 sj |
||
|
||
No More Violence
|
|
|
Subject: No More Violence From: sophocleese Date: 18 Sep 01 - 02:21 PM I think this link will lead people to a petition about a non-violent approach to last week's event. Also, some American friend's of my mother, sent her this poem for last week. Its a good one. "September 1, 1939" W. H. Auden
I sit in one of the dives
Accurate scholarship can
Exiled Thucydides knew
Into this neutral air
Faces along the bar
The windiest militant trash
From the conservative dark
All I have is a voice
Defenceless under the night September 1939 |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Sep 01 - 07:52 PM Bravo, Sophocleese. As the poet said: "We must love one another or die." Moral death. Spiritual death. Physical death. Only the last of those is unavoidable in this world. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: catspaw49 Date: 19 Sep 01 - 09:44 AM Wonderful poem........This whole week, too much... Sorry this hasn't gotten more notice Soph. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 19 Sep 01 - 12:10 PM I think it has been noticed - but as CarolC says - we have had a lot this past week. And the poem stands on its own. Too bad we don't have counters to tell us how many folks have read a post without responding. Kind of an eBay forum? I know - highly impractical - Thanks again for all of you - Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Sep 01 - 01:37 PM I tend to pass on things I agree with, unless I see them being attacked, or unless I feel I have something to add to them. I suspect there are a lot of people like that.
I think this week I've been closer to understanding what it was like to be around in August 1914 and September 1939 than I ever have before.
All around, alongside and underlying the shock and horror, there's a kind of euphoria which is very frightening, and yet you can understand the pull of it. Someone wrote a letter to the Guardian today saying sardonically "Of course it will all be over by Christmas." |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Walking Eagle Date: 19 Sep 01 - 03:00 PM I think I'll print that poem and tape it up near my workstation. Crazy days now, even crazier ones coming up. I know we as Americans feel great loss, but citizens from over 62 countries were in that terrible catastrophe. Anyone know where I can get a United NAtions Flag? No More Violence! |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 19 Sep 01 - 03:55 PM At my base the lines have been long at the legal office. Military members getting their wills in order. There is no euphoria here - a lot of fear of the unknown and a quiet resolve to do their job as they see it. At risk of sending this down the religious warpath, pardon my terminology Walking Eagle and Little Hawk, many are renewing their bonds with The Creator. I am opposed to war but will do my job to support the men and women who are tasked to go in our stead. It is the first time since the towers were hit that I am near tears - May each of us Pray for Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: GUEST,no name Date: 19 Sep 01 - 04:08 PM If McGrath of Harlow was half as smart as he thinks he is, then the Government of Great Britain, or perhaps the United Nations, would have put him to use in solving all of the world's problems. However, his greatness is unrecognized and it is only the denizens of the Mudcat Cafe who get to read his sanctimonious, self-righteous, and generally distorted, tracts.
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Troll Date: 19 Sep 01 - 04:15 PM At least he has the courage to not post as a faceless GUEST. I disagree with Kevin a lot, but he mostly gets his facts right. His interpretation of them on the other hand... troll |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 19 Sep 01 - 04:19 PM Yep! I'll second Troll's message. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 19 Sep 01 - 11:20 PM If you want no more violence PRAY Bin Laden Dies Soon and , YES , I did say Pray. Only an idiot would think that any peaceful approach can even be considered while he is breathing. But with him dead , with minimal blood spilt, the Nations of the world including those who support his kind have no choice but to Bring Terrorism to an end for 25 to 50 years. Imagine a world where the USA suffered this extreme loss and only brings down a handful of guilty men, and then turns around and tells the UN- IT ENDS NOW! Here is the USA, Germany , England, russia,China..... and Damn near EVERYONES list of Known terrorists- IF THEY ARE ON YOUR SOIL, GET THEM,if needed ask for Help in getting them , or suffer the consequences. Pray Bin Laden Dies soon. naming the operation- Operation Infinite Justice isn't Helping!!!!! It only makes the entire Middle east fear WWIII. In which case they have to fight as a group, they do have children. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: sophocleese Date: 19 Sep 01 - 11:38 PM DJH only an idiot would consider praying for the death of a prime suspect in a case. Without more evidence before his death we would just create a lucrative niche market of conspiracy books. Or are you a publisher of "True Crime"?
