BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Another Reaction to Grant's essay

 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
autopilot disengaged
09:14 / 20.09.01
ray, if you can point out a use of the word 'evil' in any one of my posts, i have an apology ready and waiting.

...and at what point does intervention in other countries' and regions' affairs go beyond domestic interest? and what right does a country have to do this anyhow - when it always has to be at someone elses' expense? and when it's always the same (rich) countries profiting, the same (poor) countries suffering, isn't that a rather better description of bias?

i disagree with US foreign policy (and the UK, and yes, much of the west). i believe the almost complete inequality in international affairs, the economic scams used to maintain it, the occasional military adventurism to contain and control other nations is nothing less than neo-colonialism.

it's not a bias. it's an opinion. and i'm more than willing to discuss and defend it.
 
 
Voidmind
09:26 / 20.09.01
quote:Originally posted by rosie:
soft sanctions??!! these so called soft sanctions Blah blah blah


Funny enough... Saddams people starve... is it just me or did he get fatter since the Gulf War?
 
 
autopilot disengaged
09:30 / 20.09.01
quoteriginally posted by autopilot disengaged:
but in the case of Iraq, before long it became pretty obvious the people suffering through the sanctions (which were running alongside virtually daily bombing to boot) - were the huddled masses of the Iraqi people. the ruling elite still had all the luxuries they had before - y'know, food, medicine...


that's exactly why sanctions don't work, void.
 
 
autopilot disengaged
09:30 / 20.09.01
quoteriginally posted by voidmind:
All I have to say, is if Grant thinks he is so smart, why isn't HE running some super power the way he THINKS is right and correct?


because he distrusts people who want power over others and isn't personally interested? because he knows that, even if you start off in politics as a decent person, by the time you reach the top you're a world-class cunt? because even if he could rule thw world as a benevolent dictator, he thinks people shouldn't live under subjegation?

those'd be my suggestions...
 
 
Jamieon
09:30 / 20.09.01
quote: All I have to say, is if Grant thinks he is so smart, why isn't HE running some super power the way he THINKS is right and correct?
The Answer is, he isn't and therefore has no Business telling anyone that what they are doing is wrong.


Well, all I have to say is.....

God forbid anyone who isn't in power should ever criticize their leaders.

God forbid a comic book writer should have an opinion.

God forbid anyone should attempt to contextualise the situation within any framework other than "good" versus "evil".

Jesus.....

[ 20-09-2001: Message edited by: Deluxe Frunt ]
 
 
autopilot disengaged
09:30 / 20.09.01
deluxe: DOUUBBBBLLEETEEEEAAAMM!!
 
 
MJ-12
09:30 / 20.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Voidmind:
All I have to say, is if Grant thinks he is so smart, why isn't HE running some super power the way he THINKS is right and correct?


He is, you just don't know it. Unfortunatly, neither does he, which goes a long way towards explaining why so many things seem poorly thought out.
 
 
MJ-12
09:30 / 20.09.01
quote:Originally posted by autopilot disengaged:
that's exactly why sanctions don't work, void.

that actually depends on how you define work.

If you mean bringing peace, freedom and justice to the people if Iraq, then no, they're a rather appalling failure.

If, however, you're looking at it in terms of containment, preventing Iraq from invading it's neighbors, it's seems to have been a success, or at least is not demonstrably a failure.

I'd prefer the first goal, but what is the blood price of achieving that?
 
 
Ray Fawkes
09:30 / 20.09.01
autopilot, you are correct. The word 'evil' hasn't played a part in your statements - it was wrong of me to assume its involvement. I think I was drawn that way by the implication of your language, which is what I was discussing. Please forgive the attribution, as it was misplaced.

quote:...and at what point does intervention in other countries' and regions' affairs go beyond domestic interest?

That is one of the central questions of political science, and one that we can (and might, if you're interested) discuss in lengthy detail. In my opinion, it is nearly impossible to draw a line that distinguishes the boundaries of domestic interest. All features of foreign activity are inextricably linked to domestic interest, to different degrees. One must make the choice at the fundamental level of national philosophy - isolationism, which restricts both malicious and benevolent interaction - or a policy of intervention - to whatever degree one's nation is capable and/or willing.

quote:and what right does a country have to do this anyhow - when it always has to be at someone elses' expense?

Some see it as less a right and more an imperative. The problem with the complex ties between countless nations and peoples, is that it is almost impossible to intervene in any sense (either destructively or constructively) without damaging somebody's interests.

