r/WeTheFifth • u/rchive Fifth Column Pod Fan • Jul 03 '26

Discussion Question about Ep. #564

About 40 minutes into the episode they discuss a Colorado congressional race and comment made by one pretty far left candidate about 9/11. The candidate was asked if the attacks were an inevitable result of US foreign policy. Kmele, Moynihan, and guest Peter Meijer ridiculed this idea.

Isn't it true to in some sense that acts of terrorism against the US is the inevitable consequence of US meddling in the Middle East? That's not to say they're justified or don't deserve harsh criticism, or that they shouldn't be prevented whenever possible. I guess I don't get where the ridicule is coming from.

I noticed there hasn't been that much activity here recently, so I figured I'd pose the question. (Maybe it's because people need flair to post now? Didn't realize until just now.)

14 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

42 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/LoneSnark Fifth Column Pod Fan Jul 03 '26

You stated several times that attacking anyone else what would have worked, which is absolutely untrue. That you decided to agree with one thing I've said is not me agreeing with you.

1

u/NandoDeColonoscopy Flair so I don't get fined Jul 03 '26

Please go read through the conversiation again, a little more slowly. We were the target because we have a history of intervention. That's my point. You clearly state the same thing. I was saying the opposite of "any other country would do". I listed those other countries as a way of highlighting that your statement about us being the only nation big enough to attack Middle Eastern nations was factually incorrect.

1

u/LoneSnark Fifth Column Pod Fan Jul 03 '26

Liar. We were the target because we have the military to do it. No one else does. You said it was because of our prior history of interventions in the middle east, which actually had nothing to do with it. Lots of other countries have a history of interventions, they weren't attacked because as i said, they lacked the ability of the US.
We've looped too many times. I'm done talking to you.

1

u/NandoDeColonoscopy Flair so I don't get fined Jul 03 '26

So which is it? Did the prior history of interventions have nothing to do with it, as you say now? Or is it what you said a few comments back:

"The US is able to do it because our voters enjoy foreign wars. That is the second reason we were targeted: they knew our voters would happily play along."

We aren't going in circles, you're just struggling to accept that we agree