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Peg Date: 19 Sep 01 - 11:41 PM great poem. I have been writing quotations from various poets on the boards in my classrooms in response to this crisis, and have been leaing them on the boards when i leave the classrooms, and now I have this reputation as some rogue, phantom professor who is writing these things...I was going to go looking for something from W. H. Auden. This has some eminently quotable bits and is in its entirety quite chilling and moving at this time... Thank you, peg |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 19 Sep 01 - 11:42 PM He is Guilty!Every Hijacker has been linked to him and even on the .00000000000000000000001 chance that he is innocent , he is the symbol of this act , and a guilty man as far as many other acts of terrorism are concerned . Sophocleese you are SEMI- RETARDED. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: sophocleese Date: 19 Sep 01 - 11:46 PM Tut Tut DJH, you are no longer supposed to refer to people as retarded, they are mentally challenged. Geez get with the age. 8 days after the attack, the American Government is referring to him as the Prime Suspect, but you think I am semi-retarded for using the same term. That's what I call pulling behind your president. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Peg Date: 20 Sep 01 - 12:02 AM Now lemme get this straight; we should kill bin Laden, regardless of whether he is guilty of this attack or not, because he is a SYMBOL of something? Whaaat? Killing bin Laden, bombing Afghanistan, burning the Persian Gulf...none of this will stop terrorism. Not in the short term, certainly not in the long term. The human race is sick and we can't just keep slapping bandaids on ourselves and swallowing painkillers. The ILLNESS goes way deeper than the SYMPTOMS. We have been given an opportunity to heal humankind from this malaise. Will we do it?
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 20 Sep 01 - 12:09 AM I am not at all behind operation -INFINITE JUSTICE. But, you are a moron. Do you really believe this thing ends without Bin Laden's Blood? Stop speaking for your pompous pious self and think about being in the current American administration- One of the gravest single day losses in any battle in the history of the world has happened to your people , without declaration of war, about 150 deaths can be attributed to military(pentagon) and terrorist personell ( a Whopping 24 Dead!!!!!). Nearly 6000 Deaths are CIVILIANS!!!Your economy has been TRASHED!!!! And your enemy has publicly stated "you are soft" ( Damn Christian values, we should all be violent islamic militants who have no clue what being Muslim means and SHAME their religion on an unspeakable level!!).CAN YOU AS AN AMERICAN OFFICIAL FAIL TO RESPOND AND DEFEND YOUR PEOPLE? You are not semi-retarded, you are COMPLETELY RETARDED.You are a simp. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 20 Sep 01 - 12:32 AM And furthermore , you are NOT a pacifist, you are an ideological shithead. You are not present in the real world, you are incapable of comprehending the facts, and you are playing into the enemy's hand. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 20 Sep 01 - 01:17 AM And Peg, Yes I am Willing to make an example of Bin Laden! And you are as stupid as sophocleese is you want to attach the word innocent to his name. Anyone who doesn't pray that his death will come soon, bases their beliefs in Ideology. I AM A REAL PACIFIST on the planet Earth, anyone who disagrees with me because of the strong language is someone who hasn't formulated an opinion since the Vietnam War, or doesn't think human life is sacried enough to defend at the expense of those who would 'Bravely' to snuff out 6000 heartbeats in the name of ALLAH. Anyone Know ALLAH? I always thought that SATAN was the one who promoted Murder, Hate, and suffering. Anyone who doesn't hope Bin Laden dies soon and his death can be used as an oppurtunity to withdraw the (inescapable)Guns and defeat terrorism in the Court Of Public Opinion , worldwide , whether the "Host" Nation likes it or not, Is pretending to care or pretending to have an opinion that they acctually formulated on their own. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 20 Sep 01 - 01:29 AM WAKE UP , The American Goverment can't, won't, SHOULDN'T let this crime go unpunished!!!!! Bin Laden's Blood is the PACIFIST ANSWER!!!!!!!!! Anyone who thinks otherwise , ISN"T REALLY THINKING AT ALL!!!!! Ideological Pompous pious Bullshit. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Sep 01 - 03:52 PM This strikes me as a pretty good site to visit at a time like this - Sojourners. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 20 Sep 01 - 07:18 PM Peg: How do you propose that it be done? (heal mankind from this malaise). DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Justa Picker Date: 20 Sep 01 - 07:32 PM There was a very good show on TLC last night (sponsored by Discovery and BBC) and narrated by Forrest Sawyer, all about "Understanding The Enemy". They spoke with experts on Islam and the Koran. And the version of Islam as practised by the Taliban as well as the Islamic terrorists (and other fanatical muslim fundamentalists), has very little to do with the teachings of the Koran because they have grossly distorted, twisted, bent and manipulated those teachings. If they were the true devout followers of Islam as they claim, then according to the Koran it is they themselves who are the infidels and the ones who should be executed under true Islamic law. These people are in no way, shape or form representative of Islam and it's teachings, and have about as much of true Islam in their belief system, as a MacDonald's burger has of protein value. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Troll Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:22 PM |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: ddw Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:54 PM DJH — Am I to understand that bin Laden's blood is going to stop terrorism? Go look up the word "martyr" and then reflect on the facts that A) there are already a goodly number of people who have volunteered for suicide missions and B) the WTC/Pentagon actions brought thousands of young wannabes offering their services to Hamas, Islamic Jihad and, presumably, bin Laden's minions. I would suggest you get a grip on your tiny little mind, stop calling other people names and realize that things have changed. This ain't the schoolyard bully you want to gang up on. On second thought, why don't you do the gene pool a favor and just volunteer for the suicide corps you seem to think is necessary to go get bin Laden? cheers, david |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 21 Sep 01 - 10:49 AM DJH - You and X-Ed ought to get together. Although I believe that Ed is a bit more eloquent than yourself. And quite possibly more committed! I really struggle with folks that insist on calling others names when they believe that thier opinion is the only one rooted in truth. Yours is an opinion - nothing more and nothing less. And your opinion does not give you the right to condemn anyone else. It becomes borderline slanderous. What you state is exactly what the radicals who flew into the WTC had in their minds. Let us destroy a symbol. It didn't matter to them whether or not they were really killing the people they believed were the problem - they just wanted to kill someone. So if this is all pompous, pious, bullshit - so be it. But if you want to sit on the side of righteous indignation then at least come from an honest space and not one wrapped in "slap anyone near me that disagrees with me" space. You're a Flamer - and I just love Flamers - gives me a place to be calm and stir up trouble with the progenitor of the pot. Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Mrrzy Date: 21 Sep 01 - 04:31 PM From today's Washington Post, at washingtonpost.com:
Anti-War Protest Planned in D.C. 2:56 p.m. EDT--A Washington protest group said it will hold an anti-war march next weekend from the White House to the Capitol. The group, which had been organizing protests against the IMF-World Bank meeting in Washington before it was canceled in the wake of last week's attacks, said it has obtained permits for what it billed as the first anti-war march.