Here's the thing: if somebody needs your help, and their interests mesh with your own, one cannot lend a hand without damaging those who have contrary interests.

If somebody intends to take action which will do you harm, physically or economically, one must intervene in a preventative sense.

So what lines, then, can we draw on help or harm?

quote:and when it's always the same (rich) countries profiting, the same (poor) countries suffering, isn't that a rather better description of bias?

In the strictest sense of the word "bias", yes. However, your statement is self-explanatory. It is as if you were saying "when a stronger, more resourceful warrior consistently wins against a weaker, less resourceful one, it is unfair."

It does bear mentioning that the weaker, less resourceful (poorer) countries may well be aggressors in a battle that they lose. Should blame for that battle fall on the victor?

I value your opinion, and hope you welcome further discussion.
 
 
Voidmind
09:30 / 20.09.01
Seems you guys missed the point of my post, but that's okay.. the LAST thing i want is more of the same flaming I have been witness to in EVERY other forum I visit..

HOPEFULLY we're above all that

Now onto: Is it just me or is it now considered "cool" to be "subversive" and dis' America?

I feel as I missed a lesson somewhere... oh wait me and the ONE other guy on this forum that isn't down on warfare

perhaps I am being a bit touchy here... but then I lost friends... no not playing the pity card, just A) Stating fact and B)fairly upset about the whole mess
 
 
sixblueten
09:30 / 20.09.01
Wag the dog? Of course! You don't have to be sick to think that Cheney would engage in full-scale warfare to make a few billion dollars. We're talking BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in wealth that will be transferred from poor to rich, via the siphoning of social programs to the war effort (let alone the ridiculous bail-out of the airlines). You're kidding yourself if you think that BILLIONS is not enough to motivate sick bastards like the ones who are running the show. Just look at the capital transfer from California to Texas earlier this year. Again, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS from poor to rich, via a bogus energy crisis.

If ONE person dies because of what Bush/Cheney/etc. do in the coming days, these men MUST be held accountable. THey must face trial, and endure the appropriate punishment for capital murder.

tod
<http:www.stopbush2000.com>
tod@stopbush2000.com
Please e-mail me if you know of any organizations/actions that are engaged in efforts to stop this madness. I will not be able to post at this forum again. . ..
 
 
grant
19:18 / 20.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Voidmind:
Now onto: Is it just me or is it now considered "cool" to be "subversive" and dis' America?

I feel as I missed a lesson somewhere...


Ask Thomas Paine....
 
 
MJ-12
19:40 / 20.09.01
there's nothing that Chomsky could teach to Paine. Which is probably why he died hated and in poverty.
 
 
autopilot disengaged
19:56 / 20.09.01
what happened to Paine completely fucking shames my royal-worshipping, nostalgia-loving, inhibition-obeying country.

it's times like this that i'm glad i'm (originally) from The North. even if we're no better, at least we're less favoured - we profit less from the whole unholy mess.

incidentally: we have Chomsky. now. that makes him worth a thousand Paines (now, at least) - because he can respond to things that are actualy happening - now.

incidentally, i do think people are taking Grant's essay a mite seriously. as far as i'm concerned it was gonzo commentary not dissimilar to Hunter S. Thompson or something - except self-consciously 4D. not a fucking edict from the mount.

i still agree with much of it, mind you...

oh: and ray, void: i haven't forgotten about you, and will respond. but i'm a l'il tipsy right now and my faculties wouldn't be up to much. incidentally, void, don't take any of this personally. when i argue, it's over points, not people. apologies if it came across differently.
 
 
Voidmind
10:49 / 21.09.01
quote:Originally posted by autopilot disengaged:
deluxe: DOUUBBBBLLEETEEEEAAAMM!!


No offense taken ~n)

V/Defender of Great Satan (Snort)
 
 
000
11:42 / 23.09.01
The condition of Christian humanity, with its fortresses, cannon, dynamite, rifles, torpedoes, prisons, gallows, churches, factories, custom houses and palaces, is really terrible. But neither the fortresses nor the cannon nor the rifles will attack anyone of themselves, the prisons will not of themselves lock anyone up, the gallows will not of themselves hang anyone, nor will the churches delude anyone or the custom- houses hold anyone back, and the palaces and factories do not build themselves or maintain themselves. All this is done by people. And if they once understand that there is no necessity for all these things, these things will disappear.
And the men already begin to understand. If they do not understand, the leaders among them do-those whom the rest will follow. And what the leaders have understood the rest of mankind not only can, but inevitably must understand too.
So that the prediction that a time will come when men will be taught of God, will ceas to learn war any more, and will beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks( which translated into our own tongue means that all the prisons, fortresses, barracks, palaces, and churches, will remain empty, and that all the gallows, guns and cannon will remain unused), is no longer a dream but a definite new form of life, to which humanity is approaching with ever-increasing rapidity.

