The central question we need to answer is this: What were the real reasons for the Bush administration’s invasion and occupation of Iraq? When we identify why we really went to war—not the cover reasons or the rebranded reasons, freedom and democracy, but the real reasons—then we can become more effective anti-war activists. The most effective and strategic way to stop… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (573)Sounds like ideological psycho-babble to me. Not what any scientist would call objective fact. By ‘actions and deeds’ you mean violent repression, don’t you? This is more to the point than whether one happens to be Jewish or not.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 3:19 PM I actually had no idea he was jewish.
That implies he practices.
If that is the case..who cares?I again state, that regardless of your arrogant condescenion in your comment, which is completely uncalled for, since Finklestein’s claim is false, as Hardvard vacated any action based on it, there is no ipso in your facto. If I have been insulting in this way to you, I apologize, but frankly I find that means of insult, as I have said, elitist and intolerant. Which, of course, is you making the claims of the most conservative of the republicans reality. Is that really what you want to do?
Baghdad Bob claiming no M-1 are n the neighborhood did not make a liar out of Ari Fleischer. I see no difference here.
Posted by epaminondas on May 14, 2005 at 3:21 PM Actions and deeds to fight racism are never repression.
Destruction of what lay behind behind 1923’s best seller can never be called violent repression
Ending the sperad of this:
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=saudiarabia&ID=SP4 49403
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=saudiarabia&ID=SP4 42102
and what went on at teh Lokcheed plant in Mississippi…hat tip to RB for bringing that out..is not violent repression
ipso factoAnd now I’m going out..but it’s been a stimulating morning
Posted by epaminondas on May 14, 2005 at 3:31 PM If you had no idea that he was Jewish why the ‘self-hating’?
You are relying on other’s (biased) readings, I’m looking at the text. Therefore, ipso facto.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 3:34 PM Actions and deeds to fight racism are never repression.
And at long last,sir, have you no shame? This is mindless sloganism worthy of any of your enemies. Genuine think-speak.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 3:48 PM Regardless. You advocate violence, I don’t. Rationalizations of hatred just do not move me, either by yourself or Arabs. If you had any interest in or respect for why I hold this view some synthesis of opinion might be possible.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 4:01 PM I am talking about Finkelstein, not Chomsky
Finkelstein…whose parents have not only spoken out against him, but done so from their temple. Thus I know he is jewish.
I think you are talking about Chomsky..not me.
BTW, it was Harvard that vacated any action and therefore found Finkelstein’s charges baseless. But this is all stupid since the facts of the book remain true, which is what pissed off FInklestein to start off with.
END. The whole thing is boring.
If you think that acts of non violence would have turned aside the racists of the SA, or will turn aside those within Islam who believe you personally to be an agent of satan, and willing dupes of jews and other christian zionists,and let’s not leave out the descedants of the templars those evil freemasons, and have an inividual muslim duty to see you either convert or submit and be a dhimmi and pay your 2.5%.. you will simply be extinct. Arrested as Christians and others are in KSA.
Where are the Sufis?!!!!
I advocate those acts necessary for defense from these salifist imperialist racists. You advocate extinction or servitude. You just don’t understand that. There are other who do, and will protect your right to advocate non survival policies, all the while claiming those who are doing just that to be criminals and troglodytes.
You demean Mr. Welch with your comment, BTW. I am not trying to expunge you from any party. I am not trying to silence you from speaking within that party. I am not trying to say you are criminal in your advocacy of anything. I haven’t even likened your opinions to those of ‘spineless’ men..who I think you did call criminals. I haven’t called you a socialist communist non democrat or anythng of the kind.
One might even find your continuous personal attacks, and frankly haughty magisterial words, attempts at repressing alternate influence within the democratic party.
But nevermind. Regardless, there will be more elections, and more primaries, and this party will go one way or the other.
Just for Giggles read some stuff by this lady..
B’at Yeor.
Posted by epaminondas on May 14, 2005 at 4:25 PM I haven’t called you names, my sarcasm has been constrained to your words not your person. I haven’t taken any of your slanders personally, have I? Nor am I trying to expunge you from the Democratic Party. Not being a Democrat I have no interest in your affiliation. It’s your choice, not mine.
Your sense of humor leaves me flat, sorry.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 4:49 PM Where are the Sufis? Do you care?
If you think advocating non-violence means absolute abrogation of self-defence then you are sadly and horribly mistaken, as you would discover if you were to physically attack me or anyone around me or pre-emptively invaded my country.
You’d do well to take a hint from John Lennon;
“If you’re talking about destruction, don’t you know you can count me out (in)”
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 5:25 PM From observing your continual reliance on fallacies of authority and equivocation; as a scientist you may be able to discern objective data from a bench test, but in the field of linguistics you are demonstrably inexpert.
I would refer you to Prof. Chomsky.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 5:57 PM The only criminals I can think of are in the administration. If you think that applies to you, or Democrats who spinelessly enable the continuation of criminal activity, then it’s your own conscience speaking, not me.
Another unwarranted equivocation.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 6:07 PM If you knew anything about Sufis ,epi , you would know where are.
“Nim-Hakim khatrai
Nim-mulla khatrai imanThe half-physician is a danger to life
The half-priest is a threat to faith “What the US has displayed is a history of half plans and half diplomacy.The world sees our hypocrisy, which feeds hate.
This doesn’t seem so hard to understand.
Posted by RB on May 14, 2005 at 6:16 PM One might even find your continuous personal attacks, and frankly haughty magisterial words, attempts at repressing alternate influence within the democratic party
The only thing I’m attempting to influence is your conscience. Which sadly seems lacking in humane values.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 7:02 PM oh, and thanks for that eponymous “haughty magisterial words” bit. Really made my day.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 7:14 PM RB - I know where they are. You need to know that to the salafis these guys:
http://www.naqshbandi.net/haqqani/sufi/sufi_islam.htmlEspecially Kabbani, are not even regarded as muslims. They have been in decline for 150 years, and regard conquering america by conversion still as the ultimate goal…the key is that the Naqshbandi believe the way is to provide upright ways of life thru living example, and don’t care if the conversion of america takes 10 years or 10,000.
These guys are getting crushed as being non muslims. This is ironic considering it was sufi dervishes who lead the fighting in Chechnya for 150 years until the salafis arrived in the 1990’s.
Too bad for the world.
Salafi = KharjariteLB - By the way everyone here got a belly laugh out of you claiming you launched no personal attacks but with a fluorish, finish with “The only thing I’m attempting to influence is your conscience. Which sadly seems lacking in humane values.”
No harm done here. I won’t even respond in kind.
Posted by epaminondas on May 14, 2005 at 8:36 PM You don’t know the meaning of ‘seems’? There is a distinct difference between a critical challenge and a condemnation.
I’m sure there are humane values tucked away somewhere in there. I was merely commenting on their apparent lack.
I’m perfectly willing to be proven wrong, believe me. Otherwise I would have ceased talking to you days ago.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 8:56 PM Margaret, just got to your reply. I was obviously trying to lighten things up and just razz you all a little. I feel like the battle b/t you, LB and Epa has gotten nowhere and neither side will buldge. Why is it, even when we start out considerate on both sides, it always reverts to this mess? Screw how to end the war, if we could answer that issue, the war would be a cake walk to figure out. Take care…
Posted by Curious on May 14, 2005 at 8:56 PM Curious,
To answer your question with another question;
What in the world makes you think ‘razzing’ people isn’t going to cause them to ‘razz’ you back? Especially when you are so especially, not funny.
If’n you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. That goes for you to epi. And I don’t want no crap about pots & kettles, you hear. When you start acting like grown-ups, I’ll start to treat you like grown-ups.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 9:13 PM Razz away chief, I have no problem with it, but apparently some do, and resort to much harsher methods. “my sarcasm has been constrained to your words not your person” Ditto.
Sarcasm and flat out name calling and belligerence are very different things….and I see most of the latter coming from the other side of the trench.
Posted by Curious on May 14, 2005 at 9:25 PM That, and a totally undeservedly high opinion of their own rational and moral perfection.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 14, 2005 at 9:33 PM I whole-heartedly disagree with you, Curious. I see the majority coming from the Conservatives. You all are much more abusive.
By the way, I can’t believe you guys are still going on. What’s up with that?
Well, best to you all!
Glad I’m leaving for Thailand this Fall.
Posted by Margaret on May 15, 2005 at 1:49 AM Um
It’s spelled KHARIJITE
Are you familiar with Idries Shah??
“Though commonly mistaken for a Moslem sect, the Sufis are at home in all religions….....because they believe Sufism to be the secret teaching within all religions.” Robert Graves -
Just as there are people whu claim to be sufis, there are people
who claim they are christians, moslem, jewish, intellegent,
moral.Doesn’t mean it’s true.
The Sufi Law of Life requires
“Kindness to the young
Generosity to the poor
Good counsel to friends
Forbearance with enemies
Indifference to fools
Respect to the learned ”Moral ?
Again the point is that someone has to act in a manner befitting
an intellegent people.We are not getting any better
Posted by RB on May 15, 2005 at 2:22 AM Lockheed
When a cop says “Niggers Get out’
everybody better move .If he shoots us all for a parking ticket we won’t call it racial as long as somebody in the car wasn’t blakkk.
Let’s call a spade a nigger
Posted by RB on May 15, 2005 at 2:28 AM RB
There are numerous spellings and names for that group.Kharjarite, Kharjerite, and according others Khawarij, in fact Bernard Lewis himself uses different spelling in different books.
But thanks for the correction.
I don’t now where you got your sufi info, but they are not only muslim, but the sufi sect got going about 1200 AD. The Naqshbandis became dominant within that sect later. That is why, geographically separate from Ibn Wahab and his followers (who literally became intermarried with the Al Saud ..today they are the Al Sheikh) it was the sufi who lead the rebellions against Rusia and later the USSR in the central asian republics.
These are facts.
Shah says that God is love, and this matches with what else I know of Sufism, but Robert Graves is absolutely wrong. Perhaps to him those mystic traditions would fit in other religions, but the modern idea that sufis are not muslim is an effort by the salafis/wahabbis to make sure they do not gain adherents.Indeed the sufi idea was that jihad should be an internal war to conquer one’s own weakness. The salafis claim this is not quranic. It doesn’t matter anyway, since the huge majority of schools founded worldwide since 1973 have been on the back of saudi/wahabbi oil money, and therefore what islam has become is what they have taught..music is evil, art is evil (they ran around scraping painting off the walls of european mosques in europe, and desecrating muslim cemetaries with engravings on the tombstones). In pakistan alone the public education system has virtually collapsed in favor of these schools.
Meanwhile we worried about selling them F-16’s from Carter on down..piloted by who? People who begin in that kind of education system? Every president, every congress, every advisor is responsible for allowing such violent, exclusiveist, racist, extremism to become the dominant and growing force it is without ringing the bell for every american to hear.
Then we could have tailored programs to aid education (maybe…but the effort could have been made), now not only is it far too late, but like an approaching meteor, it takes far more effort to deflect it as is gets closer, and larger in the lens.
Hope you are not headed for southern Thailand.
Posted by epaminondas on May 15, 2005 at 10:45 AM Sit, be still, and listen
Because you are drunk
And we are at
The edge of the roof
What is to be done, O Moslems? for I do not recognize myself.
I am neither Christian, nor Jew, nor Gabr [Magian], nor Moslem.
I am not of the East, nor of the West, nor of the land, nor of the sea;
I am not of Nature’s mint, nor of the circling heavens.
I am not of earth, nor of water, nor of air, nor of fire;
I am not of the empyrean, nor of the dust, nor of existence, nor of
entity.
I am not of India, nor of China, nor of Bulghar, nor of Saqsin;
I am not of the kingdom of Iraqain, nor of the country of Khurasan.
I am not of this world, nor of the next, nor of Paradise, nor of Hell;
I am not of Adam, nor of Eve, nor of Eden and Rizwan.
My place is the Placeless, my trace is the Traceless;
‘Tis neither body nor soul, for I belong to the soul of the Beloved.
I have put duality away, I have seen that the two worlds are one;
One I seek, One I know, One I see, One I call.
He is the first, He is the lest, He is the outward, He is the inward;
I know none other except “Ya Hu” [Yahweh] and “Ya man Hu” [“O He who
is”].
I am intoxicated with Love’s cup, the two worlds have passed out of my
ken;
I have no business save carouse and revelry.
If once in my life I spent a moment without you,
From that time and from that hour I repent of my life.
If once in this world I win a moment with you,
I will trample on both worlds, I will dance in triumph for ever.
O Shamsi Tabriz, I am so drunken in this world,
That except of drunkenness and revelry I have no tale to tell.
Jalal ad-Din Rumi (1207-1273)
‘Everybody must get stoned’
Bob DylanImagine there’s no countries
I wonder if you can
Nothing to kill and die for
A brotherhood of man.
John LennonIt appears you are as misinformed about Sufism as everything else, epi. Graves is absolutely correct.
And how do I support that assertion?
Graves knows how to put things together.
The heart drunk on hatred is only capable of tearing things apart.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 15, 2005 at 11:48 AM I get so tired of people who look only at the surface of things and believe they know objective truth. You try to show them one little secret from inside, and they call you a liar, a traitor, a heretic, a fool.
Heres a hint; there’s only one boat.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 15, 2005 at 11:57 AM They hate us; we fear them.
We hate them; they fear us.Quite the conundrum, isn’t it?
Death and destruction are the consequence, not the solution.
Who will break the chain?
Posted by luminous beauty on May 15, 2005 at 12:58 PM What do I know?
I only speak to shia, salafis, ibadhis, and deobandis nearly every day?
What can they know about this to tell me?
Obviously Graves based on his ability to write poems and historical fiction knows more.
Obviously he knows more than Stephen Schwartz who spent a decade in Bosnia learning of all this, who converted, who writes as an expert reporter and historian. Or Bernard Lewis.
Obviously you who prejudge any conclusion I could come to even about the color of the sky well before my typing is done are well placed for objective reality.
I have been speaking with these people since 9/13/01. Please don’t come to me with a poet’s words which are factually incorrect… why don’t you go off and figure out which phonetic spelling is more correct, Kharjarite, or Khawarij?
Why dont you go off and read all of Bernard Lewis as I was driven to do since ‘meeting’ my arab acquaintances. Or exhaustive histories on Syria-Palestine since 1880, or histories of the templars, or comparisons of their histories to ours over the crusades.
If I said the devil was evil, you would find a few good words for him.
You made up your mind long before anything I said here about the arabs that anything I had to say must be false because I supported one policy. You have tried to demean my ‘conscience’ and then tried to hide behind ‘seems’ as a sophist dodge when confonted by the actual reality of your attacks…like wondering what the definition of “is” is.
I cannot describe to you the reaction of others looking at this thread. Both here and thru emails taking a gander.
The incredulity is stupefying.
Ironically it is easier to reach an agreement on what the facts are with the arabs to have real discussions than with you sir.
I leave you that which you have achieved ..enjoy it.
Posted by epaminondas on May 15, 2005 at 1:10 PM Here is one for Matt H, to whose propositions I fully adhere. But also for Margreth and all the others amusing me.
Continue to have “dinosaurs” administering your country, pretending that they are running public affairs (your country’s or even preposterously the world’s) while they are simply doing their own private business and the one of their sponsors (having kids butchered for markets and supplies, business as usual).
Continue to let them impose unilaterally their goals in disrespect of national and international rules as well as international law. Where changes of the law are impossible, lifetime appointed judges will handle the problem or extraterritorial solutions will be provided (tax-free off-shore havens, torture, covert actions for instance with paramilitaries or provo-agents - everything can be bought, discretely – how many in Langley Virginia? And all the others?).
Continue to let them “brainwash” people with all the puke that can be watched on screens in cinemas and at home. Let them continue to flood people with their junk food, their junk drinks, their junk sounds, and above all their junk thoughts.Let them continue to talk free market and practice protectionism, let them continue to talk democracy and act totalitarian and let them continue to produce the same amount of CO2 or even increase its production. Let them continue with their international covert actions of destabilization….
AND not only the war in Irak will end….
(Dinosaurs disappeared from the surface of the earth and only fossils remain).
Posted by Pecos on May 15, 2005 at 1:20 PM My heart is with all the survivors of one of the biggest collective “Brain washes” and collective deliriums in history. Goebbels would be dying of jealousy. So much brain down the drain! The international reputation of your great country went already the same way. Margreth, even Senator Charles Bird said it with somewhat more select words!
I whish you all, the courage and the determination necessary to have your country ruled again by civilized people willing to join the ranks of a democratic, multilateral world !
Fight terrorism? A bad joke and vain promises!
Fight the breeding grounds of terrorism but for that, radical changes are necessary and you would have to start back home! Start sweeping on your own front porch, as we say here!How can such a great number of people be so preposterous and so blind?
Poor Stars and Stripes. Where has the heritage gone? I pity you compelled to live with it.The US might be a military and economical superpower but there are values much more important than arms, money and stock you certainly agree. Social and emotional intelligence for instance, solidarity, all lacking terribly in the last years: in international comparison and based on other parameters than corporate benefits the US give an extremely desolate picture (high crime rates, sky high number of prisoners, sky high costs for security and crime repression, sky high deficit, sky high armament expenses, poor public transportation, significant increase of poverty, increase of the gap between rich and poor, one of the highest pollutions, fragile or absent social security, a very poor health care system, high mortality rates, decreasing finances for education, except for the rich….you want me to go on? Propaganda?).
I presume for Fox TV these facts are not worth mentioning.Here and here only lie the reasons for the ever increasing number of people in Europe and other countries overseas, not wanting your model of society and frowning their nose when seeing your banner. Model that has been imposed on you by the Chicago boys starting with Reagan. Ultra-liberal economists promised paradise, the land were honey and milk would flow abundantly. Where is the honey and the milk? Abundantly in the pockets of the happy few. Keep your democracy, we do not need it!
An ever increasing number of people over here invite your “rulers” to keep their “democracy” and their “freedom” their World Bank and their IMF policy on their side of the big pond and to leave it there. Our conceptions of an open, democratic and pluralistic society being diametrically opposed to what is presently happening under the shadow of the stars and stripes. Keep your austerity policies for the rich and do not impose them on the poor.
By the way. We do not need anymore satire, hearing your president talk about civilization, freedom and democracy is satirical enough, what a laugh, even “Monty Python” could not do better. The only difference is that your president is serious when he babbles the Monty Pythons are not!
For the time being we will handle our own remaining “dinosaurs”. Some have shamefully been chased, others already with their nose in the mud and some still smiling but not for long. There is plenty of work on both sides of the pond.
I love your country! I lived in the US in times when there were people saying “America love it or leave it” and it seems that this sort of “patriots” still haven’t left? On the contrary, they are stronger than ever. I wonder if they have ever read and understood your constitution….I doubt it!
I personally “loved it but left it”!
Posted by Pecos on May 15, 2005 at 1:22 PM Please allow me to introduce myself; I’m a man of wealth and taste.
Better use all your well learned politics, or I’ll lay your soul to waste.My intent is to prick your concience, not to demean it. I’m sorry if you fail to understand, but I’m not particularily surprized.
<objective reality.</i>
And this isn’t insulting and demeaning? Not even the ghost of a caveat.
I really have no argument with your ‘facts’. It’s the conclusions you draw that I take issue with. This is the meat of the matter, which you do not even have the awareness to address.
There’s factual knowledge, and then there is wisdom. Without wisdom, knowledge is a ship without a pilot.
Your ship is headed for the shoals.remember, there is only one boat.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 15, 2005 at 1:38 PM Reality is a question of perspective, the further you get from the past, the more concrete and plausible it seems – but as you approach the present, it inevitably seems more and more incredible. Suppose yourself in a large cinema, sitting at first in the back row, and gradually moving up, row by row, until your nose is almost pressed against the screen. Gradually the stars’ faces dissolve into dancing grain; tiny details assume grotesque proportions, the illusion dissolves – or rather, it becomes clear that the illusion itself is reality
Salman Rushdie
“Midnight’s Children”
Posted by Pecos on May 15, 2005 at 2:19 PM ‘Seems’ actually does mean something. It’s not a sophist trick. Not in the sarcastic meaning with which you use the term.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 15, 2005 at 3:13 PM Sadly, this is so on target:
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/000515.html
Posted by luminous beauty on May 15, 2005 at 4:12 PM Factual knowledge is much different than conclusions drawn from half truths and errors.
Stop me if you’ve heard this one
A woman brought her son to Nasrudin. “Please frighten him a little,” she said, “because he is rather beyond my control.”
Nasrudin turned up his eyeballs, started to puff and pant, danced up and down and beat his fists on the table until the horrified woman fainted. Then he rushed out of the room.
When he returned and the woman had recovered consciousness, she said to him, “I asked you to frighten the boy, not me!”
“Madam,” said the Mulla, “danger has no favorites. I even frightened myself, as you saw. When danger threatens, it threatens all equally.”
Shock and Awe.
thanx for the link LB
“the meek shall inherit the earth , in 4x6x6 plots”
Posted by RB on May 15, 2005 at 5:44 PM for a serious critque of this article:
http://counterpunch.org/neumann05102005.html
Posted by Jackson Lewis on May 15, 2005 at 7:00 PM Best of luck to you too Margaret, we can agree to disagree as that saying goes. I too am heading off for other pastures, of course I have yet to tell whether they will be greener! Though we may (or do) disagree, I wish you the best.