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: gus C Date: 21 Sep 01 - 08:09 PM No , I am not a flamer , and I am only expressing my opinion annoyedly because there is a level of smugness by many here that always speaks from the point of view of moral and mental superiority. In This instance they are particularly annoying, A) My opinion has been trashed from the outset. B) the people trashing it are feigning moral superiority, without an eye towards protecting The innocent. C) I don't think Bin Laden Dies it's all over, I do think it is neccassary for the worm to turn in the right direction. I have said that multiple times, and them some Pseudo Jerk comes along and says OK STUPID, BIN LADEN ISN"T THE ONLY ONE OUT THERE. or ATTACK WHO? Half of the people who complain about flamers endlessly here ARE COMPLETELY OBNOXIOUS. I was slapped 2 dozen times by the PEACE CREEPS before I got pissed and you are creeps, nearly 7000 Dead innocents requires response , especially, if you don't want it to happen again. You Peace creeps affirm your own BS Piety instead. And only a Scared Twit who is positive of his/her own genius would suggest That you shouldn't eliminate him, he'll become a marytr. Yeah 10 more years of him denying NEW attrocities That will prove his methods are ineffective . Fuck YA |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:33 PM O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us! It wad frae mony a blunder free us. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: toadfrog Date: 21 Sep 01 - 11:55 PM DJH: If you aren't a flamer, fella, then flamers must be mythical beasties, like unicorns. They just don't exist. Supposedly, the excuse for political threads is that people can discuss things, and agree to disagree. Not scream abuse. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: CarolC Date: 22 Sep 01 - 04:05 AM This is what I propose we do...
We do everything we possibly can to promote, protect, and preserve a coalition with as many countries in the world as we possibly can.
We work together with all of the countries in the coalition to come up with a plan to use diplomatic, law enforcement, and financial avenues to isolate and starve the organizations who are responsible for the terrorist attacks. This includes holding banks accountable for any help they give to terrorist organizations by sheltering money for them.
We make absolute sure that we do not do anything to destabilize any countries that have governments who are friendly to us or who are willing to help us.
We learn to work with other countries as equals instead of acting like a father figure to them and treating them like children.
If there is anything that is going to save the US, it will be for us to learn that we need the rest of the world, and we need their help as much as they need ours. If we fail to learn this lesson, I fear that we are in very big trouble.
The first and most important thing, in my opinion, is that at this moment in history, perhaps more than any other moment in history, we not only have the compassion and sympathy of much of the rest of the world, we also have their empathy. By that, I mean that they can, probably for the first time ever, see themselves in our shoes. This is very critical, and should not be wasted.
Because of this, they will very probably be willing to work with us and help us, as long as what we propose to do helps all of us. Most other countries probably won't have the burning desire or need for retribution that we have here. Most of them will probably be interested in solving the problem of terrorism, and no more. If we use our military might in a way that destabilizes countries that are crucial to this effort, at least one of which has nuclear weapons (Pakistan), the other countries in the coalition will probably recognize that they will not be helped in the long run by these military actions, that they may, in fact be hurt, and may remove themselves from the coalition.
I did a research paper about a year ago to find out what is the most powerful motivator for people. This was not research that originated with me. I was researching work that was done by others. What I found was that the most powerful motivator is what I would call "enlightened self-interest". By that I mean, people are motivated the most powerfully, and in the most lasting way when they understand how it is in their best interest to behave in a certain way. But what makes it enlightened self interest is the understanding of how what is in their best interest is also in the best interest of others. So, obviously I'm not talking about extortion. I mean people are motivated most powerfully by what is genuinely in their best interest.
If the US says, "You must do what we want or you will suffer in some way", that would be extortion. If we say, "We must work together to find a way to solve this problem in such a way that we all benefit", that would be motivating people through the use of enlightened self-interest.
Once we have built a coalition of willing participants that is based on the idea of enlightened self-interest, we determine what the benefits will be for all of the members of the coalition. The most obvious would be to protect all of us from terrorism. Even the banks will probably suffer in the long run if terrorism is allowed to destroy the economies of many of the richest nations on earth. So, even for the banks, there is an element of enlightened self-interest in helping to eliminate terrorism. In fact, it seems to me that there are probably very few groups, nations, or other interests who would benefit in the long run from allowing terrorism to continue or to flourish in the world.
If we put together such a coalition, we will need to identify what sort of actions would be detrimental to any of the members in the long run. One example of this would be if we caused, through military action in Afghanistan, destabilization in Pakistan resulting in an overthrow of the government now in place which is friendly to us at this time, by Muslim fundamentalists who are friendly with the Taliban. This, of course would be contrary to Pakistan's self-interest (as defined by the majority of people there at this time, which would likely change if we killed a lot of Afghanis), and it would also be contrary to our self-interest, because we would then have two enemies in the place of one, and one of them with nuclear weapons.
