 sj |
||
|
||
BS: for all who wish for war PART 2
|
|
|
Subject: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: GUEST,SharonA at the library Date: 24 Oct 01 - 08:48 PM Now that I've learned how to make one, here's a link to PART 1 of this thread: for all who wish for war PART 1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: kendall Date: 24 Oct 01 - 09:01 PM petr and anuone else who believes that I am trying to legimize the attack, listen carefully, BULLSHIT! no one is doing any such thing! I hate what they did, and I want them to pay for it. But, to go up against an enemy without having a clue about how he thinks is just plain stupid. This attitude of, "My country, right or wrong is also stupid." That's Homer Simpson logic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 24 Oct 01 - 09:03 PM Hi: Sharon asks... What's your definition of "working"? Please give an example of a situation in which peace has "worked." I'm thinking of the story of Adam and Eve, and even then peace didn't work because of greed and jealousy.
I gave one about the KKK Imperal Dragon and his Jewish nieghbor, another would be found in my song about Judith Folger, maybe someone would make a blue clickie to it. It is a true story from the great great grandmother of my Friend Anna L Curtis who I knew as a child. It involves Quakers making a sparate peace with the Mohawks during the Revolution. There are many examples of peacemaking, that as artists we have a responciblity of shareing and teaching. I don't believe we are trogladites that kill each time we meet, sorry, I just haven't seen it. We kill when we are afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 24 Oct 01 - 09:12 PM A few other q & as... Larry —— "Share the wealth for peace"? I think Sharon has pretty effectively shown the hollowness of that argument, but even if you ignore her demonstrably true analysis, yours sounds suspiciously like trying to buy peace. A: See my earlier post about how we are already being taxed for this all by the Insurence companies which have given us a 100% raise before the month was out, how would you deal with that extortion? Bomb them? See the above... As to what do we take for our rosy point of view? As with many Quakers I don't do drugs, I don't smoke I don't drink... so maybe I am reacting to the reality of smelling the boddies of my nieghbors, which stench I can decribe to you at the moment, as it is ever present in my apartment, acrid smoke and rotten eggs. Rosy, not a bit of it, I just don't want it to get worce here. Fear, no, many of the hawks are fleeing this city. My wife and I are staying, and just saying stop it, especially you arm chair admirals and golf club generals who are pontificating from the safty of your small town american living rooms. Cheers, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: heric Date: 24 Oct 01 - 09:30 PM Hey Larry, from thread one I think it better be you and not me who goes to Kabul for the talks -- Would you tell Gary that I love him. . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 24 Oct 01 - 10:01 PM Gary??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: heric Date: 24 Oct 01 - 10:49 PM Yeah, I pissed off some guy named Gary. Never mind. . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: heric Date: 24 Oct 01 - 10:51 PM Oh, it was Greg. Still. . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: ddw Date: 24 Oct 01 - 11:17 PM Whoa, Kendall — touchy, touchy.... I may be wrong, but I don't think anybody suggested that the only alternative to the "chickens come home to roost" argument is "my country, right or wrong" as a blind reaction worthy of Homer Simpson. What I would contend is that the "chickens" argument is tantamount to blaming the victim — it's the old "She wouldn't have been raped if she hadn't walked where she shouldn't have been." That pretty well parallels "The al-Qaida wouldn't have attacked if the U.S. hadn't been pursuing its business in their part of the world." 'Scuse me? They've got something to sell that we want to buy? But we have no business being there? We help refugees fleeing some bloodthirsty regime and piss of that regime and we're to blame if they're pissed off? That's Homer Simpson logic, IMHO.
But the important thing now is no is no longer who's to blame for the attacks. The focus now is on what to do about it. The fight has begun and there are only four possible outcomes. Sorry, but I see the choices as a no-brainer.