Posted by Curious on May 15, 2005 at 7:16 PM between the disjointed mumbo-jumbo that epiclueless passes off as rational thinking,the white trash cheerleading that USM indulges in,and the constant repitition of the same tired sound bites that ‘curious’spouts,is it any wonder that conservatives are considered the stupid ones?
Posted by amazed on May 16, 2005 at 2:24 PM USM,
Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. Thanks for your earlier post directed my way. I appreciate your honesty. I agree that it would be helpful if moderate Muslims in the US and in Europe spoke more forcefully, but I disagree that they do not have any pressure to worry about here or in Europe to do such. True, government resistance may be less in the West, but pressure can be brought to bear from a wide variety of sources - just look at you own life, for example. Family, friends, work, community, and, of course, religion, all can and do “steer” people one way or the other. Moderates, no matter what the venue (politics, religion, etc.) rarely have the loudest voices. Which makes sense, they are ‘moderate’ after all. I don’t think you should read too much into their relative silence. It’s when they begin lending their voices to the extremists en masse that I’ll be getting on your bandwagon. I don’t see that yet.
Posted by tomkin on May 16, 2005 at 3:37 PM Curious,
Very sorry for the, “way too moderate and considerate of a post.” I’ll try to do better.
Posted by tomkin on May 16, 2005 at 3:58 PM Epiminondas,I asked you quite a while ago why,in all your historical musings, you never refer to US/Arab relations over the last 50 years,and as usual,what you don’t respond to says more than what you respond to. USM,you’re a shriner?Thats hardly a ringing endorsement.I lived in Missouri years back,and knew quite a few shriners,and I have to say that I never knew a bunch of more self satisfied,beer guzzling,redneck bigots in my life.Way to impressed with themselves cause they helped out ‘po white kids.So whats your point?
Posted by mike on May 17, 2005 at 1:44 AM Epaminondas,
You are one interesting dude. Lots of good stuff to discuss in your post. As to your first point that there is no metric to decide which side of the Islamic civil war (for that’s what it is) is winning, I agree. The data are hard to quantify and are conflicting. And there does not seem to be many polls on the subject – at least none that I could readily find. This brings us back to the premise that, as you noted, there is no “objective way to decide.” Still, just because we don’t know who is winning doesn’t mean we don’t know who we want to win. Clearly, as I’m sure you agree, we (the West) want the moderates to win. The question is how do we best help them?
You stated that “there is no crafty plan here to prick us here and there until we ‘retake’ the holy land proving all they say…” Really? Drawing us into their war on their terms gives them many measurable and obvious advantages:
* Our actions have killed thousands of innocents – with each death giving a heretofore moderate Muslim family a very personal reason to listen to or even join the radical Islamists. It gives the radical Muslim family incontrovertible proof they they were right.
* Abu Ghraib – each picture was probably worth a thousand recruits
* Our now transparent siding with Israel in the eyes of Muslims regarding the Palestinian/Israeli conflict – that’s a self-evident problem if the US is trying to play the role of honest broker.There are others too. You are no doubt right that their ultimate goal is to unite the ummah under their banner, but drawing the Christian-centric West into the fray certainly has not hurt their cause. Quite the opposite, I’d say.
Posted by tomkin on May 17, 2005 at 1:54 AM ...continued
As to your second assertion, that Coalition’s involvement in the war has made a change – see Lebanon, Iraqi vote, Mubarak’s announcement, Saudi municipal elections, Libya et al. – I tend to agree. Sometimes the pot does need to be stirred up before things can change. But see also the points I made in the previous post. What we have done has caused many negative results as well. Just because some positive changes have started does not mean that what we did or are doing is right. Are the people of the Middle East, in general terms, better off now that the coalition toppled Saddam? Will they be 10, 20, 50 years from now? Are we, “putting our best foot forward?” The jury is still out on the first two questions. As for the latter, it seems pretty clear that we could, and still can, do much better than what we have done so far. The neocon plan for Iraq was wrong or incomplete on almost all counts, from troop strength, to being greeted as liberators, to planning the peace. The positive events in Lebanon, etc. did not come from a vacuum either. They were looking for an excuse to occur. The events in Iraq may have proved to be a helpful catalyst (so far), in some respects, but clearly the price has been very high. It may prove to be too high. I think we could have chosen much more wisely. Examples include, but are not limited to, a major initiative to reduce the US dependency on foreign oil (think that might have spurred changes in the ME?); a push for a resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict; a longer term effort to help the countries affected by the tsunami coupled with our asking (not demanding) each to put in a good word for us with their Muslim neighbors; etc… Good will and the very real power derived from it is earned through acts of charity and kindness. Acts the West, and particularly the US, is able to afford. And yet we only do a small fraction of what we could. The wave of positive change we could create, if we focused our energies on charitable works instead of war would be large indeed.
Democracy began in 1945 at the point of a gun. It succeeded because of the Marshall Plan.
Freedom started at Appomatox, but it continued and slowly took hold because of Reconstruction.
Posted by tomkin on May 17, 2005 at 1:55 AM Hi tomkin, I had turned off notifications…recently there was a relatively publicized “FREE MUSLIM MARCH AGAINST TERROR”
http://freemuslims.org/
Good idea! Brave people.http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050514/ts_alt_afp/usislamm muslimsdemo_050514231702
Nobody showed…there were more websites publicizing this that people whio turned out
And so so depressingly this typical of possibilities…
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD90805
The people who teach this stuff are the real target. You have to be carefully taught this poison.Finally yes it is the Marshall Plan which makes it go ..for a portion of hope check out this
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000CAR62/qid=1116326898/sr=2-1/ref=pd_b bbs_b_2_1/002-7792920-8473605
Michael Beschloss’s incredible history of the plans for the occupation of europe starting about 1943. Mind boggling.I don’t think ‘charitable’ works are the answer. I believe we need to appeal via teaching, and doing to the people’s enlightened self interest. Despite Hamas, most mommies and daddies who are devout don’t have children to be ‘vest’ wearers, even in Gaza. But unless those who treat mommies and daddies who want better for their kids as if they were collaborators are gone ... Same for Pakistan..
We also have to bear in mind another factor. I (and many others) am NOT a citizen of the world. I am a citizen of the USA. I have from 1987-2002 probably spent more time out of the US than in it consulting in Med research to Rx corps and universities ...now to be sure, med resch is a luxury for societies, but none the less I’ve still been to Indonesia, Thailand, many times etc. SOuth America and arab nations (except for KSA) being the exceptions. Except for direct contact with americans (some of which may not be too swift) nobody really has a day to day idea about america except for TV in a lot of places. And values are very different from ours. The time is not yet when people can be citizens of the world first, imho.
Posted by epaminondas on May 17, 2005 at 10:24 AM I don’t think ‘charitable’ works are the answer. I believe we need to appeal via teaching, and doing to the people’s enlightened self interest
If by charitable works, you mean making people dependent on meager gifts that have no hope of effecting their material conditions, you are correct. Just look at Palestine.
“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach him how to fish and you feed him for life”
Chinese proverbTeaching is the most charitable work a human being can do.
There is a term of political art to describe the tortured grammar you use in the phrase ‘doing to the people’s enlightened self interest. It is ‘Mutual Aid’.
Empirically, you are a citizen of the world whether you identify yourself as such or not. National citizenship is an arbitrary distinction made concrete by clinging to rationalizing self-serving ethno-centric, cultural-centric, and politico-centric constructions of bloody human history. As an individual, I am a citizen of the world because I was born in the world. I am a citizen of the USA because I was fortunate to be born inside the political borders of the USA, but also because I choose to live here.
At this point in our history there is no alternative planet or space habitat available that would make the choice of world citizenship meaningful.Hint; (last verse, same as the first)
Posted by luminous beauty on May 17, 2005 at 1:37 PM Mutual Aid refers to the phrase not the grammar. My apologies for any confusion. (grammar can be such a fickle thing, can’t it?)
Posted by luminous beauty on May 17, 2005 at 1:47 PM Naomi:
Well said. I think the next step is the question you and Avi Lewis ask on “The Take”: What are we going to do about it? What are the alternatives?
I see two tasks ahead of us: (1) What do we do to throw these criminals out, mete out due punishment, and ensure that they are not replaced by other criminals; and (2) What socioeconomic system should we design that assures economic and social justice and well-being for all that works, and how should we go about implementing it. It seems that the workers in Argentina are providing us with one model of such a system.
Paul McDowell
Instructor in Anthropology
Santa Barbara City College
Posted by Paul V. McDowell on May 17, 2005 at 2:30 PM Paul;
Good questions.To the first, all I can say is don’t forget. The consequences of their crimes ensures they cannot remain in power forever. I think Latin America with South Africa provide a model of justice with the Truth and Reconciliation process.
It’s a pleasant surprize that an US citizen is even aware of the picaderos of Argentina. There are good things happening in Chile, Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Uruguay, Bolivia and Mexico as well.
There actually a great deal of practical implementation going on here:
http://www.planning.unc.edu/courses/261/pisunyer/resources.html
This is a very abstract theoretical model I find fascinating:
http://www.zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm
Melman’s book is good on historical examples of alternative ways of organizing work and production:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0679418598/qid=1116347057/sr=1- -4/ref=sr_1_4/104-6315571-0810345?v=glance&s=books
Bob Heinlein’s first and last novel is a futuristic vision from yesteryear. Imaginative stimulation:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/074325998X/qid=1116347427/sr=1- -17/ref=sr_1_17/104-6315571-0810345?v=glance&s=books
These folks are creating an integrated dynamic model that covers the whole ball of wax. Social, political, scientific, economic, spiritual:
http://integralinstitute.org/integral.htm
Posted by luminous beauty on May 17, 2005 at 4:38 PM Thanks, Luminous Beauty. These links should prove valuable.
You should know, however, that not all U.S. citizens are cretins; only those who voted either for Bush or Kerry. Naomi Klein herself is the daughter of U.S. expatriates who migrated to Canada. Then there’s Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky, and thousands of others better or lesser known—U.S. citizens all.
As for Mike—what did you just say? Plain English, please!
Paul M.
Posted by Paul V. McDowell on May 17, 2005 at 5:46 PM Hi Epaminondas,
As usual, interesting links, thanks. It is a shame not more moderate Muslims marched. Not sure what to make of it other than to note that it can be difficult for anyone or any in-the-lense group, especially a minority, to ‘stand up’ as it were. And Muslims, no matter on which side of the moderate/radical line they fall, are definitely getting their fair share of attention by the West.