You see where I'm going with this. So we form a solid coalition. We work with the coalition as equals, rather than as an authority figure who says, "you're either for us or against us". Then, we put together the best minds that each of the countries in the coalition have at their disposal, and formulate plans to use the tools at our disposal to find out who the terrorists are, and how leverage might be applied to dry up whatever resources they have to help them to accomplish what they are trying to do. And whenever it is possible to, try to take into custody important figures within the terrorist organizations only if doing so does not put any member/countries of the coalition in jeopardy in any significant way. It seems to me that the most important thing we can do to the terrorists is to remove their sting. Even if they are still walking the streets, if they are perceived as ineffectual and weak by the starry eyed youths whom they would want to recruit, would anyone want to join them, much less give up their life for them? Take away the glory and there is no point in any of it. We don't take away the glory by killing them or making them glorified prisoners. We take away the glory by making them ineffectual. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Paul from Hull Date: 23 Sep 01 - 12:38 AM Very well said, CarolC....*S* DJH....If you walk like a Duck, & you quack like a Duck, its pretty certain that you're a Duck... Duck YOU! |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: GUEST Date: 23 Sep 01 - 06:03 AM My two cents worth - General Colin Powell said yesterday that he does not want ANYONE (including Bin Laden) dead. He said (and I TOTALLY AGREE) that it's more important to bring the author of such an atrocious crime against humanity to JUSTICE - and I can only hope that is an impartial justice in the Hague. We have international courts for good reasons, we have a UN for good reasons - let's use them. If the American government could hand Bin Laden and any other suspects over to the UN and the War Crimes Tribunal, it would give both organisations true credibility and power to act. I'm with Noam Chomsky - let's seek true justice, and not retribution. Seek justice, and give peace a chance. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Amos Date: 23 Sep 01 - 10:48 AM 9/23 Powell said dismantling the al-Qaida network is the first goal. He also indicated that any military action in Afghanistan, where bin Laden is believed to be hiding, will not be on the scale of the Gulf War. ``Let's not assume there will be a large-scale move,'' Powell said. ``I don't think we should even consider a large-scale war at this point.'' |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Sep 01 - 11:16 AM Shame Powell's not the President. I imagine he probably will soiner or later if things work out right in this "war". |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Troll Date: 23 Sep 01 - 04:41 PM Kevin, Powell doesn't speak on policy issues unless they have been cleared by the White House so what he said is the administrations current position. If he spoke publicly and espoused a position that was counter to what the Boss wanted, he would be out of a job in a hurry. troll |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: CarolC Date: 23 Sep 01 - 06:41 PM Powell and the State Department are in disagreement with the Department of Defence in their basic philosophy about what should be done. He has spoken about what he would like to see happen. The only question is whose voice is going to hold sway with Bush... Powell and the State Department, or the hawks at the Defense Department. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Sep 01 - 07:25 PM Even so, if you were on an interviewing panel for a job which involve this kind of responsibility, would anybody seriously consider giving it to Bush than to Powell? (Well I know there are some people who are racists, but this question isn't addressed to them, and I truly think we don't have many around the Mudcat.)
And that's not second guessing the American people or whatever, because they didn't have that choice. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 23 Sep 01 - 09:01 PM Troll is right. Anyone making public statements speaks with the approval of the President. You just choose to believe whatever they are saying if whatever it is is said by someone you approve of, I suppose. It should not be surprising for there to be disagreement among members of Bush's advisors on any subject. He listens and decides which way to go. So far he has sided with Powell. I suppose if a military strike is ordered at some point, you will scream that the "Defense Department Hawks" won out over the State Department. CarolC: You make many good points in your post, I believe. I do not believe, based on what I have heard and read, though, that the government of Pakistan would necessarily be overthrown because the U. S. makes military strikes in Afghanstan. I think if their present government is overthrown, it will be because the current government joined the coalition. I do think at some point, like it or not folks, there will be military strikes somewhere in Afghanstan. Not a mass movement of troops as in Desert Storm, but small units hitting hard pockets of terriorist training camps and getting out. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: ddw Date: 23 Sep 01 - 09:13 PM DougR, I think you're right — Afghanistan's topography has defeated everybody who has tried to wage conventional war there. This is going to be our terrorists (i.e. special forces) against their terrrorists. I don't believe there will be a really "hot" war —— with air strikes being measured in tonnage —— unless there are other major strikes at highly symbolic targets around the western world. This is going to be a dirty, secret war of assassinations, kidnappings, etc. that will go on for a long time. cheers, david |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: CarolC Date: 23 Sep 01 - 09:31 PM Pakistan's having joined the coalition certainly puts their government at risk. But that risk increases with everything that happens that links Pakistan with acts of military force by the US in Afghanistan. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:27 AM Yes, David, I agree. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 24 Sep 01 - 10:41 AM CarolC - How eloquent! Very well thought out and stated. *BG* - Peace Creeps unite!! Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:48 PM So, Norton1, I assume you agree with Carol C. that we should do nothing militarily at all, right? Okie dokie. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 24 Sep 01 - 01:12 PM DougR - Using a military response is the last thing I would advocate for. It's sort of like spanking your child. I need to do several other attempts at behavior modification before I opt for corporal punishment. The problem with this whole scenario is that it appears to me, me/my opinion/my delinquency, there are several unruly children involved. I have believed for a long time that there are financial avenues, freezing ALL assets, and humanitarian ones (anyone heard of a hand up?), as well. I look at Israel and ask, "What has this form of counter terrorism done for them?" And I guess I'm not ready for suicide bombers in the local pizza shop. And I am not ready for a Holy War. Killing in the name of religion is pure bunk to me. If we are going to go after a nations assets let us not wrap ourselves in "Old Glory" and say were aren't. As far as going into Afghanistan - we'll fare no better than the Soviets did. In Viet Nam I saw a young girl, maybe 8 or 9 years old, walk into a group of Marines and set off a charge hidden in her pants. She didn't know what she was doing, at least I don't think so, but it was terribly effective. None of us trusted anyone after that. I've stepped a fair amount around your response/question DougR. But in my experience to respond militarily, unless predicated on a lot of home work and support from the rest of the world that the spanking is being applied to the correct person in the correct measure, and at the correct time, it isn't going to work. And yes I believe in Peace. I think it can work. But not by going to war. I guess I am hopeless and way too anachronistic - and Thanks for asking - no one ever really came right out and asked me before. I told CarolC she was my hero the other day - She may be a novice to music but she has her head screwed on quite well in her passion, in my opinion. Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Sep 01 - 01:12 PM This is going to be our terrorists (i.e. special forces) against their terrorists.
And that stuff about it being a "war on terrorism" (rather than a war against certain terrorists) was so much hot air. Which is as well, since a "war on terrorism", as such, has about as much chance of ever ending in success and victory as a "war on drugs". |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Troll Date: 24 Sep 01 - 01:33 PM Politicians love sound bites, Kevin. They go over well with a public that has been conditioned to not think for themselves. Remember "Keeping the World Safe for Democracy" or how about, "Winning the Hearts And Minds of the Vietnamese" Or "The Mother of All Battles". And the beat goes on... troll |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:04 PM Steve: thanks for your reply and I respect your views. I'm not confident (putting military action aside) that under your scenario (or Carol's) there is anything that would prevent the suicide bomber from entering the pizza shop in the U.S. either. I think it less likely that a young pre-teen girl in this country is a threat, but I guess there is no way to guarantee that either. No one seemed to think anyone would fly our own airliners into our buildings either. No question but that the economic approach has to be used to, freezing bank accounts, dealing with banks that deal with terriorists, etc. but that's just one of many options and I won't discount the need for military response as one either. DougR
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:05 PM But that "Infinite Justice" bit sounded horribly like the man might be starting to find his own sound bites convincing...That happens sometimes with politicians. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:14 PM Thank You DougR - I believe that what is happening is an attempt to quantify something that can't be. It's like - "If I can quantify it I can understand it, if I can understand it I can solve it." I guess none of the above is true. I do believe that the discussions occurring here, and elsewhere around the world, are very healthy. I would like to think that we can at least begin to work towards a different way of doing things. If we could just do something different - and have it work - even a little bit. Know what I mean? Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: UB Ed Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:34 PM Doug R, I too really appreciated Carol C's thoughtful proposal to move forward. That is clearly the right thing to do. Unfortunately, I believe, in this situation, it is simple wishful thinking to believe Terrorism can be eliminated without tactical military action. So I subscribe to eloquent Carol with the caveat to include a military response. All of us need to be mindful that we are operating and forming opinions based on the information provide to us by the media. My Paki friends assure me the position in their homeland is not as tenuous as the media would have us believe. While the government is paying attention to its radical element, it also recognizes that this is a vocal minority. Pakistan has more to gain in carefully working with the coalition, and subscription to Carol's approach (Which is what I believe Colin Powell will do) is the key. Finally, its time for everybody to stop telling everybody else to fuck off. The medium for communication in this forum is the written word; lets all please 1) have some respect for others' views and 2) recognize we can't see each others' faces or hear each others' tones and subsequently are getting less than half the communication. This should apply to posters as well as their readers. The biggest bummer in going through these threads is when a genuine question is responded to with an "asshole" or "fuck off." Ed |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Steve in Idaho Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:49 PM Ed - I certainly agree with the respect thing. I've been going back to old postings, yes thinking before engaging my fingers, and trying to sort out what folks are saying. It seems to take history for me to adequately put the posting in context. It further lends credence to opposing views when they are pedicated with words like "respect your views" and really searching for the common ground. I firmly believe we are all seeking the same answer. The beauty of Mudcat for me is that it epitomizes what I fought for. Freedom - in all of its abherent, inane, functional, ways. And the only thing that really gets hurt here is our feelings. Almost all of what I have on this whole deal has come from here. I've been able to take it in little pieces and react to it in a safe space. And I'm starting to see some songs come from it - the epitome of what Mudcat is about - Folk Music. Peace - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Deda Date: 24 Sep 01 - 05:57 PM "Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are ANGER and COURAGE; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are." - St. Augustine
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Troll Date: 24 Sep 01 - 06:13 PM Ed, unfortunately "asshole" and "fuck off" are the only ways some people know to answer someone who disagrees with their viewpoint. Hopefully this will be a growing experience for them and they will come to understand that give-and-take is the normal way things are done. They must learn that a dissenting viewpoint is not a personal attack on them. troll |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 25 Sep 01 - 12:18 AM Well, we'll see, won't we, troll. I suspect the folks that answer posts with words like those will not change their "spots." Perhaps because they are not confident of their arguments, or they desperately "want" to be right, but they are not sure they are. Norton1, there is no reason for anyone to be rude when they reply to someone whose views differ from theirs, but on the other hand, some folks just can't resist. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Sep 01 - 06:18 AM TRue enough Doug. And you get them on both sides in any argument. They tend to be the people you wish were on the other side. (Though talking about "sides" is giving in to the assumption that it is a lot simpler than it actually is.)
And UB Ed - if your Pakistani friends are OK about being referred to as Pakis, I'd suggest they are a bit unusual. In my experience that is a word more typically used as an insult, and understood as such. So I'd advise people to be very very careful about using it, and better to avoid it. The generally aceptable word is Pakistanis.
