Our foreign policy is being written by schoolyard bullies who will go after weaklings to look tough. If those weaklings talk tough themselves, then all the better. It makes us look even tougher if we can convince everyone that Saddam is an actual threat to anyone beyond the poor souls who happen to live between Syria and Iran. The problem is very much about how to intelligently package and market an anti-war argument. I strongly believe that the protests against Viet Nam resonated and worked (inasmuch as it actually put the "establishment" on the defensive) because it was really difficult to show why we needed to be there in the first place. Compound that with the fact that scads of Americans were dying and being captured, and the anti-war crowd ended up with credibility leaving the pro-war crowd looking bloodthirsty and stupid. No argument. This time, however, it is different. If you accept the right wing "Me first" worldview, then the idea of going to war to oust an unfriendly leader and to get our hands on all that oil is not so much a question of "why" as it is a question of "why haven't we done this sooner". And here in America the "Me first" paradigm is number one with a bullet. The challenge to those who work for peace is to make decency and actual sacrifice sound like a good idea. There is no convincing most Americans that American greed did contribute to the hatred that caused the attacks on September 11, 2001. The moment you say something like that you are accused of blaming America first. So we are left with a very unpalatable truth: We can protest all we want (and I encourage everyone so inclined to do so), but this war is going to happen. The only point at which an anti war point of view will be recognized will be when there are more terrorist attacks after the takeover of Iraq. At that point it will be easier to demonstrate cause and effect. Of course, it will also be easier for the average "me first"-winger to blame all those of Middle-Eastern decent for retaliating against U.S. aggression. Buckle up, kids. It's going to be a long ride. Peace. _____________ Youth is the first victim of war - the first fruit of peace. It takes 20 years or more of peace to make a man; it takes only 20 seconds of war to destroy him. -- King Boudewijn I, King of Belgium (1934-1993)
Remember, dissent is treason in US I just don't think the war-hawk mentality possessing the American culture right now will tolerate any peace movement. The more intelligent the argument, the harder the hawks laugh, the more angrily they denounce. At present, a peace movement is largely considered treasonous. Part of that is that Americans are just that fucking stupid. Seriously: a pundit on one of the news-talk shows was asked if there really was a clear and present danger from Saddam Hussein against the United States. Though he "answered" the question, he did not establish that clear and present danger. But the "answer" is good enough for the Americans, who generally do not realize that we are about to undo a lot of American progress. We are about to move from alleged defender of freedom to admitted Imperial Authority. Our way or the highway. You're either with us or against us. The nation has sunk to meet its president at his intellectual level. I guess that's why we reduced the election to Bush/Gore. Either way, it would be easier for Americans to think about the issues if they were presented according to the needs of simpletons. Heaven help Americans the day they actually have to think. I do, in some sense, blame the peaceniks. They have not represented themselves well, but what should have happened is that we, the peaceniks, should have organized during the intervening period, instead of actively fighting on this politik-mudslinging issue-specific platform. But I've found that my platform transcends most of the people around me, and even the peaceniks are willing to stick with the five minutes immediately on either side of them. It's sad. I'll have to do some thinking, but people wouldn't want me leading a peacenik charge. Part of the point is that you have to let them blow you up once in a while to make your point. All Americans must be smarter about what is taking place in their country. And the smart ones ... well, they need to raise themselves to an even higher vantage point. But I'm having difficulty appealing to even the most intelligent people I know. A couple of them are already disposed toward peace, but they're quite resigned, it seems, to the idea that the stupid people will go to war, so in the meantime, they're trying to reduce the number of stupid people. Oh, well. If I come up with anything (A) workable, and (B) argumentatively tenable amid the current hawk culture, I shall let you all know. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Certainly an idea that might lead to an interesting discussion. Would you care to expand on your thought with examples, or were you merely trolling? Peace.