You wrote, “I believe we need to appeal via teaching.” I could not agree with you (and LB) more. That’s exactly right. As LB well noted, “Teaching is the most charitable work a human being can do.” The charitable works I referred to were not meant to be handouts, but rather part of the process of bettering the lives of those who could use a helping hand. Repairing or providing infrastructure (roads, schools, hospitals, etc.) and teaching how to do so would be tools to achieve that. The radical Imam’s rhetoric about the satan US could be well-blunted if it’s the US who helped fund/build the local hospital. You convert more, and more thoroughly, through good works than good rhetoric.
As for being a citizen of the world, we all are, by default. But I see your point. Most people identify their citizenship nationally or locally. Still, US citizens or any citizen from a Western culture surely should see that it is in their long-term best interest to help the moderate Islamists any way they can. The Marshall plan is an excellent case in point. What better way to show, directly, American values than by helping as we did for a while after the tsunami. It’s a win-win. What the current administration right now is doing is lose - ?losing?.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’m a big fan of Teddy Roosevelt’s “Big Stick” theory. But the point of the stick is to persuade, it’s not to be used unless absolutely necessary. The pot has been stirred by the neocons at a very high price. Some good may come of it, but the price could get very much steeper if we don’t stop using the stick as our only tool. It’s far too blunt.
Posted by tomkin on May 17, 2005 at 8:55 PM lb you are simply ignorant on palestine.
Starting with the peel commission (1936) they could have had a palestine any time they wanted toUnfortunately they are the worst lead people on the planet and have been for almost 100 years, occupation or no.
Posted by epaminondas on May 17, 2005 at 10:56 PM Mike…my notifications are off..what is your question? Sorry I missed it, perhaps you would be kind enuf to repeat?
Posted by epaminondas on May 18, 2005 at 9:43 AM epi,
yes. My ignorance on Palestine would fill many thousands of books. Large books that have never been and never will be written. The same for you and even for the Palestinians whose lives they would document if they existed.I was refering to present day Palestine and its economic dependence on the ‘charity’ of the UNRC and the kind of hopelessness that can inculcate in a people reinforced over generations.
In my ignorance, I fail to see how that is impacted by some historical could-a, would-a, should-a, a decade before the events that led to the establishment of Israel.
You’ll have to answer for yourself if your reading of history is to acquire insight into the universal human condition or merely provide justification for your ethnic, cultural and political biases. All I can say is that is the impression you are making on me.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 18, 2005 at 10:54 AM I didn’t know a single real thing, until the arabs asked/accused in such a way as to force one to examine what one thought of as basic information.
This was the end of reading 2 or so novels a week and instead the substituion of histories. You think I had any idea of who Daniel Pipes or Edward Said really were or had written before that? Or Sayid Qutb?
So here’s a question..why is it that there are no jewish refugees in UNRC camps despite the fact that more of them were disposessed, and stripped of not only property but capital, during 1947-51 than arabs? This is not to say jews are great, but the reverse? Why are the Palestinians still in camps at all?
Part of the answer is that the UN as presently operating is hopeless. Part of the answer is that other arab states use them as pawns in a racist game over a muslim waqf. Part of the answer is that they ARE the worst lead people in the last century. Part of the answer is the Likud (freely elected after Barak’s total failure). It’s no mistake that Israeli citizens who happen to be arab refused to revert to PA control in 2000 as part of a settlement involving swapping ‘settled’ land with theirs. New info, that last?
There can be no help for palestinians which will be effective until there is a palestine. And there will be no palestine in which there will be effective help while the real goal is no Israel. (last poll I saw ..2003, I think, showed 58% of the people in the west bank and gaza did not want to have a palestine if it meant Israel would be permanent. They were specifically asked if they’d rather go on ad infinitum).
Frankly I find this incredible, and incredibly depressing. But it is totally consonant with the quttba link from the PA of a day or so ago.
The palestinians remain in camps at the heart of the issue because there is still rejection of the right of Israel to exist.
That is a leadership issue. Search on this “Altalena”. When the palestinians have their own experience like that, I will believe there is hope. As it is, Abbas won’t even make the symbolic gesture of firing the PA shaykh who uttered such racist nonsense (Abbas himself got his Phd with a holocaust denial/minimalization thesis ..but he gets a big pass if he can DO SOMETHING A LEADER DOES)
But as it is…yes, hopeless. The UN is not he organziation to make a difference while the depredations of HAMAS/PIJ/AL AQSA brings in the IDF to use tanks to make streets impassable by ripping them up. How can there be any economy to help in such a situation? Maybe over the course of the next year or so the wall will make enough of difference to break this cycle. A bad answer to a worse problem.
Posted by epaminondas on May 18, 2005 at 11:43 AM Mike,
You said:
***USM,you’re a shriner?Thats hardly a ringing endorsement.I lived in Missouri years back,and knew quite a few shriners,and I have to say that I never knew a bunch of more self satisfied,beer guzzling,redneck bigots in my life.Way to impressed with themselves cause they helped out ‘po white kids.So whats your point?***I also lived in Missouri a few years back and I knew quite a few black people. I have to say I never knew a more violent, crime causing, crack smoking bunch of people in my life. They impress themselves doing drive by shootings killing ‘po black kids’.
One good point is bigotry from the left, right or middle is still just plain old bigotry. Let it go and be free. Maybe we should sit down and guzzle a beer together. I’ll buy.
Posted by U Scare Me on May 18, 2005 at 11:58 AM yessir USM,
Calling bigots bigots is the worst kind of bigotry.So you hang with gang-bangers?
I too have spent some time in Missouri hanging with Black people. Well, East St. Louis which is technically in Illinois, but, regardless, they were Blues musicians and winos. They treated this white boy like an honored guest.
My own grandfather was a shriner, 32nd degree Scottish Rites, and yes, I’d have to say they’re a bunch of bigoted a-holes, but here in Cali the preferred beverage is Bourbon.
epi, I agree. Because the PA doesn’t do the bidding of the IDF against their own people is a real leadership problem.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 18, 2005 at 12:47 PM Excuse me for actually believing that a discussion sans sarcasm was possible.
Acting against HAMAS, a racist (if one bothers to read their charter) and terrorist organization whose purposeful strategy and tactic is to specifically kill the innocent is in the interest of the palestinians..just as David Ben Gurion ordering Lt. Yitzhak Rabin to open artillery fire on Menachem Begin of the Irgun, and sinking the Altalena filled with arms for the Irgun was in the interest of Israelis.
And you accuse me of bringing my own bias? Your technique does not encourage discussion, it encourages increasing polarization. Apparently you find rhetoric preferable to facts.
Sad
Posted by epaminondas on May 18, 2005 at 1:14 PM Dear luminous beauty,
Nice to see you have recovered from last week. Thank you for the last post. You make my points far better than I could ever hope to do.
My drink of choice is also bourbon…Wild Turkey. Jimmy Russell make a very fine brew for the price.
Posted by U Scare Me on May 18, 2005 at 1:32 PM So we’ve moved on the the Israeli/Palestinian conflict? Well, if nothing else, that should keep things interesting. It’s a much more intractable situation than Iraq, primarily, I believe, because it’s become intensely personal on both sides. Most everyone on both sides has had a relative/friend/aquaintance hurt or killed over the years. Hard to see forest past the trees, when one of your trees was felled by the enemy. Epi, USM, LB, any of you think Sharon’s promised pullout of Gaza will provide the necessary catalyst for change? Or is the wall separating the two groups a better, more promising option? Or should we resign ourselves to an indefinite conflict and prepare accordingly?
Posted by tomkin on May 18, 2005 at 2:14 PM Tomkin,
I don’t claim expert status, or anything approaching expert, on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I just don’t understand how 2 groups of people can have such a deep hatred for each other for so long. Since I’ve been paying attention, every new USA president that comes along tries to be the one that is going to get things worked out. The end result seems to always be the same.
With Arafat gone, maybe there is a chance for change. My gut feeling on all I’ve seen and read when condensed down to an opinion is; I don’t see it happening. There just seems to be a hatred fueled by religious differences that will prevent the opposing sides from coming together. If there is a chance I believe it will take generations and I’ll be long gone.
If I were Sharon, I’d be building me a big ole wall and start by maybe putting a few doors in it.
Posted by U Scare Me on May 18, 2005 at 2:43 PM epi,
At least I don’t confuse rhetoric with facts. I hope you don’t think sarcasm is necessarily pointless. I really do agree about the leadership problem. I am just trying to point out it has quite a different character when seen from the other side.
A good example of faulty rhetoric is your abysmally fallacious analogy of Irgun to Hamas.
I am a little confused by all the racist rhetoric. Wouldn’t being anti-semitic make them self-hating Arabs?
Posted by luminous beauty on May 18, 2005 at 3:37 PM LB
Irgun and Hamas? Why is the example I gave ‘abysmal’? Be specific.And let’s not get semantically cute about semitic, your line is what the most clearly racist (jews have always been mischevious, money loving yadda yadda) arabs I have conversed echoed quite well. The meaning of anti semitism as racist jew hating was fixed in the late 1890’s. Shall I get out the link with which you will take issue?
Again in order to think you are going to ‘defeat’ me in a discussion you make alliance with that which you would otherwise profess to dislike, I would hope.
Tomkin…indefinite. The crux of the matter is HAMAS/PIJ/AL AQSA. Hamas in particular, in their charter makes this a religious and not political issue. The say palestine is a muslim waqf (conqueered land and therefore given by god) which humans cannot therefore give up. The charter makes it clear the claims are quran based, which make them immutable, and declare that those left in palestine who are not muslims must be dhimmis or ‘swimmis’, ideally for crete I suppose. I have not yet seen anything from Hamas which is a discussion of more than a very temporary truce. In fact if you look at the translations of even the PA’s statements, they make clear they are only using the word HUDNA. And of course we have the quttbas continually saying what they say .. a uniform stream of hate.
Nor is that the only problem. The right wing settlers in Israel keep talking as if attempts to remove them will be a ‘pogrom’. Some right leaning likud keep saying they’ll never give the west bank up after unilaterally leaving gaza ..and other such unhelpful stupidities.
I see the wall as the only chance right now. Perhaps once things quiet down physically some economic improvements and integration are possible. But IMHO we are looking at generations.
Posted by epaminondas on May 18, 2005 at 5:30 PM I’m not making alliance with anyone. I’m just trying to understand what reasonable causes might underly the real political difficulties faced by the PA in carrying out the kind of activities the Israeli gov’t. says it must to be considered ‘relevant’. Not a situation faced by Isreal in 1948.
Free from demonizing rhetoric or the biased conclusions drawn from the other side’s demonizing rhetoric, whichever side one is viewing from.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 18, 2005 at 7:20 PM Trying to use our “facts” here in what seems like a verbal war with a blatant disregard, ignorance at best, is sad. Visit www.navyseals.com and check out blacknet news and intel section. Here are great articles, many by soldiers, who actually know and give a damn about what’s really going on. Included in this group is the recently deceased Col. David H. Hackworth.
