The US, UN & Iraq II

I doubt Saddam is taking a whole lot of time out of his working day to watch dancing protesters on a springy day on American TV, but the rest of the world is watching us and that's one of the things which animates peace protesters in this country. I, for one, am relieved to feel solidarity many anti-war people in other countries. Is the rest of the world the enemy? This is not a needle. Just trying to figure out where you're coming from.

0 Replies

Nimb

Very good that is really good "spin" now what do you really think?

0 Replies

Al Goldman's latest Market Commentary speaks of the continuing market uncertainty etc. etc. and says he doesn't know what's going to happen. He ends by advising investors who believe the administration to hold on to their stocks and those that don't to get rid of them. I'll see if I can find his exact words, if anyone's interested. I find this odd, ominous... Goldman is not a fool.

0 Replies

perception I am getting tired of you telling us we're wrong, dumb.. if you want to disagree with anyone please don't do it with insults. Don't assume what our hearts say is anything but what we are saying out loud. Please do not assume we are uneducated. You are no more likely to change your view than any of us.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

perception I am getting tired of you telling us we're wrong, dumb.. if you want to disagree with anyone please don't do it with insults. Don't assume what our hearts say is anything but what we are saying out loud. Please do not assume we are uneducated. You are no more likely to change your view than any of us.

well said but i would add that perception's increased vileness of degradation aimed at those who disagree tends to lend increased strength of will, perhaps this is his attempt at aiding and abeting his enemy.

0 Replies

I just want to bring this discussion back to what it's supposed to be. A discussion about US/UN/Iraq, not about us as individuals.

0 Replies

Ladies...gentlemen

One can suggest or state his/her opinion that another contributor here is incorrect. Or one can point to an argument and draw attention to what one sees as a logical fallacy in it.

One can suggest that all liberals or all republicans are great fools. But such generalities only demonstrate one's own fool credentials.

One can suggest or state that any politician is next to god, or a complete moron. Though it makes one's point compelling if one also includes a picture of said politician sitting next to said god, or includes some statement by the politician that shows moronosity.

BUT ONE MUST NOT DESCEND TO PERSONAL ATTACKS ON OTHER POSTERS HERE.

Please take this to heart, all.

0 Replies

Blatham

Great idea Twisted Evil

0 Replies

nimh, I must commend your posts of 10:15 and 11:00 am this morning and about 1 pm this afternoon. Excellent thinking and writing.

0 Replies

Interesting article in the Economist about Shia Islam:

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1649403

0 Replies

Tartarin wrote:

<Is the rest of the world the enemy? This is not a needle. Just trying to figure out where you're coming from.>

Would this be a tactic similar to the recent incidents of Iraqis pretending to surrender with a white flag----but then as the troops drop their guard --- they open fire.

As a parting(only momentary) shot I would suggest Tartar that without the rational functioning half of the brain, you don't have much chance of "figuring out where I'm coming from"

Just joking Blatham!

0 Replies

Kara wrote:

nimh, I must commend your posts of 10:15 and 11:00 am this morning and about 1 pm this afternoon. Excellent thinking and writing.

Kara I'm crushed---I didn't even get "honorable mention"

0 Replies

With honorable mention to all....it took me a bit of time to catch up, but have found the discussion (mostly) thought-provoking and relevant.

[maybe giggling a little bit]

[no, not an AOL keyword]

0 Replies

perception wrote:

Nimb wrote this about me

<And you yourself talk of madrasa's as if they are by definition and collectively schools of fundamentalism and terrorism, which doesnt evidence a great deal of reading up on Islam either. So that goes both ways.>

I admit that I do not know of real curriculum content---your most recent response disappoints in that it provides no substance that you use to refute my contention about madrasa schools. Why is that---I don't mind learning from an expert ---that is why we participate in these forums---to learn-- but I strenuously object to someone making a statement that would imply expertise then you "cop out"
I am constantly confronted with rhetoric but in your case I expected something better.

I'm flattered that you have such high expectations of me, perc. I'm sure I will dissapoint them many a time, alas ... <smiles>.

What exactly is it you dispute about my post? That there are different brands of Islam? That within each denomination, there are militants, conservatives and moderates? That the mainstream of Islam, traditionalist though it may be, does not adhere to the vengeful doomsday fantasies of Osama and co.?

If it is any of this you dispute, there is not really much I can say. Any textbook or encyclopedia entry will give you the information you lack. If it is not, than why do you think the Muslim religious schools all *are* exclusively involved in "the teaching of hate"?

You have provided us with information about a specific movement, a specific leader, of fundamentalists. We all know such movements exist. On what information, however, do you base the assumption that all or even most madrasa's are extremist, though? There have been madrasa's throughout the Muslim world since the 10th century. What makes you think that the range of them are now merely breeding grounds of hate?

0 Replies

Quote:

The silent majority (not to be confused with moral majority) will make it's case at the polls in 2004. Can you be equaly confident?

I AM confused. Isn't the silent majority the moral majority the moral majority and vice versa?
I do know I am not planning to make any kind of discouraging word remarks about our sitting President like whether or not he might have been involved in shady land deals or drug deals back in his home state nor shall I remark that he is responsible for the murders of one of his staff and a member of his cabinet because that would be treasonous, so I won't be saying things like that because our enemies might delight in our fractiousness. Or am I able to talk like that only when it's a Democrat?

i'm'm going to go back on topic now.......

0 Replies

perception wrote:

Nimb

Very good that is really good "spin" now what do you really think?

<grins> I take that as a compliment for my writing skills, thanks.

But seriously, yes, I really do think that freedom of expression and organisation are two of the most fundamental values of how Western civilisation developed. And that therefore a peaceful demonstration, being nothing more or less than a freely organised collective expression of individual opinions, can therefore never be "anti-American", or anti-British, -Dutch*, whatever, to my mind. Demonstrations are nothing more or less than an alternative avenue of making one's voice heard and counted, when citizens feel their Congressman and local newspaper do not 'hear' them.

And yes, from what I read of Iraqi's hopes and fears, the hope of liberation is often juxtaposed with fear about the future and distrust of the invaders' intentions - hey, you can't blame them for feeling apprehensive, after living under Saddam's terror, and seeing it fed by military and political support from all the world powers, for so many years. So how to lessen those fears about what they have been told on TV is an imperialist invasion, a crusade against their country? The more of an exemplary democratic nation the US is, the greater the hope among Iraqi's will be that they will get that deal, too, and the more hopeful the Iraqis are, the easier that will make the American advances on the ground.

*(It's funny, really, we don't actually have that notion - outside the radical fringe, no Dutchman is ever accused of "anti-Dutch" behavior for expressing this or that opinion ...)

0 Replies

Quote:

*(It's funny, really, we don't actually have that notion - outside the radical fringe, no Dutchman is ever accused of "anti-Dutch" behavior for expressing this or that opinion ...)

Nor do we in Canada. This is a point of some significance.

0 Replies

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/PrinterFull&cid=1048389497622

Quote:

US TROOPS CAPTURE CHEMICAL PLANT

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caroline Glick Mar. 23, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About 30 Iraqi troops, including a general, surrendered today to US forces of the 3rd Infantry Division as they overtook huge installation apparently used to produce chemical weapons in An Najaf, some 250 kilometers south of Baghdad.

One soldier was lightly wounded when a booby-trapped explosive went off as he was clearing the sheet metal-lined facility, which resembles the eery images of scientific facilities in World War II concentration camps.

The huge 100-acre complex, which is surrounded by a electrical fence, is perhaps the first illegal chemical plant to be uncovered by US troops in their current mission in Iraq. The surrounding barracks resemble an abandoned slum.

It wasn't immediately clear exactly which chemicals were being produced here, but clearly the Iraqis tried to camouflage the facility so it could not be photographed aerially, by swathing it in sand-cast walls to make it look like the surrounding desert.

Within minutes of our entry into the camp on Sunday afternoon, at least 30 Iraqi soldiers and their commanding officer of the rank of General, obeyed the instructions of US soldiers who called out from our jeep in loudspeakers for them to lie down on the ground, and put their hands above their heads to surrender.

Today's operation is the third engagement with Iraqi forces by the First Brigade of the US army's 3rd Infantry Division, since Saturday afternoon.

So far in the campaign, the brigade has suffered no losses. But two were wounded Saturday night in an ambush on the outskirts of As-Samwah in southern Iraq

This is not "Independently verified", but it is getting wide play. The Pentagon "Will not confirm". This afternoon's CENTCOM press briefing mentioned two Iraqi Generals newly "In custody".

0 Replies

perc, no, you do not get honorable mention. Why? Because you are always angry. Habibi may indeed be angry but, if he is, he does not force me to deal with his anger, only his reasoned commentary.

0 Replies

Joe -- I was listening to a discussion of attitudes towards the military a few minutes ago and having thoughts along the same lines. According to the military commentator, the military are held in much higher regard (by the antiwar protesters, among others) than they were during the Vietnam War. And in large part because of what happened then. And because of the zippy PR. And because it's a volunteer military... Connected to that, it occurs to me, is access to information that Bush himself essentially blew off the military; having gotten a special deal in the National Guard, he received training and then went AWOL -- not officially AWOL apparently because his commanding officer signed off on his absence after the fact. So he belongs nowhere in the pantheon of the respectable, or so many believe. He has none of the stature of a "Commander in Chief." Rather, the "Committee in Chief" includes him, side-lines him, and the stand-outs are Rumsfeld and Franks and Wolfowitz. This is said to be a result of his ability to delegate. I think it may be his ability to be relegated.

Thanks in large part to the internet, antiwar protesters are not only able to organize more easily and quickly -- here and overseas -- but they are much, much better informed about the details of our government than we ever were in the '60's. We have access to most of the media and to each other. We don't need a Daniel Ellsberg any more -- much of the ripest stuff is on the 'net within 24 hours. So everyone knows about the connections between specific corporations and the top of the Executive, not to mention the influence of each lobbyist on legislators, the connections between the Iraqi leadership and our leadership, etc. etc.. Many of us don't rely primarily on TV or other mainstream media for information -- and I think that's one of the irritants in the debates which go on here and elsewhere: Who d'ya believe? (Do you believe the administration? Buy stocks. You don't? Change your portfolio!) You could say we've become even more cynical but I don't think that's it. I think we're just much better informed. So we're not just criticizing the current administration and its war because they represent a political party we don't like and a war we don't like, but because we know so dang much about them that links them to various kinds of financial and political profits from the war. War and Bush are known to be inextricably connected in ways in which War and Johnson or Nixon weren't.

0 Replies

The US, UN & Iraq II

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know