We're going to War

Discussion in 'Politics' started by aphexcoil, Dec 21, 2002.

  1. Maxpi,

    It's clear you've never actually been to the middle East. What the Israelis are doing to the palestinians is genocide.

    And America supports it. If someone took my family's land and shot my children in the streets I'd be pissed off to.

    You just can't go on slaughtering people people and expect them not to bite back. And destroying entire nations is not the answer.

    If the US invades Iraq then it needs to stay on after the war has ended to build schools and hospitals and teach children about the importance of democratic systems and freedoms.

    Just destroying nations is not the answer.

    #31     Dec 22, 2002
  2. good job runningbear. you've summarised the Simpleton's Illustrated perspective on the situation quite well.
    #32     Dec 23, 2002
  3. Let me see if I've got this straight. If a gang member kicks down your door, shoots the wife and kids, then burns the place down, it's ok because:

    a) the african-american plight was caused by the abduction of our ancestors,
    b) the poor educational system in our communities has not given us a fair chance,
    c) we were forced to accept Christianity instead of our own mythical beliefs,
    d) our beief that the police always are trying to terrorize and deprive us of our civil rights,
    e) we are not compensated equitably in the workplace,
    f) we lost all connections and rights to our homeland, and,
    g) it's only fair because you deserve it and you know you do.

    Now the logic goes, he is not a criminal committing a crime but rather a brave protestor because he knows when he did those things that he would most likely be punished. Subsequently, all African Americans should reserve a place at the table of honor because it is stabbing you in the heart and making you address your ancestors injustice? Tell me that I am getting this correct. You see that might explain and help me understand some of the more hard core rap music and the messages that I don't fathom at the moment.

    You clearly are more in touch with them, using that logic, than I. Using your premise, this whole measure of intollerance of crime in this country needs to be reviewed. You see I'm sure that you won't give the folks overseas more tollerance and understanding than you would give our own citizens. :)
    #33     Dec 23, 2002
  4. I think what the entire situation comes down to is "personally justifiable" action. Let's work on the premise that everyone does something for a reason. If I eat a candybar, I did it because I was hungry for something sweet. There is no moral grounds that would prevent me from acting out on my hunger -- I am hungry so I eat. Since most, if not all, people can sympathise with what it feels like to be hungry, we as humans all agree with each other that it is socially acceptable to eat something when we are hungry.

    However, if someone does something else that we cannot relate to, we will probably view it outside of our own logic base and assume their actions to either be strange or immoral.

    If a guy were to go out to a farm and get caught having sex with a cow, my very first reaction is to think, "Would I want to have sex with a cow? Do other people have sex with cows? If other people are having sex with cows, why am I not having sex with cows?" This is exactly how social norms are created. We observe an action, question the action and compare it to our own life experiences. Over time, our observations and "reactions" to those observations keep us in "check" with mainstream society.

    Again, the guy who has sex with a cow would have that act labeled as strange, but is it immoral? Well, since we can't ask the cow and since the cow may have not wanted to consent to sex, it could be immoral but than again it may not be.

    We really take for granted this constant "sub-consious" self-check system that we have in place. If we walked into a bathroom and saw someone pissing in the sink instead of a urinal, that person is performing a "strange act" compared to our own life experiences.

    Now, what happens if, through two societies, it becomes perfectly acceptable to do one thing in one society and totally unacceptable to do that same thing in the other society? One will look at the other as having a "strange" custom -- perhaps even immoral.

    I'm sure many conservative Jews and Muslims cringe when they observe the diets of other non-orthodox people. Through a strong fundamentalist structure, these views become polarized. It is no longer a subconscious system of passively observing events and than adapting one's own behavior to conform to society, but rather a proactive subconscious need to project one's ideals upon another society.

    The pilots who crashed our own planes (and I am speaking as an American) into the two towers are heroes. That's right, I said they are heroes -- but I should qualify that statement -- they are heroes to a different group of people other than Americans. In our eyes, they are terrorists, cowards, villains, immoral, strange and every other word that we can use to condemn them.

    The problem becomes whether we, as a nation, are condemning that specific action or over-generalizing our anger and projecting it upon an entire society or religion (muslims). Unfortunately this rift begins with the extreme radicals and builds up to the less extreme radicals and continues moving upwards until two entire societies are polarized against each other. It becomes a purely "us against them" mentality on both sides.

    Sadly, the big picture is often missed and we only observe what we do and conclude that what is happening is the complete and total picture. Perhaps the man is having sex with a cow because some deranged lunatic held a gun up to his wife's head and said, "go screw a cow or the lady dies." Perhaps someone is pissing in the sink because they are at one of the many overcrowded football stadiums and everyone present has concluded that pissing in the sink is acceptable due to the nature of the situation.

    That's just exactly what we need to do -- we need to stop and say, "Hey, just what really is taking place here?"

    If you look at society, you see how people become cells to a much larger social body. Every cell in our own body is alive, but we don't really consider each cell to be necessary for our survival -- however all cells, taken as a whole, are necessary for our survival.

    So I believe that the "terrorists" that crashed our planes were actually absorbed into a larger body that polarized their views. It is almost like they stopped to become individuals and took on components of a larger system. I don't think any of the people who took part in that operation knew any of the people they killed on 9/11 -- it wasn't personal against them -- but in their eyes, we are merely cells that belong to a body that they cannot stand -- and we must address these issues as well.
    #34     Dec 23, 2002
  5. man


    I appreciate this thread so much I can't tell. I think it stands to some extent for a change in the way americans see themselves. I have the feeling they start to understand that the rest of the world might not be simply an underdeveloped america. I think this is just starting, but it is nevertheless important.

    IMO americans started quite many things by their blind believe that they found the key to happy living for human kind. At the same time there is so much ignorance about the permanent failure of the american way of live to make people happy. Covered by breast surgery, legendary careers of a ridiculously small group of people and seemingly democratic ways to elect political leaders. It is the right of america to live its way of live. It is just little a problem to think that everybody should do the same - and unfortunately have the power to enforce it more or less obviously. The problem is, and this will remain for quite some time: americans find nothing at all weird about their way of living, about the idiotic speed of NYC and the crazy monstrosity of las Vegas.
    Actually most americans think that everybody should have a las vegas, or even more precise: everybody already wants it, they just can't afford it. And the americans can afford to think so, because they have so much economic power.

    The truth is that the american way of the thinking is a blessing and a burden for the world at the same time. The freedom of choice is a very great thing. Yet 99% of the americans do not have that choice anymore, since their brain has been constantly washed through the Hollywood- and TV-machine. If I put a bird in a cage and keep it there for three years, and then suddenly open the gate, then, yes, this bid has the choice to fly, but is it the same after three years in (mind)prison?

    Americans still export their way of thinking in a very dramatic way. There can be know doubt that policy follows business interests, using then whatever seems the appropriate phrase about freedom and other abused terminology.

    There was one post in this thread by someone signing with "maxi", which stands for what I would call the typical american thinking. I do not want to get into detail, but this is really upsetting.

    many people made very good marks in their posts about the current situation in the middle east. no matter if you are pro or con to whatever, you have good evidence to support your point. Why? because the conflicts have bee lasting for so long, that a mass of injustice and cruelty already happened on both sides. Wouldn't you compassionately agree to the anger of a palestinian whose relative got innocently shot by israel death commandos? wouldn't you completely understand the point of view of a mother whose child died in a suicide attack on an isreal bus?

    The world will not get out of this easily. This is for sure. Many things have to change, one of them being the ignorance and arrogance of america. America is not were it is because their thinking as such is so great or because americans are so innovative or whatever. It is mostly due to two wars won without loosing one - I am just speaking of economic disastrous warfare, so I am neglecting Vietnam. Don't get me wrong: I highly appreciate many aspects of american culture and thinking, but it was not them who invented brains. And I do not at all envy america for their strength. It was just better for the world if america could wake up before it is forced to, because the problem is not just a couple of hundred terrorists!

    Stop believing that the world should be one big america.
    Look at your own history to see whether your idea of rights has ever really been adopted by majority of your people.
    Look at your own rates of suicide, mass poverty and race problems before you claim to be superior in moral terms.

    There is the freedom of choice as long as the business oriented way of thinking is not affected. There is more to life than beauty and dollars, America!

    #35     Dec 23, 2002
  6. wild




    Dr. Stephen Biddle

    November 2002

    The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.



    America's novel use of special forces, precision weapons, and indigenous allies has attracted widespread attention since its debut in Northern Afghanistan last fall. It has proven both influential and controversial. Many think it caused the Taliban's sudden collapse. For them, this "Afghan Model" represents warfare's future, and should become the new template for US defense planning. Critics, however, see Afghanistan as an anomaly - a non-repeatable product of local conditions. This briefing examines the Afghan Model's actual role in the fall of the Taliban using evidence collected from a combination of 45 participant interviews, terrain inspection in Afghanistan, and written documentation from both official and unofficial sources.
    The results suggest that neither of the main current interpretations is sound: Afghanistan offers important clues to warfare's future, but not the ones most people think. The campaign of 2001-2 was a surprisingly orthodox air-ground theater campaign in which heavy fire support decided a contest between two significant land armies. Of course, some elements were quite new. Precision firepower was available in unprecedented quantity and proved crucial for success; special operations forces served as the main effort in a theater of war. In an important sense, though, the differences were less salient than the continuities: the key to success in both Afghanistan and traditional joint warfare was the close interaction of fire and maneuver, neither of which was sufficient alone and neither of which could succeed without sizeable ground forces trained and equipped at least as well as their opponents. In Afghanistan, our allies provided these ground forces for us; where others can do so, the Afghan Model can be expected to prevail. Hence Afghanistan is not unique. But not all future allies have armies trained and equipped to their enemies' standards. Without this, neither the bravery of our special forces nor the sophistication of our PGMs can ensure an Afghan-like collapse in a resolute opponent - and this implies a very different set of policies for the Army and the Nation than many of those now prominent in the public debate on the war.


    for Biddle´s conclusions on the planned Iraq war scroll down to page 53 of the complete study ...

    Implications for American Foreign Policy and the Conduct of the Ongoing War



    #36     Dec 23, 2002
    #37     Dec 23, 2002
  8. ElCubano


    You are one sick puppy....:D
    #38     Dec 23, 2002
  9. Didn't you once have a lot of theories on how to make money trading stocks and options in addition to your social and political theories?

    Your musings are all ivory tower stuff, all of it. No practical basis or experience to any of your thinking.

    In the real world, everybody knows you have sex with sheep, not with cows. Cows are too damn tall.
    #39     Dec 23, 2002
  10. bobcathy1

    bobcathy1 Guest

    :D :D LOL

    You know what hillbillies call sheep?

    Yea, cows are too damn tall.

    That stock fell like a turd from a TALL cow!
    #40     Dec 23, 2002