Additionally, I believe Lt. Gen. Harold Moore (Ret.) said it best after a 3 day, 2 night engagement in the Ia Drang valley (which happened to be the first major engagement between American and Vietnam troops. He said, “Hate War, Love the American Warrior.” To believe that every soldier is commiting atrocities unthinkable by us over there is absurd. Yes, it happens, that is war boys and girls. But some things are worth fighting for.
Posted by chris on May 18, 2005 at 9:08 PM Also, it’s real easy to sit here and critisize what’s going on isn’t it? You speak of War as if you’ve seen it. You speak of an American military as if you belong to it and therefore hold the God given right to gripe and critique what’s being done. I have a grandfather who bled for our country, and ancestors before him. I wouldn’t doubt for a second the remarks you’d make after news of and enlistment of a close friend or relative. “You’re going what?! How could you? Are you a moron?” You think that honor is outdated, you think duty is unecesarry, and you think courage is for someone else. Buck up. If you think that America is the problem in a world of sorrows and woes, you my friend, are the problem.
Posted by chris on May 18, 2005 at 9:20 PM chris,
I have seen war. I have smelled it. I have seen intimately the horror war does to the human soul. The Generals are full of stirring words about the honor and nobility of the common soldier, right up to the moment the dirt is thrown into his grave. You probably aren’t aware that more Nam vets have died by their own hand than died in combat.
What is really evil is using ordinary soldiers as scapegoats for crimes committed by the civilian administration.
It really takes more courage to confront ones own real flaws than to attack another for his percieved ones.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 18, 2005 at 10:55 PM Chris,
The first duty and real MOS of a soldier of any stripe is to kill. Just in case you don’t understand that. Duty? Honor? These are buzz words that the war mongers down the ages have used to convince people to become Crusaders. Rah, rah, freedom is on the march. Yeah, sure.No, its not us. The problem lies with all you people who promote and justify war as the solution to what you view as the world’s problems. (By which I mean anything that you, in your own “damn the world” selfish attitude and belief, want to justify. Like this wonderful exercise called Iraqi Freedom, for instance.)
Posted by Merlin on May 18, 2005 at 11:04 PM Alright. “luminous”, I respect your comment and the things you said. And I’m fully aware, even though not having experienced it yet, what war does to the human soul. I’ve read about and seen the so-called “1000 yard stare”, and I’ve had several conversations with a ranger fresh out of the shit with post-combat stress disorder.
Anyway, I still won’t believe that the words I mentioned are manipulating tools. These words have existed for thousands of years and the use of them by a few men doesn’t diminish their weight.
I’m curious, also, where you found out that more Vietnam vets have committed suicide than acutally died in Combat. That being 65,000+ men I find it hard to believe. But for the sake of argument, let’s say it is true. Why would that surprise you? A lot of men didn’t understand why they were fighting and weren’t ever allowed to see victory, of sorts, because the enemy was allowed to retreat, regroup, and re-deploy on a regular basis. But I digress. When our men came home there were no flags or banners, no welcoming party, no handshakes and “jobs well done soldier”. No, our brave young men were greeted with spit and cold shoulders from a public who, if they’re still alive, should be ashamed.And as far as your comment goes “merlin”, I don’t respect what you said. First of all duty, honor, freedom, these are the farthest things from “buzz words” but you think what you want. But why can’t freedom be on the march? Iraq aside, what exactly, is the negative towards freeing an otherwise opressed and downtrodden people from any country? And I don’t think War is the solution to every one of the world’s problems but in extreme situations it sure is. It should be the last resort for sure. And if it’s a competely ridiculous idea to believe you live in one of the greatest countries in the world (with plenty of problems of it’s own, of course)then maybe you should consider a re-location. At the tail end of any descision to go to war I would always consider this. “The only way for evil to triumph is for a few good men to do nothing.” -Edmund Burke
And since I’m sure you think Bush is some war monger and that I’m some so-called “crusader” and I’m just a mind numb robot who can’t think for himself and has bought into the lie then there’s no reason this conversation should continue because you are totally unreachable in the arena of conversation and argument.
Posted by chris on May 19, 2005 at 3:05 PM Well, thank God for small favors! Another neocon shot down.
Merlin, you should have told him you served. Chris definitely has a hard-on for murder and Bush’s lies. Guess he doesn’t read anything but loves Hannity, Coulter and Rush. Guess that would explain his inability to bear the truth.
Posted by Margaret on May 19, 2005 at 4:04 PM Margaret-
No on Hannity, Coulter, and only small doses of Rush. And as far as my inability to bear the truth, which truth is that dear? Oh, and as for Merlin, he has my deepest respect if he did serve and furthermore my disagreement with him at any standpoint of politics does not take that away. And as for Bush’s “lies”, well, I won’t touch that either. You think what I want, and I’ll do the same that’s an argument that no matter what either of us say neither will listen. But as far as having a hard-on for what you’re calling murder and for being a neocon, those are two completely out-of-control statements. I’m not even going to fire back at you with insults you apparently feel are necessary, like you did.
You can think whatever you want about this war, but our soldiers “murdering innocent people” on a large scale is the biggest load of bullshit. Who is being “murdered”?? Innocent civilians? Only in the rarest of occasion. Do you think we’re “murdering” these people trying to protect their country? Well guess what-a large majority of the terrorists that are pumping the insurgency are NOT NATIVE IRAQIS. If you want to talk about murder-look at these terrorists strapping bombs to their CHILDREN and sending them to blow themselves up in a crowd of innocent people. Look at these terrorists who would hide their munitions in mosques where women and children linger close by. Look at these terrorists who cut off the heads of world citizens, and look at these terrorists who say that any woman or child who stand in the way of “holy jihad” will be killed. You want to talk about murder, Margaret? Look at the 3,000 people killed on 9/11, which you’ve clearly forgotten about, that were killed for no other reason than the fact that they were AMERICAN. How does it feel to know that if you went to Iraq and found one of these excuses for a man, he would rape you and kill you just because of the way you chose to live your life. Give me a break.
Posted by chris on May 19, 2005 at 7:14 PM “Well guess what-a large majority of the terrorists that are pumping the insurgency are NOT NATIVE IRAQIS.”
Please cite your source for this information-I’d like to read it.
“If you want to talk about murder-look at these terrorists strapping bombs to their CHILDREN and sending them to blow themselves up in a crowd of innocent people.”
Yes there are despicable people everywhere, but their despicable actions in no way justify other murders.
” Look at these terrorists who would hide their munitions in mosques where women and children linger close by.”
And where should they hide them-in the middle of the desert under a large, sand-colored umbrella??
“Look at the 3,000 people killed on 9/11, which you’ve clearly forgotten about, that were killed for no other reason than the fact that they were AMERICAN.”
I haven’t forgotten about that, nor do I confuse the senseless killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians whose only sin was being IRAQI as somehow avenging the first senseless loss.
Posted by Matt H. on May 19, 2005 at 9:03 PM Hi Chris,
Part 1
Let me give you a point by point response, even though you feel it is not worth pursuing. I feel it is.
“And as far as your comment goes “merlin”, I don’t respect what you said.”
This thread is not about whether you respect me or not. That you don’t is your choice and I respect that. I don’t write here for respect, I write to lend my voice to the debate. Your Burke quote is applicable here.
“First of all duty, honor, freedom, these are the farthest things from “buzz
words” but you think what you want.”They are “buzz words” when they are used by a liar like Bush (for proof see the “smoking gun memo” that 89 senators wrote a letter about demanding explanation.) This neocon administrations has twisted wonderful words like these into a shape that can only by countered with anger. Duty? To what? A war we should not be in and are only because of the lies about WMDs by these neocons? Honor? How does Bush honor our troops? He sent them to risk their lives to die in Iraq on a lie. Does he ever mention the fallen heroes except in a general way. Are the dead met by their parents when they arrive in their caskets? Where is the press to photograph the returning heroes? Honor the fallen? These things are forbidden by these neocons. I ask you why if he has this “honor!”
“But why can’t freedom be on the march?”
Freedom begins “within” an individual as well as a country. It can not be imposed from the outside as Bush and Co. is “claiming” they are doing.
“Iraq aside, what exactly, is the negative towards freeing an otherwise
oppressed and downtrodden people from any country?”No one has the right, individually, step into another persons life and tell them how to live his life, regardless of how terrible it may appear to that person. And that also extends to countries. That is the concept of the UN. Preventing war and imposing peace through a combined effort of many minds. Sadly the concept is difficult to put into practice due in large part to politics and all that underlies that word. In short we have no more right to invade another country, as we have done many times, than your neighbor has invading your house because he believes you are bad.
“And I don’t think War is the solution to every one of the world’s problems but in extreme situations it sure is. It should be the last resort for sure.”
In my view, self defense is the only reason to fight. Pre-emptive, unilateral war is just plain wrong. And this is this administration’s policy. Defense is the last resort, not pre-emption.
“And if it’s a completely ridiculous idea to believe you live in one of the greatest countries in the world (with plenty of problems of it’s own, of course)then maybe you should consider a re-location.”This tired old “Love it or leave it” attitude from the 70s, hides more than self righteousness. It says that you believe you are more of a patriot than I am. It says that you have decided that you know I don’t love my country as much as you do. It says that if I don’t agree with you I should shut up and take a hike.
Well, for the record, I love this great United States as much as any other person. Perhaps more than some. Especially those who when honored with elective office, lie and deceive the very people that put them in high office.
Posted by Merlin on May 19, 2005 at 10:53 PM Hi Chris,
Part 2
“At the tail end of any decision to go to war I would always consider this. “The only way for evil to triumph is for a few good men to do nothing.” -Edmund Burke”
Setting the word “evil” aside, as I don’t believe in that word due to its religious connotation, I thoroughly agree here. The problem is with the attitude and agenda of the persons who are making the decisions to go to war. If their very agenda is “evil” to use his word, then doing nothing is a far better response. The ends only justifies the means when self defense without revenge is the motive. This is why we have trials, rather than letting lynching parties rule the land.
“And since I’m sure you think Bush is some war monger…”Yes, I do, and with good reasons which are slowly becoming apparent in things like the “smoking gun memo.”
“...and that I’m some so-called “crusader…”
You are one if you believe in this phony Bush agenda.
“and I’m just a mind numb robot who can’t think for himself…”
No don’t think this.
“...and has bought into the lie…”
Yes, it appears you have. And I believe that any thinking person rather than one who is acting out of a faulty judgement or belief, will see that this “emperor has no clothes.”
“...then there’s no reason this conversation should continue,...”
If that is what you wish, so be it.