But when will this be realized?

Nineteen hundred years ago Christ replied to this question, that the end of the present age ( the end , that is, of the pagan organization of the world) would come when the calamities of mankind had increased to the utmost, and when the possibility of the Kingdom of God (that is, the possibility of a new system of live free from violence) had been proclaimed throughout the world. (Matt. xxiv. 3-28)
“of that day and hour knoweth no man, but my Father only”( Matt. Xxiv. 36), said Christ then. For it can come at any minute, even when least expected.

To the question when that hour will come, Christ replied that “we cannot know that, but for that very reason should always hold ourselves in readiness to meet it, as the Goodman must be ready who guards his home, and as the virgins with their lamps must be ready to meet the bridegroom, and that we, too, must work for the coming of that hour with all the powers given to us, as the servants worked with the talents entrusted to them”.

In reply to the question when the hour would come, Christ exhorted people to devote all their energies to hasten its coming. And there can be no other reply. Men cannot possibly know at what day and hour the Kingdom of God will come, for its coming depends only on themselves.
The reply is like that which the sage gave when asked whether it was far to the town: ‘Walk on!’

How can we tell whether it is far to the goal to which humanity aspires when we do not know how humanity will advance towards it-whether it will choose to move onwards or to stand still, to slacken its peace or increase it?
All we can know is what we ( who constitute humanity) must do and must not do to bring about the kingdom of god. and we all know that. Each of us has only to begin to do what he ought to do and cease the contrary. We need only each of us living according to the light that is in us to bring about the promised Kingdom of God towards the heart of every man* aspires. ( *man stands for all of us male and females)

By: Leo Tolstóy
Born: Yásnaya Polyána, Tula 28 August (Old style)=9 September (New style) 1828
Died: Astápova, Riazán 7 November (Old style)=20 November (New style) 1910

Page 333 from:
The Kingdom of God is Within You was first published in 1893 and was banned by the governments. The Essays between 1894 and 1909.
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
12:14 / 23.09.01
Right, let's get this out of the way first...
quote:Originally posted by Voidmind:
but then I lost friends...


Sorry to hear that.

quote:
Now onto: Is it just me or is it now considered "cool" to be "subversive" and dis' America?


Whoopdidoo, I is cool, at last!
Two things;
1) Use of the word 'now' in you statement is incorrect, people have criticised America for many different reasons down the years. Just as... oh wait, they've criticised every other single country in the entire world. Were you here before 9/11? Then there was some discussion of Australian policy going on there too, and around Spring this year a fair few threads about British politics.
2) WHat this has done has concentrated opinion and people outside of America have seen a lot more of it in their news programs. So when you see Politicians, Presidents, Advisors and 'Experts' talking about bombing, talking about military operations, spewing prejudice, wrapping themselves in a flag (of whatever country), promising aid in the event of the desire to snuff out more life, to basically try to justify the most outrageous proposals with the most half-arsed arguments, you might think, 'hang on...'.

What you seem to be doing is mistaking the fact that people have problems with America for hate. Two completely different things. I don't hate America. If I did I wouldn't be writing this, I'd be sending an SAE to Osama Bin Laden asking for tips. However, I don't particularly like America as a structure and as a thing either. Americans are, from my limited contact, human beings as much as the rest of us are. But a mob is only as smart as it's stupidest constituent, and the same goes for a country as well, especially if he's the President. When I hear Americans say "our country is the best in the world!" or "There's no justification for these attacks!" again, I'm going 'hang on...'

And I think (eventually returning to the point) that's whats going on here, we're not just 'dissing' America as something to do while we wait for the Greenland contingent to say something stupid, we're trying to figure out why it happened. And one of the parts of that is going to be looking at what America has done to the world. And in this case, it's more germaine to talk about the bad things.

So why don't you set up a 'why America is great' thread?
 
