|
Subject: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 17 Oct 07 - 10:47 AM Sounds too incredible in this incredible age. The article is here Read this amuzing peace about an attempt to forge an international alliance between the godtoofull islamo-extremists and the godless commies- It involved a revision of the cult of (Che) Guevara into a God-fearing semi-divine, which was almost spoiled by actual relatives who actually knew him when he was alive. They had to be shuttled out of the party before it was over to preserve appearances. The only thing apparently holding it together was anti-Americanism. It is an attempt at a union of the superannuated and long bankrupt communist ideology of liberation with the 'liberation via enslavement' ideology of the current beast over human minds also known as islamofascism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Oct 07 - 11:37 AM Ahmadinejad is simply the latest trumped-up bogeyman who has been chosen by the neocon marketing machine to serve as the excuse for the next war. He fills the same worn-out niche as Manuel Noriega, Osama Bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein. He's a recognizable "face" for Americans to fear and hate so they can be conned into supporting another war of aggression. He's the latest trumped-up "threat to the entire world". If he didn't exist, they'd find someone else to fill his place. He's perfect: swarthy skin, facial hair, foreign name. After him will come another such. Wait and see. Chavez is simply the latest in a long, long line of independent-minded Latin American leaders who dared to resist the USA's corporate policy in Latin America. Most of them have ended up dead at the hands of the CIA. A few (Castro, Ortega, and so far...Chavez) have endured, despite the CIA. After him will come many more, because they are not going to just lie down and die. So they are united with Ahmadinejad by their anti-Americanism? Well, yeah. Why be surprised? When people in a global village are threatened by a ravening tiger they will tend to band together, after all, regardless of their various differences. This is not any attempt at a union of archaic communism and Islamic fundamentalism, it's an attempt at self-defence, independence, and mutual survival by smaller nations in a world in the grip of international anarchy on the part of a superpower that is in the control of a criminal administration which commits blatant aggression over nonexistent WMDs. It's also an effort to openly call the corporate tiger what it is: a killer. I tried opening your link to the article, by the way, but it doesn't work for some reason. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 17 Oct 07 - 11:39 AM Your link doesn't work, robomatic, but really. The New York Post? I'm incredibly disappointed. When I see that masthead, I expect to be able to read about Ahmahdinejad & Chavez's love-child, not more pseudo-analytical propaganda from the punditocracy commentariat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: John MacKenzie Date: 17 Oct 07 - 11:46 AM I told you the Americans spoke a different language! G. [Just joking Carol!] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: GUEST,albert Date: 17 Oct 07 - 12:08 PM Try as I might I can't think of a single country that Iran and Venezuela have attacked or invaded or occupied.....now when it comes to the USA the list is as long as my arm! Albert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 17 Oct 07 - 01:11 PM You must have very long arms, Albert. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Oct 07 - 03:43 PM I think that the phrase "more pseudo-analytical propaganda from the punditocracy commentariat" is the most marvelously composed satirical comment on the corporatocracy's client media in North America that I have ever heard. LOL! Bravo, Carol! It shall ever after be the "punditocracy commentariat" for me. They're doing quite a job emulating the proud tradition of Reichs Propaganda Minister Goebbels...to get an outrageous lie to be believed by most people, just repeat it again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and ag-....... Kind of like the Energizer Bunny approach to winning hearts and minds in heartland America. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 17 Oct 07 - 03:59 PM ;-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: PoppaGator Date: 17 Oct 07 - 04:45 PM I don't see anything except a New York Post masthead when I click the link. Too bad, I'm curious about how this was presented. I'm no fan of American Imperialism as practiced by our current government and their corporate sponsors, but that doesn't mean I feel any comradery with the Islamic Jihadists, either. A curse on both their houses, sez I. Indeed, the very worst crime perpetrated by Bush and his neocon buddies is that they've done their utmost to prove the USA's critics right and to drive millions of young people worldwide into the arms of the terrorists. I do have quite a bit more sympathy for the Latin American leftists, but I have my doubts that the most strident leaders amiong them are truly representing their people, and not just their own nasty selves (like most other politicians of every ideological stripe). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Oct 07 - 05:16 PM There's always a strong possibility of that, all right, PoppaGator. Mind you, many young idealists with the best of original intentions end up as pragmatic and ruthless political leaders later in life...and some of them end up as outright tyrants. Mussolini's life story is interesting in that sense. He seems to have been motivated by 3 very powerful drives as a young man... 1. seducing women 2. fighting the social injustices of his time in the most flamboyant way possible 3. drawing attention to himself by any means possible He started out as a passionate firebrand leftist. He eventually had a complete falling out with the Italian Left and became their deadliest enemy. Benito was never a man to do anything by halves. ;-) If you lined up all the women he had bedded in single file, they would probably have reached from Rome to Beijing.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 17 Oct 07 - 06:43 PM LH: Your comments are rather obvious, these days you seem to issue a kind of standard boilerplate that insulates you from having to sympathize with any coherent position (I'm referring to your earlier comment, not to your analysis of Mussolini), but what you leave out is the suffering of the Iranian and Venezuelan populations, who, one would hope, deserve better than they are getting or are likely to get under the politics of extremist religious zealotry or exhausted communist ideology. If I were a Communist I would go ahead and excommunicate Chavez anyway, he is such an obvious demagogue under any 'ism'. Carol: I agree with you about "POST" it is the article itself that I found so intriguing, hence I went back via my original source and have duped it below. (Carol you know you have oft quoted a lot of "non-standard sources including some that proved to be outright bogus - I reserve the right to do the same) If the conference actually happened as depicted I wonder why it wasn't taken up by the more established media, and if it's a candidate for Snopes I'd like to know that, too. It's like an ideological mixture of vinegar with oil, using "any egg necessary"! I apologize for my non-working link. I tested it this morning but clearly I didn't cut and paste correctly. It is word for word what I've pasted below, under the New York Post logo: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TEHRAN'S PRICE FOR 'SOLIDARITY' By AMIR TAHERI October 12, 2007 -- ANXIOUS to create what they call "a global progressive front," Presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela are sponsoring projects to underline "the ideological kinship of the left and revolutionary Islam." The theme - hammered in by Ahmadinejad during his recent visit to Venezuela, Nicaragua and Bolivia - inspired a four-day seminar organized by his supporters at Tehran University last week (partly financed by Chavez). The hope was that the conference would produce a synthesis of Marxist and Khomeinist ideologies and highlight what the Iranian leader has labeled "the divine aspect of revolutionary war." But the event itself proved rather embarrassing. The conference title was "Che Like Chamran," a play on words designed to emphasize "the common goals" of Marxism and Islamism. It honored Mostafa Chamran on the 26th anniversary of his death, which coincided with the 40th anniversary of the death of the Cuban-Argentine guerrilla icon Che Guevara. Chamran was a Khomeinist militant of Iranian origin who became a U.S. citizen in the '60s before traveling to Lebanon, where he founded the Amal guerrilla group. He entered Iran in 1979 and helped the mullahs seize power. Appointed defense minister by Khomeini in '81, he died in a car crash a few months later. The conference had three guests of honor: Mahdi Chamran, a brother of Mostafa and an Ahmadinejad associate, and Che's daughter Aleida and son Camilo. Aleida, a pediatrician who lives in Havana, wore the mandatory Khomeinist hijab, while her brother had grown designer stubble to please the hosts. Also attending were an array of aging European and Latin American "Guevaristas" and Lebanese Hezbollah cadres. At first, the conference was all clear sailing as participants agreed that the sole source of world evil was America and its "earth-devouring ambitions." The Khomeinists were pleased to hear their European and Latin American guests denounce "America's criminal plans to attack the Islamic revolution," and insist that Iran had every right to develop its nuclear capabilities. The aging Guevaristas were equally pleased as their hosts praised the dead T-shirt poster boy as "a fighter for universal justice." Mahdi Chamran claimed that Ahmadinejad, Chavez and "the leaders of the revolution in Nicaragua and Bolivia" belong to the same family of "strugglers for universal justice." Another Khomeinist speaker, Mortaza Firuzabadi, invited all anti-American forces to accept the leadership of Ahmadinejad's revolutionary regime. "Our aim is to free the downtrodden humanity and restore the violated rights of all nations," he said. "In this global jihad, we recognize no frontiers." Things went pear-shape thanks to one keynote speakers, Hajj Saeed Qassemi, whose title is "coordinator of the Association