Reply
Wed 2 Apr, 2003 04:23 am
Although most of the American and British media may have been persuaded that to be against the Bush invasion is unpatriotic, this is certainly not the case in the Middle East and the rest of the world, where the daily headlines are packed with anti-American and British news reports and showing pictures of slaughtered defenseless Iraqi women and children - concealed from Western audiences.
By their actions, the two Governments are progressively destroying every scrap of international goodwill built-up over generations, turning millions of innocent Americans and Britons and their businesses into terrorist targets - in addition to decimating the tourist and airline industries. Air Canada filed for bankruptcy today.
It is unlikely that even changes of Administration in both nations will generate forgiveness or prevent many more years of search for revenge throughout the West by the Muslim world.
Bush and Blair have much to answer for - but others will pick up the bills!
Your last sentence says it all; "others will pick up the bills" for this dastardly war that is killing hundreds, if not thousands, of human lives. When considered from the standpoint that the leaders of the US and the UK are christians doesn't bode well for religion. It seems to this 'outside' that neither Bush or Blair has learned the teachings of their religion; mainly, "thou shalt not kill." c.i.
We'll get past this.
We'll mend fences.
I suspect most people around the world already have an impression of George Bush and his handlers -- and I suspect they will understand when America attempts to redress these cesspool these people are making of the world.
It may take 20 years, but someday - civilization can return to a point where we may slow down the doomsday clock and the possibility of war may be less rather than more likely!
If this administration remains in power for an extra term, more American invasions and revenge-motivated Muslim atrocities will probably continue to such an extent that even twenty years may not be enough to cure the ills.
And, of course there is the danger that this could escalate to Government pressure for Muslim genocide, although it would go under another politically-acceptable name such as "Operation Muslim Freedom".
Indeed, Sharon gives the impression, from his conduct in Palestine, that he would welcome racial genocide by America, providing Arabs are the victims. One wonders if he would also welcome more concentration camps (like Quantanimo Bay) and gas chambers? It seems that one does not have to be a card-carrying Nazi to adopt their policies.
How the world has changed for the worse, when Israel used to be the last nation on earth which might subscribe to such an agenda?
JohnWebb<
I'll join you in trying to keep this administration from having a second term. It'll take a massive grassroots effort to topple Dubya . . . but it
can be done.
wh3:
And the seeds of that grassroots may be there!
If this "Anti-War" movement is willing to stay togther after this is over.
If not--I fear Mr. Webb's view may come to pass.
If we can rely on history repeating itself, GBush sr had high ratings, but lost the election. I hope this holds true for junior. c.i.
The economy was the issue which defeated Bush 41. This same issue will be Dubya's weakest spot, too. These Bushes have no idea what it's like to see the buying power of a paycheck dwindle. They don't know what it's like to worry about income.
Former Gov. Ann Richards of Texas said it best when she described Bush 41 as having been born with "a silver foot in his mouth."
Quote:Although most of the American and British media may have been persuaded that to be against the Bush invasion is unpatriotic, this is certainly not the case in the Middle East and the rest of the world, where the daily headlines are packed with anti-American and British news reports and showing pictures of slaughtered defenseless Iraqi women and children - concealed from Western audiences
How much is real and how much is propaganda or caused by the Iraqi's themselves we do not know. We do know however it is all shown in the name of PR. Does the Iraqi regime care about the welfare of people? The answer is a resounding no. As for being concealed from western audiences, Nothing is being concealed.
I Don't Know
What I read in my local paper on the war, and what I hear when I connect to
WBAI and
KPFA seem VERY different?
I don't know what you see in your local papers. However, I have seen these pictures and read the stories in various news media. In addition they are being spread around the world specifically for their PR value.
Consider this scenario. The conflict ends, A democratic and free society emerges as a model for the Moslem world. Think of what a great PR triumph that would be for the US.
au<
Yes, I agree. Nothing is being "concealed." The anti-American sentiment, however, is being reported globally. It's a fact we must deal with at some point. If not, we risk our credibility as being the leader of the free world.
williamhenry3
The only reason we are the "leader of the free world" . Is because we have the biggest gun both militarily and economically..
au<
I agree with your statement about "leader of the free world" in the context that it was written. Certainly "guns and butter" put the United States as the world's leading nation.
I guess my point was the "credibility" factor. Dubya's foreign policy of pre-emptive strikes, it seems to me, puts our country in the "not to be trusted" category.
A constant adherence to this policy would make other countries fear the United States. Our credibilty would be at stake because we would be hated rather respected.
I would prefer "respect" rather than "hatred."
wh3:
The questions are:
1. Does DUH-BYA understand the difference?
2. Does he care?
1. No
2. N/A, see 1 above
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace