Who exactly are we repressing?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

On my way to work this morning I was listening to someone on the radio on NPR and I started thinking about what was going on in Falujja. I began to wonder why the left was so fired up about "American Oppression" and "the Occupation" of Iraq. I haven't been able to put my finger around what the fuss is all about.

I ask myself "Who, in Iraq, were the Americans actually repressing?"

The only answer I could come up with was those that were trying to dominate Iraqi society and leadership through fear and death.

The average Iraqi seems to want America there to protect them from these people that seem to be the more fundamental Islamic type. (At least to sources I read and people I have spoke with. I am sure that there are opinions out there that say the opposite, but I choose not to believe them.) Most I raqi's simply want a job, an income, safety and to get on with their lives.

So, I ask you on the left, "Who are we repressing?" (or oppressing if you so desire)

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,720 • Replies: 24

No top replies

"The average Iraqi seems to want America there to protect them from these people that seem to be the more fundamental Islamic type. (At least to sources I read and people I have spoke with. I am sure that there are opinions out there that say the opposite, but I choose not to believe them.) Most I raqi's simply want a job, an income, safety and to get on with their lives."

That might be true, but how well has it worked so far for the average American?

0 Replies

Choice
"but I choose not to believe them." McG

If I or anone else posted evidence of oppression by the USA Govt. in Iraq and here in America it would be useless because you and the other Right Wingers" would chose not to believe it. That's why I won't waste my time and energy to do so.

0 Replies

Well, at least you wasted enough time to respond to this thread, pistoff, and refrained from calling Bush a Nazi. Laughing

If anyone is oppressed, it is most likely the American working poor. Man...thank heaven I'm Canadian.

0 Replies

Hmmmm...I suppose I should have qualified my question a bit firther. Didn't think I had to...

"Who are we repressing in Iraq that has the left dander up so high?"

0 Replies

What dander would that be exactly, McG, pet or human?

0 Replies

I'll tell you what...if the news was actually news these days, we might have some answers. Unfortunately, there is very little one can believe from the media these days, on both sides.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Hmmmm...I suppose I should have qualified my question a bit firther. Didn't think I had to...

"Who are we repressing in Iraq that has the left dander up so high?"

I don't know.

I don't really feel all that oppressed here in the U.S.A either. But maybe if I really try to focus on the negative all the time, I can feel oppressed too. I'll try it, and get back to you.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

"Who are we repressing in Iraq that has the left dander up so high?"

Why "the left"?

The British Labour government is the US' closest ally, I think.
And the French conservative government is dangered. :wink:

0 Replies

Repressing? Is your cat's blanket full of wrinkles and dander even after you pressed it once?

0 Replies

Many on the left seem to think the cost of dead Iraqis isn't worth the freedom they will have. A few even mourn the death of U.S. soldiers. A left biased media is more than happy to reinforce those views, and rarely is any anger or disapproval expressed toward the insurgents, terrorists, and/or anti-freedom militant fundamentalist factions, nor are these usually blamed for the death toll.

The most grumbles I'm seeing from the right comes out of resentment of those Iraqis who seem to refuse to participate in their own liberation, suspicion of a corrupt U.N. leadership, and a very few cowardly allies who capitulate to terrorists.

Kudos to Cav who recognizes the problem of making decisions and assumptions based on what some reporter or commentator says. Many of these don't have any more information than we do, many copy from each other, and most will not present the whole picture as it would not further their personal agenda.

But given the willingness of our brave military to put themselves in harms way to defend America, to protect each other, and to provide humanitarian aid to a people who were once our enemy, I can't see how anybody can make a case that we are somehow oppressing or repressing the Iraqis.

0 Replies

Foxfyre, I have nothing but respect for the soldiers who are just doing their job, they are braver souls than I. It just seems to me that in these heated times, the political arguments not only get out of hand, but polarized and kneejerk as well. Time will shed light on this war eventually, but for the moment, I choose to remain non-partisan, and proudly Canadian. Smile

Thanks for the kudos.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Many on the left seem to think the cost of dead Iraqis isn't worth the freedom they will have. A few even mourn the death of U.S. soldiers. A left biased media is more than happy to reinforce those views, and rarely is any anger or disapproval expressed toward the insurgents, terrorists, and/or anti-freedom militant fundamentalist factions, nor are these usually blamed for the death toll.

Really? Why, then, does your above comment closely resemble the editorials frequently seen in far right magazines? I would question your familiarlty with the "left biased media," jsut as I question its very existance.