Thanks for asking. My thought: peaceniks = morality hawks = morality A naturalist collective is my goal Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Thinking for the individual is shit and always will be. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Re: Remember, dissent is treason in US Tiassa: what makes you think you're so smart you should be judging this system? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Fair question I'm an American. It is my right. I live amid this system. It is my duty. We judge the system daily, in our hearts, with our words, and, when given the opportunity, with our ballots. As a pacifist, it is my duty to my fellows to advocate a more effective approach. As a human being, it is my duty to all to stand against needless killing. Now, given that Dan Quayle was vice-president, and George W. Bush is our president, I tend to think my intelligence qualifies me to at least judge the system. Hell, at least I'm not running it. I can spell "potato". I know that "subliminable" isn't a word. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Oh, and I actually know how the statement goes: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Maybe that's a little harsh, but I do know a poster around here somewhere that will say I'm being unfair, and tell us that Bush is merely suffering from public-speaking anxiety. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
So, you're saying that you are ****ing stupid. So, tell me what you think should happen. What is the answer that will solve this situation peacefully? You obviously feel there is something that could be done to no longer make Iraq a threat, and stop terrorist organizations from plotting to kill Americans. Please explain. I don't understand. You see, I am just that ****ing stupid.
What Iraqian threat? As far as I know, Saddam is only a threat to his own people. And is it so that only Americans are killed by terrorists? The arrogance, really. Like if it is a fact that terrorist organisations are all out to get American people. My god, you are just another stunning example of American arrogance, VAKEMP...
lol Missiles flying by American and British planes isn't a threat? Iraq didn't threaten Kuwait? No. Terrorists target many nationalities. Of course, you probably think we are wrong for defending ourselves against such actions, when no one else is willing to. Just remember that someone has to lead from the front. We're the only one's brave enough to do that. Everyone who has a different opinion than you has some kind of problem, right? That kind of attitude really opens people up to your point of view. I am open minded enough to hear your alternatives. Or do you only intend to insult Americans (or people in general)?
Isn't it so that British and US planes are attacking Iraqi planes and airport for a long while now? Is Iraq threatening Kuwait at the moment? Then you know more than I do. Don't presume too much. It might be very different from what you think. And then you US people wonder why it is that the rest of the world has such a low opinion on you. Obviously you, VAKEMP, can not make your own accusations work, because you need to find another post from someone to defend yourself in a thread which deals with a whole different subject. Adieu VAKEMP, you're not worth dealing with...
What are your intentions, Banshee? Umm, yeah. They (US and Britain) set up a no-fly zone, to prevent Saddam from attacking his ethnic minority groups in northern and southern Iraq. I don't remember an Iraqi plane actually ever being shot down. I don't know what news you receive, but every time we have bombed SAM sites or RADAR, it has been out of retaliation for ATTACKING OUR PLANES! Seems to me you're proving that Saddam has a history of threatening not only his citizens, but other countries as well. No need to be concerned... They were quotes from posts you made, Banshee. My point is you can't discuss things with people without making rude remarks about them. I didn't insult your natonality or intelligence once, did I? Yet, I am the one with who is And, of course... ...as usual (as I've learned from reading your other posts in other threads), you couldn't provide any alternatives of your own. Peace. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Oooh, the airfield which was bombed last week and damaged pretty heavy was because an Iraqi plane bombed an American/British plane? Don't you read newspapers? I do not have to come up with an alternative at all here. I am no politician but very aware that it is ridiculous how the bush administration is acting on its own in this. If Saddam has to go because of his behaviour, then all dictators should go, all over the world in every nation where there is such a character. Why, you think, were there protest marches against this war on Iraq last weekend? Because the other nations see how brave the US is behaving? Your quoting of a few words from a thread in another forum, which has nothing to do with this, is a poor reply.
VAKEMP It's entirely possible. I'm a fan of sayings like "I haven't learned anything", familiar to Sufi philosophies. But since you seem to have taken the comparison from two separate posts, you might want to note which posts those are so that we can examine context. You know, context? If you really are that fucking stupid, there's not much I can do to help. Let me know. Remember, just because the dog has a penis doesn't mean you should fuck it. Likewise, just because two sentences refer to an American or plural Americans does not mean that they translate straight across. A syllogism need not describe a proper and real condition in order to be true and correct. You remind me of a punchline to a Jeff Foxworthy joke. --Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
To say that most Americans are too stupid to care about good government, because of the current crop of reprobates running the U.S. government, is not fair to honest U.S. citizens. Most of the population of North America live a life of contentment and they don't feel the urge of the oppressed, which is the foundation of most revolutions, to rise up and change the government to an honest institution. For the most part, their basic requirements of food, shelter, clothing and personal security are well supplied by the current system. Part of the reason that so few people actually vote in U.S. elections is because they do not feel any social pressure that is capable of noticably degrading their lifestyle. Another large factor in keeping the general public apathetic is the total control of the mainstream media, which the corporate/government wields as effectively as any weapon they possess. The U.S. corporate/government, republicans and democrats, are a single party oligarchy that lately has been trying to represent itself as a republic, since they know the evidence is out there that they are not a democracy and are in fact the largest destroyer of democracies in history. These people, the shadow government that George Bush recently referred to as waiting in the wings to take over government in the event of an emergency, have a great fear of the general population rising up and revolting. They know the amount of weaponry that is out among the populace, since it is they who manufacture it, and so they devote a great deal of energy to supressing civil action on the part of the "peaceniks". Virtually all of the violence that attended the demonstrations at the globalization summits were instigated by government agitators who infiltrated the marches for that express purpose. The people who run government are so rotten that they will stoop to killing innocent people if it will help them fuel their propaganda machine. At the last G-8 summit here in Ottawa, the government said before the marches that they wouldn't start the violence, and there was none. This shows that the corporate/governments know full well what they are doing and they know what the system they control is capable of. They also must know that one of their greatest weapons, the ability to hide their evil deeds from public scrutiny, is devolving away from them and forcing them to restrict their corrupt behavior. It is this development in knowledge dissemination which will do more to change their evil behavior than any other factor in the progressive movement.
Re: Fair question DQ and GWB didn't design this system. Please demonstrate where "duty" is derivable as an inherently necessary aspect of humanity.
Easy: STOP SUPPORT ISRAEL. Step in the other guy's shoes for a moment. You're a Muslim country with none of the technology or media advantages the Americans have, and have given to the Israelis, your primary enemy in the region for almost 3,000 years. When a Christian nation and a Jewish state team up to take you on, wouldn't you feel the need for terrorism also?
prozak, get caught up on the history of Israel before you post something like that, ok? We are supporting the Israeli's so that they may defend themselves. Yes, I said defend themselves. Do they have powerful weapons? Yes. Have they ever used them against other nations? Yes. Out of aggression? No. The land Israel has claimed from other nations it got while defending itself. Ever heard of the Six-Day War. It happened in 1967. Look into it. The US supports Israel because it is a Democracy surrounded by Dictatorships. LOL! That's funny. Banshee, you don't read newspapers. If you did, you'd know that Iraqi's don't fly in the 'no-fly zone'. They're too scared of our aircraft, and our ****ing stupid pilots. They shoot at our planes with AA (that's Anti-Aircraft) guns, and SAMs (Surface to Air Missiles). Now us Americans, being ****ing stupid, and all, we don't just take out the AA and SAM (see explanations above) sites. We tend to think that those there Iraqi's ain't just lookin' up in the sky to monitor our aircraft. Well, what else could they be using? RADAR maybe? Stupid thought. They must get their intel from Allah. What were we thinking!