 
000
21:50 / 23.09.01
quote] by Lozt Bookz And one of the parts of that is going to be looking at what America has done to the world. And in this case, it's more germaine to talk about the bad things.[/quote]

Only if you start at the beginning of its history will you be able to understand. People seem to think its something just from the last decades , or at best maybe the last 400+ years. But what is happening now goes way back in time, and as long as you guys stay this arrogant and refuse to look some of the things up that we are giving you, you will be able to understand. Dismissing aliens, is absolute stupid, dismissing the history of the English speaking countries even more stupid. But this is what the western world people have become programmed idiots who don’t think for themselves, if they would , than bush would not have become president, plain and simple.

What America has done to the world, one can not even start to describe. The USA is called the united States, look at the background of these heads of states and then look at the countries especially to that country were they have been sending all these years all these billions too. And ask your self WHY? Or at least go Hang on a sec like Lozt Bookz does. Israel/Great Britain/United states/Australia what do they have in common? And were does this language come from? Think for crying out loud.You guys in all these countries dont have much time anymore.
 
 
FinderWolf
14:55 / 24.09.01
I've read more and more about US Sanctions against Iraq, and I see now that they are just starving and essentially torturing the people of Iraq, and not really affecting Saddam Hussein or his government (which doesn't seem to be doing anything 'bad' or anti-social at the moment, other than not acknowledging the no-fly zone and trying to shoot down US and British patrol flights).

Why do we continue to choke the people of Iraq when the Gulf War ended years ago, and we essentially "won"? What are we trying to prove?

This bothers me a lot. Just one of the reasons for anti-US sentiment in the middle east (although I don't buy all the "US is defiling the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia" crap, nor do I buy Bin Laden saying this is the Jews and the Christians against the Muslims with "George the Crusader under the cross").

We've made many mistakes in the Middle East. To come out and say "Oh, we apologize, let's reverse all our policy that upset anyone" is not the answer now. Especially since anything of the sort would make the radicals say "Look! The US is a band of cowards!" reinforcing the 'paper tiger' image.

But hopefully, as the administration tries to root out and stop bands of terrorists around the globe, in concert with the rest of the world, the US can seriously look at the reasons WHY we are so hated, and subtly shift its foreign policy without advertising it (because if they blatanly show such changes, it would look like we're caving in to terrorist 'demands' [that aren't even clear, incidentally]).

I fall in the middle of the people saying "The US are the worst terrorists of all and we deserved it, we've done far worse to many people and we're all corrupt, horrid, evil capitalists, arrogant as they say we are" and the people saying "America - love it or leave it! This is WW III and we are the shining beacon of freedom and civilization in the face of such barbarism!"

I question the gov't but don't think everything they tell us is a lie. But the info. about US misdeeds and fucked-up policy in the middle east is obviously out there to see, if you dig a bit. It's even being discussed in the major newspapers now, but really not as much as it should be (giving way instead to the patriotism and resolution of America to beat this mysterious enemy, which certainly has some validity and has its place as well). I just wish it was 60/40 pro-US/question US and see why they really hate us as opposed to 80/20, as it seems to be in the media since the attacks.
 
 
MJ-12
15:06 / 24.09.01
The big nasty wrt Iraq is that if you approach it from the standpoint of "Make Sadaams's life miserable" it is clearly not hurting him, but if you approach it from a standpoint of "keep in on his own turf" it is doing that job, albeit at great cost. SH's history is
1979 - come to power
1980 - invade Iran & fight an eight year massivly bloody war, taking a little time away to gas his ethnic minorities.
1988 - end the war w/ Iran
1990 - invade Kuwait

so, prior to sanctions we see two out of eleven years when he's not trying to kill his neighbors. This is the best behaved he's been, though maybe he's just mellowed with age. Ideally he'd just drop dead of a massive stroke tomorrow, but there are really a very limited range of options. I'm entirely open to suggestions.
 
 
000
16:29 / 24.09.01
Today on CNN at 3.30 pm, some guy read the new rules for you Americans, you have just entered WW3!
Today your Brave New World has Started. 1984.
All I can say, is that I feel intensely sad, for you guys will not know what freedom is no more for a longer time.
 
 
bio k9
18:26 / 24.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Lozt Bookz:
...we're not just 'dissing' America as something to do while we wait for the Greenland contingent to say something stupid...


...but if you were you wouldn't have to wait for long.
 
 
Verbal Kint
01:56 / 26.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Laila:
Today on CNN at 3.30 pm, some guy read the new rules for you Americans, you have just entered WW3!
Today your Brave New World has Started. 1984.
All I can say, is that I feel intensely sad, for you guys will not know what freedom is no more for a longer time.


Sorry Laila, that was just far too up on a high horse for me. And waay to satisfied by what is happening here.