of Volunteers for Suicide-Martyrdom." Praising the late "Che" as "a true revolutionary who made the American Great Satan tremble," he "revealed" that Guevara had been "a truly religious man who believed in God and hated communism and the Soviet Union." "Today, communism has been consigned to the garbage can of history as foreseen by Imam Khomeini," Qassemi said. "Thus progressists everywhere must accept the leadership of our religious, pro-justice movement." Demanding the right to respond, Aleida Guevara told the conference that Qassemi's claim might be based on a bad translation: "My father never mentioned God," she said as the hall sighed in chagrined disbelief. "He never met God." The remarks caused a commotion amid which Aleida and her brother were whisked away, led into a car and driven to their hotel under escort. Qassemi returned to the podium to unleash an unscripted attack on "godless communists." He called on "the left in Latin America and elsewhere" to clarify its position. He claimed that Guevara and his "Supreme Guide Fidel Castro" had decided to hide their religious beliefs in order to secure Soviet support." "Both were men of God and never believed in socialism or communism," he asserted. "The Soviet Union is gone," he emphasized. "The leadership of the downtrodden has passed to our Islamic Republic. Those who wish to destroy America must understand the reality and not be clever with words." A few hours after the incident, the Guevara siblings attended another meeting, this time organized at Amir-Kabir University by a group called the Mobilization of the Downtrodden Militia. Camilo Guevara confirmed his sister's earlier remarks but insisted that "progressists everywhere" focus on fighting America rather than probing each other's personal beliefs. By the end of the day, the two Guevaras had become nonpersons. The state-controlled media, which had given them VIP billing, suddenly forgot their existence. The anniversary of Guevara's death was mentioned in passing with no reference to his Marxism. The Islamic Republic bans all non-Khomeinist ideologies, but two are specifically punishable by imprisonment or death: socialism and liberal democracy. The two Guevaras, who left the Islamic Republic in some haste, managed to anger some Iranian progressists. The siblings refused to mention the mass arrest of workers' leaders throughout Iran in the last few months or condemn the current wave of repression against trade unions, women's organizations, teachers and farm workers. "These people don't give a damn about the toiling masses," says Parviz Jamshidi, a lawyer for imprisoned trade unionists. "To them workers represent nothing but an abstraction, an excuse for appearing left and chic. They don't see that the Khomeinist regime is at war against the poorest sections of our society." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 17 Oct 07 - 06:46 PM Damn, robomatic, I figured you would get a laugh out of my post. Ah well... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 17 Oct 07 - 06:58 PM Carol, I DID get a laugh out of your post, but I was overwhelmed with a feeling of responsibility about the bad link and getting the story out - as I understood it - pre-eminent in my tiny mind! Good to read from you! -Robo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Oct 07 - 07:04 PM I don't exactly follow you about the "suffering of the Iranian and Venezuelan populations", robomatic. Chavez has been democratically elected twice by his "suffering" population, who seem to have a majority who like his policies...that majority being among the lower income elements of the Venezuelan population who ARE the vast majority in that country. His opponents appear to be primarily among the wealthier people...the business community, friends of the American business community. NO surprise there. ;-) As for Iran, its population suffered under the previous government too...under the Shah's regime. They suffered grievously enough that the Shah ended up being overthrown in a locally-based revolution, not in a foreign-backed coup like the one which established the Shah's abosolute rule over that country. So does "suffering" not count when it is inflicted by an American-backed absolute monarch...like the Shah, or the Emir of Kuwait or the Saudi Royal family? As far as I can see there have been many Iranians who suffered under both the former Iranian government (which I presume you approve of?) and the present government which you definitely don't approve of...but you don't seem to care about such suffering unless the USA decides that an Iranian government is its enemy. Then the suffering becomes official! So it's all just partisanship in the end that counts then, not who or how many are suffering, evidently. I don't like Islamic extremism either, robomatic. I don't like it one bit, but I don't LIVE in an Islamic society. Neither do I like neocon extremism...and I DO live in a North American society which being damaged and misled and dominated in recent years by neocon policy. Therefore, the neocons concern me far more directly. They are right here in my own home, not on the other side of the world. If I have to deal with evil, I will confront it on my own home ground FIRST, okay? As for politicians who harangue audiences...they will always twist the record of the past in order to somehow justify the present. Their people do it. Our people do it. Why be surprised? The hypocrisy you see them engaging in is no worse than the hyprocrisy you find here on the home turf. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 17 Oct 07 - 07:19 PM LH: Well said. I've already come to my own conclusions that the leaders of Iran who followed the Shah were far worse than he ever dreamed of being. He exerted violence to keep himself in power, but they have exerted more violence not only to keep themselves in power, but to kill and harm people just for being who they are (Bahais, Christians, Homosexuals, inadequately fanatic Muslims). (The fact that the subversion of the democratic government of Iran under Mossadegh was a dirty American job is not to be forgotten). As for Chavez, you are ignoring the standard demagoguery which subverts the poorly educated and then maintains them in that state. It's a real life case of the Homer Simpson line: "I'm doing it for the poor crippled boy . . . that I crippled!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Oct 07 - 08:05 PM Revolutions pretty always get pretty messy and cruel as they settle in. (That includes the American one, with the victims being especially the native inhabitants of the country). A big factor in extending that period tends to be the activities of opponents from outside; for example, in the case of Iran there was the terrible war launched by Saddam's Iraq, with encouragement and support from the USA - a war in which millions died. As for Chavez, he's a populist demagogue, but that's not what makes him unpopular with Washington. And being unpopular in Washington is a major reason why he continues to be a very popular populist demagogue in his own country. That and the fact that his populism involves using oil revenues to improve the lives of the poor people who are the overwhelming majority. Very wise, since they are his power base. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Oct 07 - 08:35 PM As long as a majority of his own people vote for Chavez, then he IS the legitimate ruler of Venezuela. That's a simple fact, but it's one that the Bush administration would prefer people not to think of or remember. It's downright embarrassing when one's choice of "evil bad guy" gets democratically elected. ;-) It's been embarrassing for the USA every time Ortega did too in Nicaragua. Tough beans. Maybe the people there in those countries who have voted for Chavez and for Ortega know something that Mr Bush does not. What would have happened to the nation of Iran if Mossadegh's elected government had continued to serve peacefully...no CIA coup in the 50's...no overthrow of the elected government...no tyrannical rule by the Shah...no subsequent backlash against the Shah...no Islamic fundamentalist revolution to overthrow the Shah...no subsequent war with Iraq (the West's proxy) in the 80s. Now all that would have been extremely good for Iran and good for everyone else around there...except for maybe the British and American oil companies, who would have lost their direct control of Iranian oil...and lost some of their profits. And that's the sad story right there. British and American oil policies have destabilized Iran, then put the Shah in, then isolated Iran after its Islamic revolution, then encouraged Iraq to attack Iran, and again persecuted Iran afterward right to the present day...and repeatedly threatened Iran with possible attack, including the implied threat to use tactical nuclear weapons on Iranian installations...thus driving Iran into a more and more extreme paranoia...and in this case the "paranoid" really DOES have enemies. The USA and Great Britain are themselves responsible for whatever problems they presently have with Iran. The USA started the whole ugly mess when the CIA overthrew Mossadegh. The USA and Britain have NO objection to supporting Islamist governments of the most extreme sort (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates) as long as they cooperate fully with the western oil companies and the western military policies in the Middle East and the Caspian regions. This war on Terror ultimately has almost nothing really to do with fighting militant Islam...it has everything to do with controlling oil and controlling regional areas that produce oil. The oil is the prize that America, Britain, Russia, and China have their minds upon. Militant Islam is simply a handy way of getting various of the common people on both sides all riled up and making them fight each other instead of think. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 18 Oct 07 - 02:35 AM what you leave out is the suffering of the Iranian and Venezuelan populations, who, one would hope, deserve better than they are getting or are likely to get under the politics of extremist religious zealotry or exhausted communist ideology LH has a very good point, robomatic. Why do we only care about the suffering of the Iranian and Venezuelan populations, but not the suffering of the Saudi Arabian population, or the Pakistani population? Or the populations of any number of countries with dictators (past or present) whom we not only support(ed), but helped to install in power in the first place? I would suggest that it's because we don't really care one tiny little bit about anyone's suffering (our conduct in Iraq is ample enough evidence of this). It's because we, the only super power in the world, the imperialist American empire, can't abide anyone not doing what we tell them to do. The only thing Iran and Venezuela have in common that we care about is that they have maintained their independence from our empire. And they have oil. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: akenaton Date: 18 Oct 07 - 03:09 AM The little countries with "oil wealth" are indeed in a perilous position. With the rising economic strength of China and India, comes the need for more energy reserves. We in the West have enjoyed a wasteful unsustainable lifestyle for decades, simply to keep the Capitalist machine working. The rulers of the Eastern empires see it in their personal interests to supply the same mindset to their people. The time cant be far off when American military power is matched or even exceeded by China and Russia. The rulers of those nations know that a war for winner take all would be suicide, so I can see a grouping of the Evil Empires which will effectively control planet earth. They will simply take what they need from weaker countries, the rule of International Law will be a thing of the past. All protest will be stamped out. All pretense of "democracy" will end. Attempts to curtail carbon emissions will be scrapped and the life of the planet will be numbered in decades rather than millions of years. This nightmare is the alternative to tackling unfettered capitalism There is another way, a way which was still practiced in my lifetime...hard but clean and rewarding. Before long it will be too late to do anything, powerful voices are already talking of scrapping Koyoto and whipping up paranoia about small nations arming themselves with nuclear devices. This would make control so much more difficult. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: PMB Date: 18 Oct 07 - 03:56 AM If it hadn't been for the idiotic invasion of Iraq, the progressives in Iran would probably be in power by now, and we'd have an example of a liberal Islamic state. But as soon as the bullfrogs started puffing, it was all to easy for the Iranian crazies to present the liberals as traitors, in a true mirror image of what the nutters have done in the USA. If you're worried about suffering populations, try starting small. Haiti is on your doorstep. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Wolfgang Date: 18 Oct 07 - 08:53 AM Death to the dictator Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Oct 07 - 10:28 AM Ahmadinejad's strongest card is the US Administration. They got him elected in the first place, and they are doing their damnest to ensure that his opponents in Iran can be presented as anti-patriotic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 07 - 12:49 PM Well, yes, McGrath, because they need him. He serves as the present evil "face" to focus people's attention on, thus the perfect propaganda device to foment fear and promote another potential war. Look, the nastiest thing Mr Ahmadinejad could possibly do to screw up things totally for the USA would be to immediately resign from office, retire from politics, move to France or Italy, and become the host of a public affairs show on TV that focuses primarily on interviewing stars of sitcoms and showcasing the latest clothing styles. ;-) That would temporarily completely bugger up the USA propaganda machine. I wish he would do it! LOL! Then they would have to find another evil "face" in Iran to obsess about. And when they found that one, he also could resign, and go and live in a monastery in Thailand. Yeah! I think that the Third World should employ this approach at once, thus depriving the USA of its primary propaganda technique....focusing on one terrible, evil "bad guy" with swarthy skin, facial hair, and a foreign name...and telling everyone that he is the greatest threat to life and limb since Adolf Hitler. If the official bad guy simply resigns and returns to private life, and is replaced by someone unknown to Americans, then the USA propaganda effort sinks like a punctured balloon. Are you listening, Mr Ahmadinejad? Do it. Do it now. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 18 Oct 07 - 03:06 PM Carol: As for the populations of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, I do care about them, and more besides, just not for the purposes of this thread, which was an inspection of the fascinating and yes, ludicrous, attempt to make an ideology sandwich of the Communist liberation of Che Guevara and the rigid autotheocracy of reactionary violent Islamists. No one has challenged the premised story (once I got it into the thread) even though it appeared in the dreaded Post. There are plenty of other threads to rail at our horrid American excesses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Oct 07 - 03:51 PM The point is, politicians in any country can be relied on to spin any story, and to present any enemy of their enemies in a way that makes them sound as if they were basically singing from the same hymn sheet. After all it's not very long since the likes of Bin laden were being presented as heroic freedom fighters against the Russians in Afghanistan - why Rambo even got into the act: "Rambo travels to Pakistan where he meets with a group of Mujaheddin freedom fighters who agree to lead him across the border into Afghanistan. On horseback, Rambo and the Mujaheddin approach the daunting Afghan landscape--high cliffs, jagged desert mountains, and networks of underground tunnels and caves." (From here) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 18 Oct 07 - 04:07 PM No, I haven't challenged the premise of the story. I was just responding to this bit that you said in one of your posts, which also appears to be somewhat tangential to the premise of the thread, as you have articulated it in your 18 Oct 07 - 03:06 PM post... what you leave out is the suffering of the Iranian and Venezuelan populations, who, one would hope, deserve better than they are getting or are likely to get under the politics of extremist religious zealotry or exhausted communist ideology I think we also deserve better than what our government is giving us. I think a lot of countries deserve better than what their governments are giving them. And I know our government and the other governments can do a lot better. But I think you and I both know that most of the rhetoric that is being promoted in the media and by certain members of our government with respect to Iran is for the single purpose of softening us up for an attack on Iran. Now if, as you say, you are concerned with human suffering, I expect that you will not want to visit on the people of Iran the amount of suffering that has been experienced by the people of Iraq as a direct result of the actions of the US government, and that you will condemn in the harshest of terms any ideas on the part of our government about extending the war to include Iran. I think more than one million dead and countless numbers of injured and maimed in Iraq, and the total destruction of their country and its culture is more suffering by far than what they were experiencing in that country prior to our getting involved there (beginning with our responsibility for the rise to power of Saddam, and continuing to the current human catastrophe that is ongoing in Iraq, and which will become a genocide if it extends to Iran). Considering our track record of being the author of more human suffering in the world than any other country since the time of Stalin and Hitler, we need to stop exponentially increasing the amount of suffering in the world (for money, power, and oil) while using the alleviation of suffering as our cover. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 18 Oct 07 - 07:58 PM My comment was an attempt to get back to the subject of the thread by answering the even more tangential comments which brought the suffering masses of those other countries into play. As I stated above, taking a somewhat analytical approach, I don't think we are preparing for an invasion of Iran for some pretty obvious and basic reasons: We don't have the resources. Further tangential remark: The incredible suffering visited on many Muslim peoples from other Muslims, most recently in Pakistan today, when over 100 people were maimed and killed by explosions near Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan. My point being that there are great powers in play other than the standard ploy of presenting the evil Westerners lording it over the humble people of the East. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 18 Oct 07 - 08:24 PM But we are propping up Pakistan's dictator ourselves, so even the suffering in Pakistan is partly our fault. If we want to reduce the amount of suffering in the world, we need to stop doing things that cause great harm to the people in other countries for no reason other than our own selfish profit motives (and accumulation of power). We need to stop creating the kinds of situations that are causing the very suffering that you, yourself, have addressed. Islamic extremism is the greatest friend of the people in this country who pull the strings. It serves their agenda to see it increase rather than decrease (as others in this thread have already pointed out). If we want to see Islamic extremism decrease rather than increase, we need to stop doing all of the many things we have been doing that are causing it to increase. We need to stop removing democratically elected governments and replacing them with dictators. We need to stop propping up other dictatorial regimes, we need to stop waging wars of aggression and killing millions of people in other countries. We need to leave people alone to get on with the business of being sovereign in their own countries, and stop stealing their resources and forcing them to accumulate massive debts that they can't pay and that only serve to enrich a few at the top but don't provide any benefit whatever for the majority of people in those countries. We really are the author of most of the problems that we face today. We need to face up to this fact and stop seeing ourselves as the only people in the world who have any rights. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Oct 07 - 07:15 AM Robomatic, in reference to the original subject of your thread...yes it is ridiculous "to make an ideology sandwich of the Communist liberation of Che Guevara and the rigid autotheocracy of reactionary violent Islamists".... ;-) Unquestionably. But, remember the old saying: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." That's all that is going on with Venezuela and Iran right now. It's rather like when the Chinese and the Vietnamese were briefly "friends" during the years of the Vietnam War. They had always been enemies before America got involved in that war. They have returned to being enemies ever since American forces left Vietnam. Nothing unites people like a greater common enemy...even if they are people who have little in common most of the time. Now Venezuela and Iran are not natural enemies at all...they're too far away from each other for that, so all the more reason why they might unite now over a common threat from the USA and act like they have a great deal else in common, whether or not they really do. It's just ordinary political and strategic maneuvering. All countries do that sort of thing when it seems expedient. Their friends are friends of convenience. People, in general, tend to act that way too, I've noticed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: PMB Date: 19 Oct 07 - 09:31 AM "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Indeed. It's thanks to Stalin, far more than Roosevelt, that we survived the Nazi period. And he only helped us because he had no choice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Oct 07 - 10:10 AM Yup. And vice versa. Churchill, for example, simply despised Stalin and the Communists...until he had the Nazis to deal with. Then he dreamed of the day when Russia and the British Commonwealth would join hands in common cause, and on June 22nd, 1941 he got his wish. That was the day Hitler made the giant mistake of attacking Russia. Churchill went right back to hating the Russians the moment Germany was out of the way. ;-) That's how it works in power politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: CarolC Date: 20 Oct 07 - 12:33 AM Looks like they are planning for war against Iran (Cheney and his cadre of neocons), but it's this guy who is standing in their way. Good for him! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/07/wiran307.xml I note that I have not seen anything about this in the US press. Hardly surprising, I suppose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Barry Finn Date: 20 Oct 07 - 01:00 AM Our US government also has spun the practice of the expression to be: "The friend of my enemy is my enemy." Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: robomatic Date: 20 Oct 07 - 01:49 AM Barry Finn- Well put, a good spin which I had not thought of. If you came up with that yourself I am in your debt. As for the original old saw "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"- Isn't that how the English got into Ireland in the first place? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Barry Finn Date: 20 Oct 07 - 02:08 AM Thanks Robo, that was my spin. Probably true of the opposite "how the Irish got England back" I don't think Ireland had nearly as many enemies as England which would mean that England had may enemies that were friendly with the Irish. It might further be said that at this moment in time the US has to few friends & to many enemies & it's getting worst all the time & they'll soon be getting into the US as you say that the English got into Ireland. Now what to do about those Turks are they friends or enemies, really? And what will they be to our friends the Kerds tomorrow? Best we do the right thing now & we won't have to worry about doing the right thing tomorrow, if we just keep doing the right thing for the right reasons then day by day we'll be staying right on track or at least staying on the right track or hopefully we won't be straying off track as we are now. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: GUEST,dianavan Date: 20 Oct 07 - 02:31 PM "Gen Casey told Congress the army was "out of balance" and added: "The demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. We are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight, and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies." Thanks, Carol. As to Iranian students protesting against Ahmahdinejad... We depend on students from all countries to be the voice of opposition. Iran is no different. Unfortunately, U.S. students haven't quite lived up to my expectations regarding the present Bush administration. Could it be that entrance to universities is severely limited to the sons and daughters of the upper classes? Could it be that the other students are so busy trying to pay their tuition that they have absolutely no time to 'get political?" Hats off to the Iranian students. Let the Iranians sort out their own political problems. A new president might be in order but it is not our problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ahmahdinejad & Chavez- Progressives! From: Ebbie Date: 20 Oct 07 - 09:51 PM Look for General Gates to need to spend more time with his family. |