Mr MacNeil .... Well, I think the big problem is that apathy then becomes the rule of law. "What, I don't see anything wrong. Must mean there's nothing wrong." If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. (I know it was a Rush lyric, but it existed before that.) Their. Their. Like me. I eat well. Must mean nothing's wrong. And then when someone comes and blows the bejeezus out of New York City, everyone's surprised, because they didn't know anything was wrong. Okay, I'll stop here for a moment. I'm not actually as disturbed as the sound-bites would make it seem. However, while I agree with much of the first paragraph of your post, that apathy and complacency is part of the problem. And this, too, is the will of, and therefore a product of, the people. Take an event from history: the overthrow of Shah Reza Palahvi of Iran by the Ayatollah Ruollah Khomeni. All my childhood I learned about the crazy Ayatollah and the sorry state of Islam. And then when I was in college, I came across a few books on the subject, and one of the things I discovered is that, regardless of what I thought of Khomeni, he did come to power riding a wave of sentiment against a dictator and that the US's part in that, like Britain's, was to support and stroke a dictator in return for good oil prices. We, the People of the United States, through apathy, chose to endorse the acts of Shah Reza and the infamous Savak. Sure, few if any Americans actually would consciously choose such a condition, but the simple fact is that our apathy lent to the problem. Why should anyone be surprised when someone finally up and takes a swing at us? Of corporations, though, what do we expect? On the one hand, people still buy tickets to movies, still spend through the advertising companies, and generally permit this state of media chaos because it's easier than taking a second to think for oneself. And we declare entertainment so important that the only way for the news to get out is to customize it to market tastes. CNN, FOX News, MSNBC--they worry more about ratings than informational integrity, clearly demonstrated by the plethora of news-talkers who repeated erroneous factual information and built moral platforms from which to editorialize about the recent "Alligator Alley" terrorist scare. It isn't as if other news sources don't exist. But we have a severe problem with our perception of credibility. Like a story I read once at a site called La Voz de Aztlan. The site was leftist and anti-Semitic, but I must confess that they were the only place I heard any press about the police in San Francisco beating a 12 year-old girl during a peace protest. (And, for the record, yes, I did see the photographs. It would be helpful if there was a wire story about it, for then we could hear the police's side of the story, but it was pretty hard to deny the pictures of cops pulling a 12 year-old Muslim girl off the protest line, handcuffing her, and then throwing her around. There's the socialists; call them funny if you want, but the World Socialist Web Site is the only place I heard about the formation of BTC (I think that's the name), the petrol company that will build the pipeline through Afghanistan. (Given that there is rampant speculation among conspiracy theorists and others about American oil interests, doesn't this seem like a story warranting wire coverage?) The simple fact is that the American people choose to ignore other sources of information. By their apathy, they endorse the mainstream media picture, and with their attentions and their spending dollars, they endorse that corporate body. And it is ignorance and apathy that compel so many Americans to accept this way of things. Again, with the endorsement of the people. If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. Don't give me a beer right now. I could literally go on until sunrise about that. But again, I must stress the litany: This is what the people choose. This is the produce of the "American conscience". That is, apathy is the fruit of the American intellect, and from that apathy comes ignorance, and from that ignorance comes frustration at how difficult it is to piece together the information that is right in front of them, which in turn leads to greater and more sweeping apathy. I live in Seattle. The average Joe on the street still thinks the police acted nobly in this town. And, sadly, this is, by proxy of apathy, OK with the American people. It also says to me that the Canadian people aren't as willing to take crap from their government. Less apathy, stronger and more informed voice. Result? Comparatively better. Well, when you add up all the factors that lend to American superstition, I think you'll see that the people have chosen to allow this, and even endorsed it. We can either trust each other because it's the right thing to do, or we can trust each other because we're too scared not to. In the long run, perhaps. But I honestly expected that Americans would have gotten sick and tired of living in fear by now. I don't know what to think. thanx much, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Prozak Prozak I don't see what that has to do with it. They're idiots. That is the issue. If a guy who can't speak proper sentences and a guy who wrongly corrects children's spelling "errors" are qualified to administrate the system, then I'm qualified to judge it. I'm really not in the mood to build the whole thing. It's kind of like teaching children to read. On the other hand, it can shake some very pro-American people out of their shoes for a few minutes, but the gist of it is simply this: • Inherent in life is the observation that a species will work toward its own perpetuation. • Observable in life is the advantage of liberty. • The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. • In the conduct of my life, I recognize right and wrong. • Among the factors determining the notion of "right" is the idea of strengthening the species (see first point) • Therefore, I can, by supporting liberty, aid the human species in its endeavor • Technically, then, my basic duty as a living organism is toward my species • Thus, supporting liberty becomes, in effect, the support of the species. • As an American, I am raised to view the US and liberty as a positive and supportive association. • Thus, as an American, I am inclined to seek an American result that achieves the greatest liberty • In seeking a greater liberty, I am seeking a better condition for my species. • It is, therefore, my duty to support liberty in order to foster the strength and posterity of the species. It is my duty as an American to vote, to speak my mind, and to seek liberty and justice for all. And remember, that last is a pledge we offer to our nation. If that doesn't make sense, call the symposium, for it will take days to make that all clear. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