“...because you are totally unreachable in the arena of conversation and argument…”
And whether I am unreachable or not, is not the point. The point is to look at what is happening through eyes that see the reality instead of the “magic” that is being perpetrated by this administration. I’m angry at Bush because of the harm he and his neocons are doing to my great country and the world. I’m angry at the lying and deception. I’m angry at the death and the destruction I see happening when it is unnecessary. I’m angry at the distortion of those wonderful words, duty, honor, freedom and so many more.
I’m deeply saddened by the our unwillingness to have the courage to admit we are wrong, when we are. I am saddened when I realize that we have turned off the rest of the world and their views. I am ashamed that we are in a “crusade” for control of the world through military means. I am mortified that this quasi fascist, Bush, the neocon agenda and the people driving it, represent me and this country I deeply love. I have literally cried about all this.I could go on, but enough.
Posted by Merlin on May 19, 2005 at 11:03 PM Well Merlin since you believe this :
<< The ends only justifies the means when self defense without revenge is the motive>> and since the Japanese made clear they had no intention of invading the USA, and wanted only to secure their vital economic interest, then you must feel that WW2 was a waste as well. And that the nations we invaded acros the expanse of the pacific, africa, asia, and europe were the victims of our vengeful blood lust.After all, we could have understood the root cause of their predicament, and we ourselves had driven them to the wall with devastating economic sanctions. Aren’t those facts?
I mean, less people died at Pearl Harbor than in Manhattan, right?
And what did invading Africa have to do with Pearl Harbor?
Rationalizations are not << look(ing) at what is happening through eyes that see the reality instead of the “magic” that is being perpetrated >> they are just rationalizations.
Perhaps you can also be specific about what is quasi fascist…please be specific… there is a list of 17 characteristics of fascism which is widely taught..match your slander to facts
Posted by epaminondas on May 20, 2005 at 1:15 AM Matt H-
Firstly, as for citing my information I can’t remember what issue but it’s from soldier of fortune magazine. There’s a picture of a man, recently shot, wearing pants, sneakers, etc. Anyway Iraqi terrorsits that are native all wear the long dress-like garments with sandals and headdresses. Furthermore, this is not the only source out there to this information. It’s been common knowledge for months now that terrorists are pouring into the country from the surrounding areas—that’s why questions were raised as to the effeciency of border security. Secondly, if you think the attrocitiy and ill-regard of using young men and children in some cases (including one with down syndrome) as suicide bombers is anywhere equal to or below anything we’re capable of you’ve just lost it. Thirdly, if the only way you can respond to my comment of hiding munitions in their holy places and endangering the lives of true innocents is with sarcasm then why do you bother? Fourthly, since when have we killed tens of thousands of civilians? Are you kidding me? And lastly, it’s astonishing how quickly you take the side of anyone (including a militant group—not all iraqis obviously) that hate you and me over your own country. You’re off the deep end buddy, maybe you should talk to Merlin about holding a legitemate argument.
Posted by chris on May 20, 2005 at 3:36 AM Chris,
You raise some interesting points. I was wondering what you thought of the Smoking Gun memo released in the British media? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html It has been authenticated and Blair doesn’t deny its accuracy. Also, here is a link explaining why those on the left think it is such a telling document - http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/22009/. You may not agree with its conclusions, but at the least, it will give you some perspective as to why the left feels so strongly about what is happening in Iraq.
Posted by tomkin on May 20, 2005 at 1:39 PM Chris;
You might want to look at the Lancet study on Iraqi civilian deaths:
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3352814
This story from today’s NYT might be illuminating as well:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?th&emc= =th
I’m sorry if you don’t find these sources as objective as SOF.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 20, 2005 at 3:40 PM More news not on FOX:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&e=1&u=/onewor rld/20050519/wl_oneworld/65731117361116511636
Posted by luminous beauty on May 20, 2005 at 4:25 PM Chris,
Firstly: Yeah I didn’t think you had any real source for your “statistics”.
Secondly: I don’t believe that, nor did I write it.
Thirdly: Yeah, it was sarcasm. But I find your concern for the killing of true Iraqi innocents to be disingenuously selective.
Fourthly: Nope, not kidding. Wish I was. See LB’s links above. Your “argument” that I am taking sides with Iraqi militants over my own country is a straw man argument. I am actually a patriotic American, in the true sense of the word. My dissenting voice is raised against the actions of the current administration because I strongly believe these actions to be dangerously Anti-American. If you consider me off the deep-end so be it. It sure beats being stuck in the Shallows.
Posted by Matt H. on May 20, 2005 at 4:36 PM Chris:
This message is for you; pass it around:
http://www.bastardpolitics.com/troopletter.html
Posted by luminous beauty on May 20, 2005 at 5:08 PM LB, that letter is disgraceful. I only have to point to one sentence: “When the world watched the Twin Towers tumble as elegantly as if they’d been laid low by demolition experts”. He makes it sound as if we all were watching f*cking Swan Lake. The he so casually accuses the troops of buring old people and other atrocities.
Great strategy Chuck, compare our troops to Mafia hit men, that’ll win their hearts…
Is there no end to the hatred from the left?
Posted by Curious on May 20, 2005 at 8:56 PM “Is there no end to the hatred from the left?”
I can’t speak for everyone on “the left”, but for me personally, there is no end to my hatred for immoral war entered into under false pretenses and trading blood for oil. Really, no end.
Posted by Matt H. on May 20, 2005 at 9:27 PM Matt H-
Explain to me how I didn’t have any real sources. You can ask any of your liberal comrades here that border security has been an issue that’s been commonly discussed for a while now. Which, following logic, would lead one to think that people from outside are coming in. Would it not?
And yes you did say that. You were trying to portray what we’re doing, your so called “murders”, to the true and genuine definition of murder being carried out by these terrorists.
What exactly is your definition of a true, Iraqi innocent?
Posted by chris on May 20, 2005 at 9:37 PM LB-
I tried you links (copied and pasted) and wasn’t able to access any of them directly. I came across one but I’m not sure if it’s the one you speak of, at least I hope not. It was a paragraph, 5-6 sentances at best, and put up a figure of 100,000 dead. Not only do I find this to be an outrageous number but the paragraph continues to say that even half that much would be attrocious. Which is right, until you look at the way it’s written and realize this is a guess. I see no evidence or even a sound theory for the process in which they found their number. Could you help with those other articles?
Posted by chris on May 20, 2005 at 9:41 PM Merlin-
I’m trying to respond to your “part 1 and 2” but have only had the time to pop in and post what I can. I will try to do so, as you have not only made me realize that this conversation is worthwhile but also that you’re the only one that’s been able to hold a semi-decent argument.
Posted by chris on May 20, 2005 at 9:44 PM try googling Lancet study Iraqi civilian casualties
Lancet is one of the premier medical research journals in the world. Their methodology is impeccable.
The story about prisoner abuse is on the front page of today’s New York Times.
The story contra-indicating the US military account of actions around Al Qa’im is here:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&e=1&u=/onewor rld/20050519/wl_oneworld/65731117361116511636
The richardson essay and link dump is here:
http://www.bastardpolitics.com/
(click on ‘open letter…’)
Essay alone here:http://www.countercurrents.org/us-richardson170505.htm
Posted by luminous beauty on May 20, 2005 at 10:23 PM Can’t seem to make the oneworld.org link work.
Posted by luminous beauty on May 20, 2005 at 10:33 PM Chris-
A source would be something like a link to a website or a specific reference to a specific issue of some periodical or book, including page #. As a courtesy to those on the internet your post should include the actual quote, so we don’t have to find the October 2003 edition of Let’s Kick Some Foreign Ass magazine.
I don’t debate that there are for insurgents coming from outside Iraq, but from all I have read they are a fraction of the Iraqi born “insurgents” (though I would debate the use of this word to describe somebody fighting a foreign force who has invaded their own country, under false pretenses and against the will of the rest of the world at large).
“What exactly is your definition of a true, Iraqi innocent?”
Probably not too much different from yours. Here’s one now (see source below):
http://crisispictures.org/features/checkpoint.php?Qwd=./checkpoint&Qif=8. .jpg&Qiv=none&Qis=M
Posted by Matt H. on May 21, 2005 at 2:10 AM Make sure to read the short story below the picture. Goodnight, I’m gonna go hug my kid now.
Posted by Matt H. on May 21, 2005 at 2:15 AM Wow
My question is -
what is your definition of “Murder”
“Murder -noun- 1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person
esp. with malice or aforethought….Murder -verb- 1: to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice 2: to slaughter wantonly : SLAY ....”
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary
Tenth Edition
1993hhmmm
Now who’s doing what ??Thanks for the link Matt H
I’m sure the definition changes in 12 years and
Rush/Bush speak.
Posted by R.B. on May 21, 2005 at 10:54 AM Matt H-
Funny how you can critisize my sources, those being of the actual soldiers on the ground that know 100 times more than you do about what’s going on, and I can’t raise one question of uncertainty towards your heavily liberal biased news. Furterhmore, if you think that the terrorists that have poured in to that country are only a fraction of the enemy there then you’ve been reading only what makes you feel good.
As for that story, that is extraordinarily tragic. I also do not deny that this kind of thing is happening in this country but it is NOT happening at the frequency in which you are led to believe. If it were, we’d be hearing about it at every possible opportunity beacuse that is the goal of the mainstream media isn’t it? “Oh oh, this will make Bush look even worse, let’s ‘report’ it.” The soldiers who were on that road that night will be haunted for years to come, they’ll be haunted for doing what they had to do. They couldn’t see into the car, see children and a couple parents. All you know as a soldier on a dark road with a car that is fastly approaching when you’re trying to stop it for inspection is that this car must be trying to get through our checkpoint for and expressed reason that is far from peaceful. How dare you even equate that to murder, they didn’t f*cking know!
As far as your debate on the word “insurgents”, these men are in NO WAY comparable to someone fighting for their country. They are fighting for the right to keep the law of terror in that region and the right to KILL ANY AMERICAN ON SIGHT for being what you are.
Posted by chris on May 21, 2005 at 6:20 PM “How dare you even equate that to murder, they didn’t f*cking know!”
Chris, you’re just not a very careful reader are you. Your question was “What exactly is your definition of a true, Iraqi innocent?”, to which I posted the link showing you what one looks like. I didn’t say that this was murder by the soldiers, nor did I even come close to implying it. These people did die as a result of the reckless lies of one George W. Bush. He, and others in the chain of command, are the ones I hold responsible for their senseless deaths.
Your little nonsense babble about the mainstream media is about as far from reality as one can get. The Corporate (mainstream) Media has been sickeningly complicit in keeping the realities of this war from us. We don’t see pictures of coffins, my paper doesn’t even carry the names of dead soldiers. Did you read the caption below the picture? Apparently not. Here it is:
“Crisis Pictures published these pictures in January, 2005 - the day they appeared on the wires. No one else did. Not the New York Times, not Time, not Newsweek—though they all had access to them. Only after a western journalist died in a similar fashion did they get shown in the mainstream press.”