I have no idea who you were referring to on CNN, nor have I heard it. I consider CNN irresponsible infotainment since the elections and take it with a major grain of salt. Occasionally they stick to the facts, but more and more they are sensationalizing and speculating. In the last couple of weeks I have quit watching.

I get my news from a selection of news sources - a mix of international and U.S (more reliable) sources. Then I do my own thinking. I am not alone.

Just because CNN says it, doesn't make it so.
 
 
houdini
21:23 / 19.10.01
quote:Originally posted by Flux = R to the Izz-ad:

Honestly, with the exception of the bit where he talked about how he feels vindicated in his decades-long defence of George W. Bush, [Rush Limbaugh] sounded pretty damn Barbelith yesterday.


No he did not. The fact that Falwell went scuttling to retract his ridiculous attacks on the ACLU and that Limbaugh is spouting the words of Dubya's speechwriter is just an indication of how totally dominated by the Republican party these guys are. They are the 4th Estate media wing of the Republican party. Limbaugh, for instance, was hailed by the Republican "Freshman class" of 1994 as their unofficial member. (See Al Franken's book 'Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot' for details.)

In turn, the fact that Dubya is "playing it cool" (compared at least to the fenzy his daddy indulged in in the Gulf War, or even the Clinton Administration's long-range missile strikes, either on Baghdad or on the chemical factory) is the direct result of pressure on him from an international coalition - ranging from China to Great Britain - calling for a comparatively moderate response to this issue.

Why? Two reasons come to mind: One is that there simply is no real ready solution for this situation. Don't forget that, as cool as it is to enjoy fantasies about monolithic conspiracies, most of the people who actually man these institutions are the kind of people you went to school with, just a little older and more cynical. I think they just don't know how to deal with this situation. And they're scared. And rightly so.

The other reason is more subtle. I'm a liberal type thingy (I hate describing myself as anything ending in "-ist"), but at least on paper Bush has effectively talked the talk of much of what I advocate. That makes it much, much harder to oppose the fact that he really isn't walking the walk.

(Example: Much was made of the fact that the US dropped 38,000 food packages when the bombing began. However, these packages were effectively dropped at random over the country. Before the bombing began, the UN had for some years run an extensive food aid campaign in Afghanistan and this program actually brought the food where it was most needed. Since the bombing began, this program has been suspended indefinitely. And so, thanks to the bombing, the net amount of food in country has substantially fallen. But the possibility of explaining this in a media soundbyte is effectively nil. Which brings me to....)

The powers that be are remembering the Vietnam War and are very carefully positioning themselves so as to minimize and disrupt the tactics of protest which have been applied against them in the past.

Ultimately, I don't know if I'm really a whole lot smarter than those kids I went to school with, our politicians. And they, at least, have got access to accurate intelligence data. In short, it has in large part become impossible to have an opinion about what our democratically elected officials are doing. All one is left with the opportunity of having is a paranoia.
 
 
king_of_terror
23:29 / 22.10.01
...this thread defines trolling. if hunter really doesnt work for the govt, then your media has you all conditioned nicely.
 
 
FinderWolf
18:38 / 23.10.01
Uh, I actually DON'T work for the government, and I resent being called a "troll" for simply presenting a viewpoint that is seemingly in opposition to many here. I've never been a troll and I still am not. *unless you count the green scaly skin and hair behind my pointy ears*

Anyway, I'm just trying to stimulate discussion and present my thoughts. It's funny; in my circle of friends and in my life, I'm considered very liberal (I'm a liberal Democrat) and way out there for even taking a concept like magic seriously. I'm very artsy and very peaceful. But here at Barbelith, people make me out to be a CIA plant or a Republican puppet.

Honestly, it can't be all that threatening for someone to question some of these ideas. I'm not crazy about the war in Afghanistan, but I don't see any other peaceful solutions that I think would really be effective. Likewise, I KNOW OUR MEDIA LIES TO US (did you hear that, everyone who thinks I work for the US gov't?!?!? I'm a starving actor in NYC, for crying out loud!!), and I'm frustrated trying to sift out what is true and what is false.

Because just as you question the mainstream American media, would you not also question all the sources that are presenting information contradicting mainstream American media?

Anyway. I know I'm in the minority here, but I'm hardly thrilled about the situation the United States is in. But I don't think Tony Blair is a "pitiless genocidal monster," and it doesn't make me a Republican (I'm a liberal Democrat, remeber) to feel that way.