(It might seem logical that if someone from Afghanistan can be referred to as an Afghani, quite correctly and with no insult intended or understood, then someone from Pakistan should be referred to as a Paki. But it's not the case, because Pakistan is a made up word and does not incorporate the name of a people, unlike Afghanistan. It's a bit like referring to the natives of the USA as Usans.)
|
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: CarolC Date: 25 Sep 01 - 06:31 AM UB Ed, I heard on one news broadcast last night, that about one third of the Pakistani military is sympathetic to the Taliban. I heard on an earlier news report that the members of he Pakistani military who are sympathetic to the Taliban tend to be the rank and file. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: GUEST,dandyprat Date: 25 Sep 01 - 08:11 AM It's such a relief from the sabre-rattling to come across a site like this and find issues actually being debated! I was on a hunt for folk music lyrics, to get away from channel-surfing the TV and finding only shallow reporting. CNN and Fox are great at telling where and how but cant even attempt the why. Carol does it for me. Greetings from Australia. Peace. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Sep 01 - 08:48 AM Welcome, dandyprat. At times it gets a bit frenetic, but compared to other places on the Internet I've been looking at recently, the discussions here tend to stay pretty level headed and coherent.
Maybe have a look through the Mudcat FAQ - Newcomer's Guide and Mudcat Site Map and PermaThread Index. There's treasure in the Mudcat and the Digital Tradition, both musical and other things. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: GUEST,dandyprat Date: 26 Sep 01 - 12:09 AM Thanks McGrath, I'll do as you say. It's always comforting to find some like minds, or at least some stimulating ones. I find folk music to be a great comfort to me in any situation, that or the sea! |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: UB Ed Date: 26 Sep 01 - 09:34 AM McGrath, my Pakistani friends are unusual only in that they are very kind and sensitive to this overly enthusiastic and loud American and would never point out such a thing based on my ignorance. Thanks so much for the insight. (By the way USans isn't too bad. Didn't Pink Floyd do a song about USans and Them?). Carol, lets keep our eyes on this one. If there are Taliban sympathies among the military, I would expect it to be rank and file. Ed |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Sep 01 - 10:03 AM Personally if I came from the USA I'd be all in favour of being a Usan. Or would that be an Usan. That sounds a bit too much like being a nuisance, maybe. (It makes a difference whether you pronounce your "a" as in cat or Kate.)
But I's want to decide that sort of thing myself, and not have the name landed on me by outsiders.
As for assuming that Taliban supporters in the military of Pakistan would be lower ranks, I doubt if that'd be a safe assumption. Osama Bin Laden himself for example comes from a very wealthy background - True Believers aren't necessarily poor. And aside from that, many armies have ambitious senior officers ready to see an opportunity of seizing an opportunity. That's how coups happen, and Pakistan has had enough of them. (In fact the present government is only there by virtue of a pretty recent coup.) |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: UB Ed Date: 26 Sep 01 - 01:43 PM Aren't we being a bit generous in "labeling" Bin Laden and the Taliban as "true believers?" My perception is that their version of Islam is not the "mainstream" version practiced by the majority, but is more of a radical version, quite similar to those who preach hatred in any other religion. If that's the case, I would believe the rank and file would be more susceptible to a message of hate and intolerance. That being said, you are absolutely correct regarding the ambitous young officers who could parlay an opportunity for a coup. They would do this regardless of religous affiliation. This is like peeling an onion and provides a good lesson on the complexities of the world and why we should be thoughtful as we think, speak and act. I believe we Usans would use both "a" pronunciations based on regional dialect... |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Troll Date: 26 Sep 01 - 02:28 PM They feel that THEY are the true Muslims and that the rest are backsliders at best and heretics at worst. The rest of the world may not see it quite that way but bin Laden & Co. don't seem too concerned. troll |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: DougR Date: 26 Sep 01 - 08:28 PM Right troll, "they" THINK they are the true believers. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Sep 01 - 08:56 PM True Believer with capital letters I would use to refer to someone who believes in an intolerant and fanatical way. You get them in all religions. |
|
Subject: RE: No More Violence From: Donuel Date: 26 Sep 01 - 09:16 PM :-)I know next to nothing about Islamic culture but I was thinking if they had something like the NFL they might get alot of crap out of their system (minus the beer). That is if you can fit it between prayers. I just have not been exposed to gigantic Arab sporting events. Is it banned? |
| Share Thread: |