This is the regular MO of the mainstream press in cases like this. In this country we don’t see pictures of the realities of war. I guess they figure we are just too squeamish to want to see what is really happening. In this country we aren’t asked to pay for the war. Sure our kids will pay for it as the record deficits come due in the future, and sure our kids (mostly poor) are paying for it now as they die for the lie, but nobody else in this country is asked to make a sacrifice. Instead we get tax cuts. Our complicity is being bought. That makes me fucking sick.
“As far as your debate on the word “insurgents”, these men are in NO WAY comparable to someone fighting for their country.”
You’ve gotta be fuckin’ kidding. Go back and look at the picture. If someone who had invaded your country killed your brother and sister-in-law and that was your niece covered with their blood, what would you do? Say thanks? Bring them flowers?
Don’t fucking waste my time if you’re just gonna regurgitate Fox News talking points.
Posted by Matt H. on May 21, 2005 at 8:31 PM Matt H-
I don’t watch fox news you dumb bastard. We didn’t roll in and just start shooting civilians. The military has a stardard ‘do not fire until fired upon’ rule. That way we know exactly who the hostiles are. The media hasn’t covered anything but bad news. Why aren’t we hearing about the good going on in Afghanistan now? Where has the coverage gone in that region? Where is the coverage on the good things that are going on in Iraq. When these guys are forced to read good news (like the election) you can see them cringing. And if I’m wasting your time why do you feel the need to keep coming back at me with the standard liberal response?
Posted by chris on May 22, 2005 at 1:57 AM Matt H-
Furthermore, in case you think these terrorists (again, not every citizen of iraq, obviously) were just sitting at home minding their own business you’ve got a pretty think scope on events of the last 10-15 years. Before Bush 43, Clinton, and Bush 41, every muslim extremeist (the terrorists we are fighting) have been dedicated to jihad. If you think that had we not invaded and had you happened to end up in the hands of these men and they DIDN’T kill you, then your a victim of those who would have you believe they want to kill us only because of Bush. It goes beyond that. Jihad is against capitalist American culture as a whole.
Posted by chris on May 22, 2005 at 2:02 AM Chris;
You are a perfect example of how flames of ignorance and hatred sparked by really bad ideas, can lead to destructive conflagration. Just like those Jihadis you so blythely label as absolute evil. It is all to the advantage of those in power to sustain and manipulate your ignorance and hatred. Power doesn’t care about people’s lives or liberty, just power.
Why are you so unwilling to put a human face on your enemy? Do you think anyone hates without any apparent justification? That he who hates doesn’t percieve the object of his hatred as a threat to that which he honors and loves? How do you think that happens?
Do you think an insurgency can exist for a minute without broad popular support? They have no barracks, no NCO’s keeping them in line, no logistical support network providing their food, medicine, equipment, and all those small pleasures that sustain a regular soldier’s morale. They go home to their families after one of their operations, they don’t just vanish. Those who come to fight from Greater Arabia stay with their cousins. Do you really believe those families aren’t proud of their sons for standing against the foriegn invaders? That is what we are after you cut away all the BS about freedom and democracy.
Man thinks ‘cause he rules the earth he can do with it as he please
And if things don’t change soon, he will.
Oh, man has invented his doom,
First step was touching the moon.Now, there’s a woman on my block,
She just sit there as the night grows still.
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?Now, they take him and they teach him and they groom him for life
And they set him on a path where he’s bound for Gideon,
Then they bury him with stars,
Sell his body like they do used cars.Now, there’s a woman on my block,
She just sit there facin’ the hill.
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?Now, he’s hell-bent for destruction, he’s afraid and confused,
And his brain has been mismanaged with great skill.
All he believes are his eyes
And his eyes, they just tell him lies.But there’s a woman on my block,
Sitting there in a cold chill.
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?Ya may be a noisemaker, spirit maker,
Heartbreaker, backbreaker,
Leave no stone unturned.
May be an actor in a plot,
That might be all that you got
‘Til your error you clearly learn.Now he worships at an altar of a stagnant pool
And when he sees his reflection, he’s fulfilled.
Oh, man is opposed to fair play,
He wants it all and he wants it his way.Now, there’s a woman on my block,
She just sit there as the night grows still.
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?Bob Dylan
Posted by luminous beauty on May 22, 2005 at 12:52 PM Chris,
You mentioned you were going to check out the links I posted. I’m curious as to your thoughts…
Posted by tomkin on May 22, 2005 at 8:31 PM LB-
Or perhaps those people that are supporting the men engaging our patrols and coordinating the suicide bombings (i.e. families, cousins, etc as you say) have no choice. Women are subserviant to the men, are they not? Perhaps they have no choice but to offer shelter, food, etc. As you say their must be wide-spread support for it. By the same token, however, why hasn’t every Iraqi in the country told us to get the hell out? Why did thousands of people risk their very lives to vote on their election day? Maybe the situation is more than that of people defending their land. I think what they’re defending is the right to continue bombing people they don’t like. I think they’re fighting for the ability to maintain their extremist rule over the region. The right to oppress women, train children (young boys) that it is glorious to kill yourself for holy war. The right to murder women, children, and their husbands/fathers who feel that these men hold a too extreme ultra-violent illusion of true Islam. And no I will not put a ‘human face’ on the majority of our enemy. I will not accept the sending of their own children to BLOW THEMSELVES UP (read that over a few times—)as a people humanely defending their country. Once more, if you accept that men are coming from Greater Arabia, are they not in a foreign land? At what point do you consider them defending their ‘own land’. And they do very much hate with justification. You think it’s Bush, and American policy of the last 5 years. They have justification enough and it’s beyond that. The World Trade Center was bombed in a pathetic attempt by Osama and Co. during the Clinton admininstration if you remember. It lies in the simple fact that we are christians, catholics, atheists, buddhists, etc. We’re not muslims, we’re therefore damned and considered to be infidels for the way we live our lives. The men who hate us, those extremists who we’re fighting, hate us not for any reason other than that of us simply being different. Obviously you don’t accept this but their justification is, and will remain to be, how we live our lives in our great country. They don’t just hate us, we just happen to be the biggest.
Posted by chris on May 23, 2005 at 3:55 PM WE’re not Muslims ???
That’s a relief, coz I thought I saw a towel-head drivin’ a cab yesterday.
How we live our lives in our great country ???
You mean like those three 7-foot tall crosses burning in Durham, North Carolina, YESTERDAY ?!?!
Sending their own children to blow themselves up ???
You mean like the US troups who are dying because of those WMD’s.
OOP’s , there weren’t any weapons ! They are dying for…....NO REASON AT ALL .
Or whatever reason we come up with while we’re there.
You don’t see the hipocracy
That is why they hate us.When a bomb drops from a plane it just blows up
It doesn’t stop short and examine it’s target,
then scurry of to find a “bad guy”.It just kills.
Posted by R.B. on May 26, 2005 at 11:02 AM R.B.-
You’re right, we do have muslims in this country, who are good people I might add. You seem to have a bit of a prejudice though—“towel-head”? The difference is we don’t have muslim extremeists living here, at least not enough to do anything substantial if we do. And what relevance, exactly, do burning crosses have to do with why these muslim terrorists hate us? They hate us because we’re free, because we’re capitalists, we have equal rights, freedom of religion, etc. These are values they see as backward and sinful (against the quran according to their interpretation of it). Furthermore, our troops are not committing suicide, it’s quite far from it and if you can’t tell the difference then I’m sorry because it’s a large one. Also, I’m sorry that you’re still bent out of shape as far as the WMD argument goes. But it’s time to move on, it’s time to realize that for whatever reason we are there we have a responsiblity and a job to finish. Why don’t you go find an Iraq veteran and ask him how it feels to have watched one of his buddies die “for no reason”. My surprise will be the lack of a punch in the mouth, but as a credit to our American soldier I’m sure he would just turn and walk away from you. Let me ask you a completely serious question, and really take time to think about how you are going to answer this.—Say that we did not have any reaction, at all, after the terrorist attack on 9/11 except to beef up our homeland security. Let’s say that is all we did after that day. Do you think that these people would have been content with their successful slaughter of 3,000+ innocent Americans, or do you think that they would have hit us again?
Posted by chris on May 26, 2005 at 3:38 PM Hey R.B., here’s another “serious” question for you. Say we invaded a Muslim dominated country based on a false premise that the rest of the world (Bhuddist countries, Christian countries, countries that climb on rocks, big countries, small countries, even countries that don’t watch Fox) didn’t buy. Do you think that would make the Muslim extremist terrorist more or less likely to hit us again?
Here’s another one. Say that the number of terrorist attacks according to the State Department’s annual report on terrorism had escalated last year to their highest level since 1985. Do you think the Bush Administration would look at this to evaluate how the “War on Terror” is going, or would they just eliminate the 2 decade old report?
Hint- The answer is here:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/11407689.htm
Posted by Matt H. on May 27, 2005 at 2:29 AM Matt H-
If you want to answer a question I asked of someone else go ahead, I’m still waiting for an answer. Terrorist attacks escalated to their highest level last year because we were already in Iraq. They know that if they lose another key foothold in that region, they lose more and more capabilities. But still…you didn’t answer the question now did you?
Posted by chris on May 27, 2005 at 4:16 AM Chris;
Matt’s question is couched in hypothetical language in a parody of yours. His is a serious question, though. Your’s is specious and full of false assumptions. What’s called rhetorical. It is not deserving of an answer. Now if you were to respond directly to any of the points given in a way that’s not merely dismissive or changing the subject, this might become a real conversation.Let me ask you a similar serious question. What if America was invaded and occupied by, let’s say, the Chinese? What would be your opinion of an American who willingly gave up his own life to fight the Chinese?
Posted by luminous beauty on May 27, 2005 at 12:40 PM LB-
You fail to see that there is a large distinction between a man dying for his country in a firefight or by a mine, ied, etc and stapping a block of c4 to you chest and running into the middle of 50 civilians (women and children and seniors included) where maybe 1 or 2 troops are standing near by. That is a gigantic difference. I know the American soldier wouldn’t do that, I know that we have a higher ethical standard than to slaughter women and their children. And as far as Matt is concerned yeah I noticed the parody and he, nor you have answered the question. It’s in no way rhetorical, they hit us before, hit us hard on 9/11, and would do it again. What blows me away is you think these people would just leave us alone if they had the capabilities to do otherwise. They’ve hated the western world for decades.
Posted by chris on May 27, 2005 at 1:51 PM Chris:
You fail to see the difference between a soldier dying to protect his home and family and one willing to kill to further the imperial ambitions of a conquering invader.
I think what we think (not what you think we think) about the people responsible for 9/11 is that fighting an unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq just gives them political traction in the Islamic world. It is the best recruiting tool they could ever ask for. Sending fighters into Iraq gives them real world expertise in countering our best security. Expertise that will come back to haunt us. You can take that to the bank.
Oh, yeah, why is Osama still out running free?
Posted by luminous beauty on May 27, 2005 at 6:00 PM I guess you have to want to understand.
What do burning crosses have to do with “islamic” terrorists ?!?
The very idea that they are unrelated is as asinine
as the eugenics movement itself, but lets connect the dots quickly for the benefit of those who don’t get it.The King James Version of the Bible has many passages on slavery which pronounce righteousness
for those who are just to their slaves,honor in the kingdom of heaven for those slaves who are found working by their masters, etc.
Following the logic we have been heard here ,
I guess to be a good christian you have to have slaves and be good to them.
I mean good muslims follow every word of the Koran, right??
By the way, I’ve read the Koran and nowhere in it is the word Jihad.Towel-head is sarcasm, Chris, but I’m sure you knew that.
Equal Rights??
You mean like my right to go to jail with other black and brown people ,instead of a plea and probation for the same offenses?
You mean like the phaux education I can recieve in the inner city as opposed to the $ per capita in the burbs?
I can go on but I’m sure someone’s gonna say
“That’s their own fault”I’m not gonna tell my cousins who just wanted to pay for their college education just “Get over it”
They are the ones asking “What are we doing here?”
“WMD’s?” “I’m killing people…for what ?”They hate us because of our way of life?!?
I believe they hate us because of our foreign policy and our imperialist stand on the world because
THAT"S WHAT THEY SAID.Way back in 1977, a book called “Conflict and Order - An Introduction to International Relations” by Forest Grieves,(U of Montana)
stated on page 152
“... the United States has had a mixed history with regard to long-range, determined, coherent, and positive foreign policy.”No kidding…and nothing has changed.
Thanks for the link Matt.
LB I still can’t seem to open yours, but I’m having computer issues.The greatest country in the world don’t need no stinkin’ plans. To quote Napolean Dynamite “I’ll do what I wanna do! GAWD!”
I can’t beleive no one has made the parody book yet
“Where in the World is Osama bin Laden?”
Posted by R.B. on May 28, 2005 at 3:24 PM Some of our ‘brave soldiers’ have fired into a crowd of iraqi civilians because a soda can was thrown at them.So much for the good things happening in Iraq!
Posted by mike on Jun 1, 2005 at 3:10 AM By now no one can possibly doubt the destructive impact of US imperialism on Iraq and also the world. A war waged not only for oil and the control of its global production and distribution but also a major test case of US led corporate globalization is failing miserably. Very little has be down to reconstruct the country with Iraqi infant mortality rates at all time highs and unemployment sustained at peak levels. The basic infrastructural restoration is going at a snail’s pace with sustained electrical power and clean water unavailable to most outside the Green Zone. The victory over Saddam’s regime was more than squandered. US imperialism showed its true face and priorities when then CPA chief Bremmer fired all the cops in Baghdad and demobilized most of the Iraqi army on the grounds that they were Baathists (of course many ex-Baathists are in the pay of the US in Iraq) allowing a city like Baghdad which previously knew NO crime to become one of the highest violent crime areas in the world! The reason was the CPA didn’t want to squander funds on the safety of ordinary Iraqis while it could squander funds on lucreative contracts for US corporations to continue searching for non-existent WMDs and paying off odeous debt to the al Sabah family. The US than went ahead with its full colonization project privatizing industries whose main source of problems was the embargo and the war rather than their state sector status. This contributed to vast unemployment and never refurbished production facilities. So far hundreds of billions have been spent with virtually no accountability for who awarded what to whom and how it was spend. Such irresponsibility and unaccountability makes the oil for food red herring pale by comparison. The Iraqi people are worse off today than ever with over 2 million war and sanctions related deaths since 1990. The level of world terrorism is higher than ever and al Quaeda has never enjoyed more support. This is especially dangerous since Zarquawi is one of the key operatives in Iraq and his popularity with disgruntled fundamentalists could also led to a destabilization of his home country of Jordan where there is a large Palestinian refugee population especially in his home town of Zarqua. The linkage of the Israel/Palestine issue and Iraq could finally be thrust front and center in a way everyone including Israelis knew it WAS NOT before the either Gulf War I or II. Of course, Iraq never had anything significant to do with terror before today when a resented occupation has made it a breeding ground for such recruitment and training. US imperialism is trying to shore up its hegemony but has instead weakened itself further and caused greater distance between itself and its allies. Ultimately this venture will fail.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Jul 30, 2005 at 6:40 PM John Francis Lee: With regard to your May 5 post,which I have just viewed now: I certainly DO hear what you are saying… I am not American yet I feel your problems so strongly… it’s as if I were living over there now!
I too am VERY interested in the direction to be taken by the Broad American Left. I do not wish it to be “2008 and Hillary” either. I believe that Americans have to work for a third party, one that most CLOSELY represents the majority - even if most of the bottom 50% of the country currently DO NOT VOTE… they have to be given something to vote for!
But, you know, this third party thing is easier said than done… in 2000 I would have said vote Nader, except in marginal seats for the Dems! That would have been my position.
But now with the Greens (who were never that left wing a party anyway, but they WERE the largest “third” party and at one time looked quite viable) routed and in disarray and riven by arguments and Nader gone away to join the Libertarians.. oh, what??
No, Americans need a party of the working class, and they sure ain’t getting it from Nader and the Greens… who are no longer IN a strong position anyway.
I wouldn’t mind Michael Moore to be president… though he has never CONSIDERED running… he leaves it ALL to more upper-class people like Nader, who he STILL seems slightly in awe of… that to me is as big an indictment of the American system as anything.
Do we HAVE to leave everything to the upper classes??
Well if Jesse Ventura can do it… become a Senator… why not a “gonzo” filmmaker?
Just a thought.
You’re completely correct in your analysis of the American two-party (one-party) system; the thing IS… “working for a third way”... easier said than DONE… to get results, I mean!
I personally am a socialist, and there are HUNDREDS of little Marxist and Trotskyist and Socialist parties… and none of them are talking to each other! (The biggest one in the U.S. seems to be the International Socialist Organisation; but I’d say prize for most thoughtprovoking website would have to go to the World Socialist Web, www.wsws.org, the organ of the Socialist Equality party.) All split on doctrinal differences. You’d have thought that at least the Trotskyists could have got together, because of their rightful contempt of the way of Stalin… but they don’t seem to be able to do it! Funny, when one compares it to the way the Religious Right (composed of dozens of differing weird little Protestant sects, and a few biggies like the Southern Baptists) have been able to arrange themselves… Maybe it’s because they’ve got some big “godfather” figures, with tons of money, who have been able to coordinate everything from on high, hmm?
But ANYWAY, whither towards 2008 - and after that?I WOULD appreciate a reply, you know, because I would like to know how to advise a young postmodernist socialist friend of mine, an American. He thinks it might be possible to push the Democratic Party strongly leftwards, from the grassroots, and to break with the Leadership Council. Having been on the Internet a lot, and having seen blogs like the above one, and sites like Altnernet and Truthout.org and Tompaine.com and so on and so forth… I have the feeling that that liberal, democratic groundswell is certainly THERE, among the Democrat party grassroots and not a few of its “gurus”.
Though I still think that the WORKING CLASS - rather than the middle-class liberals - would be better off forming their OWN, labor-based party. But that THIS time no “union snobbery” in favor of the “skilled” workers should be exercised, and the party should take as one of its key tasks representing the working poor and the unemployed and underemployed. And all the disadvantaged.
What do YOU think? How to proceed? Is the Democratic party any good for anything at all or could it be made so? What about a third party.. shouldn’t it be socialist (or what’s the point of it, I might add!)
Posted by Liz on Aug 9, 2005 at 8:58 PM In vietnam, the u.s. gave guns, money and support to south vietnam people to fight the north vietnam people.
After the south vietnam army built itself up we the u.s. were going to leave.They were going to establish a democracy and they would be free from the north commies.
Is this sounding familiar to anybody?
Posted by brian2 on Aug 10, 2005 at 8:02 PM and the future of the world economy and thus workers after an extremist victory in iraq and consequently in the oil-rich persian and arabian gulfs would be_________________?
Posted by knocko on Aug 13, 2005 at 10:20 PM The nonsensical official explaination resonates in your views. The real story is much different. US imperialism broke international law and the 1956 Geneva Accords to which it was a signitory in order to pursue an illegal, separate, repressive, corrupt, and highly unpopular regime in the South! This was to avoid an Vietnamese nation-wide election in which Ho CHi Minh was expected to garner over 80% of the vote! Instead of accepting a Vietminh electoral victory, which would have certainly resulted in a kind of Statist developmentalism SANS collectivization or any of the disasterous Maoist policies in China, US imperialism frantically opted for war against the tiny fledgling regime and got an eleven year conflict with 58,000 US casualties, over 2 million Vietnamese casualties, tens of billions of dollars wasted, and an economic crisis at home and a foreign policy crisis abroad with the US suffering a long-term decline on both accounts. Of course, nothing was accomplished!This rendition sounds much more familiar to most Americans.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Aug 15, 2005 at 4:00 PM first off USM hasn’t got a clue! Secondly I’d like to commend Naomi on a well written peice that unfortunately is still not going to be taken seriously because Americans are still too proud to except the fact that we have made grave errors of judgement and are being led around like sheep to a slaughter by this criminal administration and the corporations that fuel it. Until we have the strength to see whats really going on and the balls to do something about it we will suffer along with the rest of the world. The Bush administration is making Iraq into a Wal-Mart, controlled from top to bottom by US corporations. We must act now!
Impeach Bush!! www.sleepercell.net
It’s time to take the country back…..
Posted by glockh210 on Aug 16, 2005 at 1:59 PM Hi folks Rabbit just came back looking for more evidence of a SHILL who has been totally outed now under various guises. This is Lt Colonel Roger Helbig. He pops up under a new alias each time but has a distinct style and isn’t hard to pick once you get used to him. He has been Roger Ramjet, Natalie, MiddleRoad, WhatTheHeck and a few others besides. Now I see from just the first page here, which predates the others by the way, he was calling himself U Scare Me. It is the same creep and if anyone wants to see why, check this out, see al-dakari posts then check USM’s postings on page 1 here.
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/2287/
don’t say anything though, he doesn’t realise he’s doing it yet.
Posted by Rabbitvoz on Aug 29, 2005 at 10:07 AM -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Naomi Klein
- How to End the War
- Georges Kids
- Into the Fire
- Devil in the Details
- Taking Back Argentina
The long journey from the Dirty War to democracy - Fences and Windows
Who are the real globalizers?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