I figure I'll pretty much stop posting my views about world events on this site, since mostly they just get thrashed and called names, essentially.

But keep in mind the discourse I've had with many Barbelith posters, and the many times I've said "You're right about that" to someone who presented me with strong points and evidence, and the stance I take on the US Sanctions in Iraq (I think they should be lifted, and I'm disappointed that more discussion about those sanctions isn't happening in the mainstream American press). Keep also in mind the post where I said "I'm just trying to make sense out of this and figure out what to believe, like anyone else."

Anyway, that's just my two cents. Rehashing it over and over beyond this seems pointless. But I love this site and will continue to check it out, read, lurk, be informed, challenge my own ideas, explore new ideas, practice magic, and post on areas where I won't get called a Republican.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:24 / 24.10.01
Hey HunterWolf: don't stop posting, eh? I haven't read all of your posts to this thread just because there are at least two threads where a very similar debate is going round and it gets confusing, but I wouldn't dream of accusing you of working for the CIA or anything ridiculous. This is a subject people will continually get very passionate about, and hopefully we can do that without descending into calling *each other* names too much (I stand by my description of Tony though ). But yes, please don't not post just because you've pissed people off - if we all did that there'd be no-one here...
 
 
Cherry Bomb
12:28 / 24.10.01
kingofterror: I'd just like to point out that your constant cries of "the media has BRAINWASHED you, MAAAAAAN!" are a rather narrow version of generalizing, an easy way out of an argument, and smack of your own stereotyping of everyone (who isn't you) having been "brainwashed."

Hunter: Never really considered the fact that perhaps you worked for the government, but hmm, the board should have a narc, yes?

Just kidding. Though I may not always agree with your views, I at least really wanna hear them. I think you do a nice job of arguing your points, and I for one am always willing to be convinced, so carry on!
 
 
Ierne
13:21 / 24.10.01
HunterWolf: Don't give up, man! You're from BROOKLYN! Brooklyn people are fierce, yo. Keep communicating!
 
 
FinderWolf
12:45 / 25.10.01
You know, after I wrote my last post in this thread, I realized "I'd be a real pansy if I said 'waah, waah, some people [not all] are bitching and calling me names for my discussion!'" After all, most Barbelithers engage in rational, mature, intelligent discourse, and I've learned a lot about the current world situation from this site, and all the posts and links herein.

So I realized it was silly for me to say "I'm not posting anymore about the war, I'm taking my lunchbox and going home, only to post in nice safe areas of the Underground like Magick!"

And I like having my ideas challenged. I like re-examining my views about the war and US policy.

(Oh, and for the record, I was saying from day 1 how stupid I thought it was for Bush to say "they attacked us because they just can't stand how free we are, how wonderful and prosperous we are, they're just jealous and want to destroy democracy, that's their only reason for hating us". And I thought it was kind of disgraceful that Dan Rather, when asked by David Letterman why these terrorists hate the US, parroted Bush's simplistic and narrow-minded "they hate us cause we're free and prosperous" rhetoric.)

Like I said, I fall in the middle of "The war is wrong, it's only so the US can make money, and the US gov't is hopelessly corrupt and lies to everyone 100% of the time" and "America love it or leave it, you commie pinko!" Actually, I would say I'm probably a little closer to the left of the middle (if the "left" is realizing how US foreign policy and greed has gotten us to this point).

But I don't believe the gov't is blatantly, deliberately targeting civilians and doesn't give a shit about the Afghan people.

What about all the stories from Afghan refugees that the Taliban military are hiding in Mosques, civilian areas, using civilian, human shields? Can we really say "oh, all of that is lies by the US gov't to explain away casualties"? There are LOTS and lots of reports that the Taliban has stored away military weapons, tanks, and troops in civilian areas.

Anyway, rock on, everyone. Like I said, I'm just trying to make sense out of this like everone else. Peace.
 
 
Axel Lambert
13:17 / 28.10.01
quote:Originally posted by sixblueten:
[QB]Wag the dog? Of course! You don't have to be sick to think that Cheney would engage in full-scale warfare to make a few billion dollars. We're talking BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in wealth that will be transferred from poor to rich.........


This reminds me of my Spanish teacher who condemned the Nato bombings of Yugoslavia in the Kosovo crisis, and showed us an essay on why Nato was bombing (after all, Yugoslavia has no oil). The writer ingeniously came up with the idea that the Kosovo campaign was a way for western companies to get more dollars through rebuilding the cities damaged by the bombs.
Logic moves kinda backwards donchathink?
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply