response to 9/11 I’ve been waiting two 8-year presidencies to see. but that’s just me”.

No – that’s not just you – it’s me too – as every peaceful American was/is for ”less military conflict” – AND can you believe it – that every peaceful America is also for far less money for the military – because of this connection that less money for the military means less ”military conflict”.

And that’s where you might have to seriously rethink comical theories like:
”He used Bolton to scare others, and then canned him” –
as it beckons the even funnier question:
Is that what he uses everybody he hires for?

And then the phrase:
”Me, I’m delighted Trump wants to be Kim’s pal”.

How in the world does anybody allow you to educate children? –
(You do – right? – if it’s true – in Japan?)
But if you would show up in a peaceful German school with: ”Me, I’m delighted Trump wants to be Kim’s pal” even the excuse that it was just a joke would help you.
And as I have these Japanese friends who reacted very offended when Trump yelled something about ”Fire and Fury” –
(and he was just yelling that in order to ”scare others and then canning… who? -Himself?)

So dod these people who let you educate children in Japan -(if you really do this?) know that you are such a… a ”comedian”?
AND is your (Japanese?) wife aware about your (Western?) sense of humour as we just had in my family a very, very nice Lady -(originally from Hongkong) divorcing her husband because he was this really unfunny Trump Voter?

And – please I know it all might read a bit ”personal” but – I was just joking!!
It was just one of these jokes – like – like when my President calls Chrissy Teigen a filly bout et cetera et cetera – as that’s just how I like MY comedy – just like Colberts – and otherwise I’m always only here for the comments…

15

LFC 09.12.19 at 12:31 pm

ph@4

Congress passed a bill cutting off US funds for Saudi Arabia’s air war in Yemen. Trump vetoed it. Trump has basically gone all-in on Netanyahu’s agenda on the I/P conflict, and his so-called peace plan has gone nowhere. T’s policy toward Iran of maximum pressure has not toppled the regime or even changed its behavior much. There’s been a lot of noise but Trump has not made radical adjustments in US foreign policy, and most of the adjustments he has made are bad. Something might have come out of his personal “relationship” w Kim Jong Un, and still might, but T lacks the consistency and patience and discretion necessary to diplomacy. You cannot conduct foreign policy by tweet. If you look at the famous diplomatic success of the otherwise horrible Nixon/Kissinger, viz the opening to China, the contrast w Trump is stark in terms of modus operandi. An obsession w secrecy can be harmful, but so is managing for. policy by watching Fox and tweeting.

16

Omega Centauri 09.12.19 at 1:57 pm

ph@4:
Kevin Drum has a piece out about Trumps weird mental conflict vie war/peace. On the one hand he wants to be seen as mister super-tough, that’s why he hires people like Bolton, and endlessly spews hatred. On the other hand he wants to be seen as a deal-maker, he doesn’t actually want the kettle to boil-over, but wants to make some sort of last minute peace-deal instead. Given the first part of this mental makeup, he takes large risks, and if one or more of these blow up, the consequences could be large.

17

William Timberman 09.12.19 at 2:28 pm

The spectacle of Trump and his big and little Trumpistas wrestling with the more traditional warmongers of Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon over the war toys left over from the recent demise of the Pax Americana is not at all an edifying one. When all else fails, rest assured that neither faction will be at all shy about using them on us.

18

ph 09.12.19 at 3:15 pm

Vote to invade and destroy Iraq, join the next administration to help destroy another Muslim nation, this time in North Africa, sign off on the spread of ISIS and the creation of a slave state in western Iraq, prolong the civil war in Syria forcing millions of refugees out these collapsed states. Laugh about it, ask: “what difference does it make?” Hack the US Democratic primary, get caught, get investigated, destroy evidence, get a free pass, pay Russians for dirt on her opponent. Lose election. Blame Russian “interference.” Huh? Sink lower in public esteem than Trump-Hitler. Sept 2018 poll 36 percent, five points below dufus. But, hey, we know she would have been a much better president, just cos.

Consider this: 45 hypothetically suggests he could shoot someone and not lose his support. His opponent helped kill and maim thousands of real children, women, and men in Iraq and Libya in needless wars of choice, (and would love to get back at it) and 45 is the monster?

Go figure, or better yet – ask Ricky Ray Rector. Cept we can’t. Trump tossed protesters from his rallies to show how “tough” he was. Bill Clinton killed a mentally-incompetent prisoner during his election campaign. He could have shown mercy, but didn’t. Instead, he traveled to Arkansas to watch the execution firsthand; unlucky Ricky death served as a photo-op to prop up Clinton’s flagging campaign. And 45 is the monster? https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-time-bill-clinton-and-i-killed-a-man/460869/

Seems odd on a 9/11 post to see folks favoring one of America’s most passionate and scabrous advocates of endless US war in the ME and North Africa. If only she’d won, Assad might be gone, and US troops could be engaged with Russian troops over Crimea and the Ukraine. Dang! That US led coup in the Ukraine worked out so well for everyone!