Quote:

The most grumbles I'm seeing from the right comes out of resentment of those Iraqis who seem to refuse to participate in their own liberation, suspicion of a corrupt U.N. leadership, and a very few cowardly allies who capitulate to terrorists.

Again, this reminds me of the 19th century comments about how the "damned wogs don't appreciate the civilisn' we're givin' 'em! No mater how many of the blighters you kill, they still refuse to behave!" What does this say about your understanding (or lack of such) of the concepts of freedom or democracy?

Quote:

Kudos to Cav who recognizes the problem of making decisions and assumptions based on what some reporter or commentator says. Many of these don't have any more information than we do, many copy from each other, and most will not present the whole picture as it would not further their personal agenda.

So why is your first paragraph completely consistent with opinions expresed in far right publications?

Quote:

But given the willingness of our brave military to put themselves in harms way to defend America, to protect each other, and to provide humanitarian aid to a people who were once our enemy, I can't see how anybody can make a case that we are somehow oppressing or repressing the Iraqis.

Again, its really hard to take you seriously when you write something like this. How was Iraq a threat to the US? How were the people of Iraq our "enemy?" How is the invasion and military occupation of a nation, with the associated imposition of a puppet government anything otehr than oppression? NO elections are planned, NO dissent is allowed. I wonder if you are really this naive, or if you are really a sort of provacateur?

0 Replies

"freedom" is a word I rarely use when thinkin' about the dead.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

"freedom" is a word I rarely use when thinkin' about the dead.

why

:wink:

0 Replies

In the Far Right Dictionary, freedom seems to be "synonymous" with "dead".

0 Replies

"Who are we repressing?"

The "we" is George Bush and he is oppressing future generations of Americans who will be handed a huge bill for his silly and arguably unconstitutional war.

But, as he said of what he thought history's judgement would be of him, he seemed to not care, saying "we'll all be dead."

How is it that conservatives so frequently care so little about the world they pass on to their children and grandchildren?

0 Replies

Enemies
"to provide humanitarian aid to a people who were once our enemy"

Hello! The people of Iraq were our enemies? I had this weird notion that the US Govt. made Saddam and his Regime our enemy because Saddam didn't tow the US Govt. rule. Saddam suddenly became another Hitler after he decided that Kuwait was stealing Iraq's oil. All was OK until then.

After Saddam's defeat things were stable until he decided that after the sanctions of the UN were lifted that he would start selling oil via the Euro. It was then that Saddam again became the "brutal dictator" and a "growing threat". There is a History regarding the reasons for the invasion of Iraq by the US and the UK.. Of course, interpretations of that History are in the minds of those that view it.

0 Replies

"A few even mourn the death of U.S. soldiers."

Oh, my. Should we not? Is it making the war unpleasant for you?

"A left biased media"

hahaha! Who was it that pointed out that all the righties constantly whining about the liberal media are doing so VIA that very media?

"rarely is any anger or disapproval expressed toward the insurgents, terrorists, and/or anti-freedom militant fundamentalist factions, nor are these usually blamed for the death toll".

So now you WANT the media to make judgement calls based on their own beliefs? They don't do this because they are supposed to be NON-BIASED.

Dee,
"How is it that conservatives so frequently care so little about the world they pass on to their children and grandchildren?"
Because the leaders in the conservative movement are freaking rich, and their kids will ALWAYS be taken care of, and the republicans who kiss up to them think they actually care about their kids, too, That's how!

0 Replies

McG

I'll actually try to answer your question, though I may regret the effort.

I doubt that the average Iraqi wants the Americans there except in the very short term. I'm certain (or close to it) that most are very happy to have Sadaam gone.

But I also think that the US has no intention of helping, then leaving. Back about a year and a half ago, myself and others here (not to mention those who were writing in various journals) argued that the US would seek to use Iraq as a military outpost in the middle east. If you've kept track, this has suspicion has been supported by statements here and there from American military. Further, such a notion is not in conflict with neoconservative writing, but there would be conflict with such theory if the US were not to utilize Iraq in this manner.

Let's assume that is at least a possibility. If so, then there are very real and direct consequences for Iraqi sovereignty. The US would not be able to allow an Iraqi political movement which advocated 'no american presence' to grow or approach power.

Thus the definition of 'sovereignty' is made quite meaninless. And if not sovereignty, which word is most applicable? Something like oppression or suppression becomes more accurate.

0 Replies

Who exactly are we repressing?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know