The current allies and heroes of the anti-Trump left are Max Boot, Bill Kristol, Mitt Romney, John Brennan, James Clapper (the clown who provided the actual ‘photos’ of Iraq WMD sic, McCain (bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran), GW Bush and the ‘responsible GOP,’ etc. etc. and the mantra is Guilty Until Proven Innocent, when it comes to 45 and his minions.

What happened to you people?

19

Scratch 09.12.19 at 6:18 pm

That’s nearly 82%.

20

politicalfootball 09.12.19 at 6:28 pm

In fact, my views on Venezuela, and especially Cuba, were far stronger than those of John Bolton. He was holding me back! https://t.co/FUGc02xiac— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 12, 2019

21

politicalfootball 09.12.19 at 8:10 pm

Trump unilaterally killed the deal that kept Iran from moving forward with the development of nuclear weapons.

22

Harry 09.12.19 at 9:53 pm

Matt — thanks for that link. Two things are fascinating. One is that it applies to men only. The other is that it does not apply to transgender men but does to transgender women. Have either of these been challenged in court?

When I’d been here about 25 years I learned that I should have registered when I arrived (and, feebly, tried to at that point). They don’t exactly advertise it!

23

Orange Watch 09.12.19 at 10:48 pm

ph@18:

On the very slender chance you’re misguided rather than trolling: nothing happened to the anti-Trump left, as they’ve always been able to walk and chew gum at the same time. It was – and is – possible to recognize that a Clinton presidency would have almost certainly been awful in many ways while also recognizing that the Trump presidency has been awful in many ways, not least of which has been foreign policy. President Trump is far more hawkish than candidate Trump; indeed, he’s been more hawkish than candidate Clinton. Your penultimate paragraph describes rehabilitations performed by establishment centrist liberals who have always been at best unenthusiastic leftists – and only that when they must – who are with few exceptions cheerleaders for hawkish foreign policy whenever their standard bearers support it, and who piously become doves whenever their opponents preach hawkishness. In this regard, their opportunism has far more in common with your beloved President Trump than with the anti-Trump leftists you slyly conflate them with.

24

nastywoman 09.12.19 at 10:56 pm

@
”What happened to you people”?

WE never got fooled by somebody who raises the military budget and uses ”Bolton to scare others, and then can him”

And I have to repeat – to say:
”Me, I’m delighted Trump wants to be Kim’s pal” – as some kind of excuse for voting for the Clownstick just doesn’t work – as probably even any of your (Japanese) pupils could tell you?
-(or even your wife?)

25

nastywoman 09.12.19 at 11:00 pm

– and seriously – we were in a Japanese restaurant yesterday and asked the cook if it is possible that a Japanese woman would marry some kind of (Canadian or American?) dude who is ”for Trump” – and he told US:

Absolutely impossible!

26

politicalfootball 09.12.19 at 11:49 pm

Pompeo is not exactly known for his peacemongering, and Trump himself supported the Iraq war.

27

Chip Daniels 09.13.19 at 12:20 am

@ph#4
Trump is not serious about any issue or principle or ideology.

He has only one pole star that guides his actions, and that is his narcissism, vanity, and insatiable craving to be the center of attention.

28

Chris Bertram 09.13.19 at 6:45 am

@Harry, there does seem to have been a successful legal challenge to the exclusion of women

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_for_Men_v._Selective_Service_System

The whole thing is fascinating (and outrageous). For example the requirement that irregular migrant register to serve in the US military! (Potentially a problem for Trumpian arguments against birthright citizenship, btw, as it shows such people are subject to the laws.)

29

Harry 09.13.19 at 12:26 pm

Thanks Chris. How interesting — nothing, presumably, has been done about it but, presumably, something will. The requirement about irregular immigrants is indeed outrageous — but also bizarre. (For some reason I’m reminded of Maoists I knew in Turkey, who, after their jail sentences, were forced to serve in the military, but not taught how to use guns — or even allowed to touch them!).

30

divelly 09.13.19 at 1:31 pm

@18 You left out one :bomb”.
It’s, “Bomb,bomb,bomb,bomb,bomb Iran.”

31

J-D 09.14.19 at 12:15 am

Chip Daniels

@ph#4
Trump is not serious about any issue or principle or ideology.

Maybe that’s the reason that ph likes him.

Comments on this entry are closed.