Larry, cheers, david |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Donuel Date: 24 Oct 01 - 11:57 PM Most the talking heads micro-manage the reasons for the war with Political, Economic(oil etc.) and Militarism(Gulf War etc.). HOWEVER the war is a religious holy war of fundamentalism vs. open free societies (an open scientific society). The concept of tyranny and misjustice is any state that is not governed by the strict laws of Islam. The concept of jihad is a perpetual fight until all unbelievers are brought to Islam. Despite the Bush gaff using the word crusade, it is exactly that to the terrorists and radical mullahs. There will be those who state that Ossama is playing the jihad card to line up his pawns for his alterior motives. Then there are many who believe that America is an unsinkable Titantic. Unshaven Barbarians defeated Greece. The barbarians defeated Rome. On and on. To sustain a 100 year war will effectively make the west much like its enemies. Victory is not assured for anyone in the long run for the very reasons stated by this thread starter. Only if it is demonstrated to the Islamic world that Allah has turned his back on bin Laden will the tide be stemed. It is said we are rich and they are poor. They are rich in conviction and we are weak. Nuclear weapons as always intended are a weapon of desperation. To win a war you have to surprise your enemy. So far we have no surprises and spend well over $500,000,000 a day while ossama spends that in 5 years. There will be no winners but the West has more to lose. 10's of millions of US deaths are predicted at the highest levels in the US government. Domestic fundamentalism in the US in the form of Arians as well as the black muslims and Al Quaita is at our back while a war to the death between free and fundamental societies will be overseas. Can we be more ruthless? Can we win? Yes and no. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: ddw Date: 25 Oct 01 - 12:04 AM Donuel... Where'd you get that $500,000,000-a-day figure? david |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Donuel Date: 25 Oct 01 - 12:12 AM 500mil is just for the bombs we use every day. I quote that from PBS nightly news with McNeil tonight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Amos Date: 25 Oct 01 - 12:41 AM We will not tire. We will not falter. And we will not fail. Wish I knew that guy's speechwriter. Good line. What if it is true? Whoa! For wanting to put an end to terrorism, I am sure we are stirring up a good dose of stark terror. But even so, it is plain that there are even some Afghans who think the arrival of the Mellicans just might improve life in general for them, since it can't get much worse. Others, contrariwise. The religous ideology which admits of violence against innocents, women and children is not mainstream Islam, and was only articulated for use against (I believe) Nasser, in the 20th century. The version that Ladenites and their ilk assert is a cruel distortion of mainstream Islamic teachings, and is motivated not by religous belief but by the desire for power, money, control, and other pleasures of the not-quite-bright. Maybe the whole thing was a trick to get us to waste our treasure bombing the deserts? Naaah -- it couldn't be!! The big risk in all this would be a complete failure of Bush's cabinet to understand the bazaar mentality and the cultural mandates the people they are opposing live under. What is required is a massively skillful PR campaign of the sort that is hardly ever accomplished--lots of intell, deep understanding of buttons, a mastery of humor and deft deflection, surehanded reversals of rhetorical postures on their part, etc. Black PR where needed. Massive amounts of it. For example, the forces on the other side have already started a wide-spread rumor circulating among Muslims in both India and Pakistan with great certainty that the whole 9-11 caper was a scam perpetrated by the Israelis, to stir up hatred of Arabs and Muslims. Not hard to deflect if you catch it early or can manage the exposure correctly, because it is so ridiculous (I think). But its a masterful rumour to spread amongst the uncritical crowds. You can't fight that brand of insanity with just Big Iron. It takes intell, and craft in psychological operations. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: ddw Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:01 AM Couldn't agree more, Amos. But once you have the massive intel and crafy psychological operations in place, a few well-placed covert operations wouldn't hurt a whole lot, either. It's no good convincing the general population that you're not out to get them if you don't stop the few who are perpatrating the terror. It's gonna be messy for a while, because it'll be our terrorists against their terrorists, and theirs have a lot more (and more vulnerable) targets. I think the bombing that's going on right now will soon abate in Afghanistan, but it might well shift to training bases and military targets in other places. Iran springs to mind. I find Donuel's quoted figure of $500,000,000 a little dubious for a daily bomb cost (I can't refute it, but I can't find corroboration for it, either), but what's going on there is little more than some heavy duty saber rattling for the benefit of those who aren't getting the whole message. Even the dumber ones might sooner or later figure out that there's no future in fighting somebody who can spend that much on bombs and food at the same time, while the Taliban can provide neither. You can factor in the religious zeal for a while, but as somebody (Patton, I think) said, "When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow." cheers, david — who is going home now.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: heric Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:09 AM Amos, even as I was reading your message, the Pentagon was on CNN discussing how they were going to warn Afghan citizens that the Taliban may be poisoning the food aid, the latter allegedly intending to blame the poisoning on the U.S. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: DougR Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:37 AM Kendall: I know you are as grieved as anyone here on the Mudcat that the terrorists took over 5,000 lives on September 11th. You don't have to convince me. I just think your preoccupation with Llamas and Hedgehogs has clouded your thinking. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: M.Ted Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:39 AM ddw, There is a fundamental difference between what you have to say and what Larry has to say, and it has nothing to do with the issues that you are discussing-- I don't agree with Larry on everything(I neither play bagpipes or keep them in my home) but I know that he has committed his life to the ideas that he puts forward--All the committees, tribal councils, legal cases, are tangible actions that grow out of the ideas he expresses here--You've been very clear about what you think should be done--but I don't see any evidence that you are putting your own life on the line for what you say you believe--talk is cheap, at least when it doesn't correspond to real committment--but maybe I've missed something-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: GUEST,Greg F. Date: 25 Oct 01 - 08:16 AM the Pentagon was on CNN discussing how they were going to warn Afghan citizens that the Taliban may be poisoning the food aid, the latter allegedly intending to blame the poisoning on the U.S. Also interesting to note that Rumsfeld has dropped the "War on Terrorism" and "getting Bin Laden" BS rhetoric, and is now stating the U.S. objective as "toppling the Taliban" which was the purpose all along. Then, he'll move on to "toppling Saddam" and anyone else the US has a gripe with- like "toppling Allende" & all the other governments the US has overthrown for its own purposes for the last 100 years or so- Who's actually got the longest history of supporting international terrorism here? Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: GUEST Date: 25 Oct 01 - 08:29 AM I cant remember the exact words but Winston Churchill once stated that "if the Nazis invaded hell I am sure that this house would forgive me if I at least made some favourable reference to the Devil" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 08:29 AM Hi David! Good morning... GOOD? I can't find my effing glasses, so I am squinting at all this and having a real hard time! But, through the haze, I see that you believe I cited the bible... In the words of Shaggy, it wasn't me! I was quoting Sharon's question. As a Hicksite Quaker, I generally only cite the bible when discussing maters of faith with Wilberite Quakers. Does history show there has always been war, well, yes and no. In fact if one goes well into our pre-history we find war a VERY modern cultural eliment! It took a long time to evolve out of our scavenger past into hunter gatherer societies, and will likely take a while to evolve out of our warrior society or become extinct, the choice now is ours. We now know that societies evolve and that extinction is a possibility, I just ask, which side are you on, the side with a future or a stark world without humans. Now Wilberites may say that this historical view is contradicted in the bible, it is. This is why one can see my Hicksite traditions in both my scholarship and life in general. Now, being Quakers we walk together towards God without much worry about our disagreements, if we were some two other groups, we may kill each other over that, so progress is possible, can any one of us do it? We can't do it for others but we can change OUR world, and by our example, change others. An endorcement for that side? Well, I find many Quakers to be rather brave in the face of adversery, as we don't obsess about the danger which violence carries, it is a really scary thing to be planing to do great violence, where - though it takes some degree of comfidence and hope, making peace feels better, it really does, try it sometime. You will feel a deeper sence of joy than the high you feel in your limbic responces to Rambo like violence. I assure you it is a better feeling, one of those things you don't know until you try. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: GUEST,Greg F. Date: 25 Oct 01 - 08:30 AM Dropped a paragraph, above. What was supposed to appear between the quotation and the second paragraph was: Considering the historical record of truthfulness exhibited by the Pentagon and the CIA, isn't it just as likely that the U.S. is poisoning the food aid so they can blame it on the Taliban & hope to convince the Afghanis that the U.S. are the "good guys"? This is just the sort of byzantine crapola the Covert Ops boys love! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: kendall Date: 25 Oct 01 - 08:52 AM Someone once asked me, if I could go back in time and make one change in mankinds course, what would it be? I answered, I would eliminate fear, All hatred is based in fear, and fear is mans worst enemy. By the way, one cruise missle is priced at One million dollars. Sure, it's a lot of money, but, how else are we to keep up the corporate welfare? Doug, you are a piece of work! More, more! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 09:24 AM Greg F! The US has done some rather nasty things in the past, but I would strongly doubt that is what is being done, more, if there is badness afoot in that, it may be to put out the rumor that the Taliban would or are poisoning the food. To actually do it, these days would take the certainty that no one would in an act of conscience blow the story. Cheers, Larry who found his glasses again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Donuel Date: 25 Oct 01 - 09:53 AM For those who wish war you could not have a larger , longer and more dangerous war. Being an alarmist at this point is a silly notion at best. I do not think there can be more alarming circumstances. what can we do? The 2 obvious things in the event of a contagion outbreak is evacuation or sealing yourself in. As in Isreal sealing the house with as much air tight measures (which is not alot) as possible and clothing protocols are used during bio attack alerts. Having a kids swimmingpool full of water in the basement could come in handy as well as provisions. Plan for 2-4 weeks at a minimum. Evacuation plans should have preparation so a 1 hour response will beat the gridlock.
New anti virals are not yet in production or properly tested so medication except for penicillan in emergencies is not an option to my knowledge. Going to the hospital during such an attack is dangerous excursion.
IF a plague outbreak occurs* realize there is no cure once the first symptom appears. So being alert to confirmed reports is the best prevention tool. The weaponized small pox is really a large pox and can be survivable better than 10% albeit disfiguring if fluid loss and pneumonia is controlled. Doctors will not return your calls* so seek information from the CDC ahead of time. Finally although most grim, handling the dead and dying is hazardous. In a sense we are fortunate the general population was first educated through the attack of anthrax and not some other agent.
Some notes on war:
This will be a war more tenacious and insidious than fighting Nazis. Once begun in earnest sitting on the sidelines is not an option. There are no nations to surrender so an official end of hostilities is not forseeable. To win this war we may have to utilize the most powerful weapons that are secret and not attributable. A humanitarian approach once war begins is not an option to vanquish the enemy. Right now we are in defense mode and will not be fully defended for a 1-6 years. The conflict is ultimately one of beliefs of fundamentalism against modern open societies. Do not assume victory. America is no less unsinkable than the Titantic. No doubt that statement will be unpopular but many empires have been brought down in the past by Barbarians at the gate and Trojan horses within the gates. It will be a conflict that will call upon Americans to fight and die perhpas in great numbers. If the 5 major cities in the US are uninhabitable from Nuke plant terrorism the game is over for at least 20 generations. Taking defense of our own facilities too lightly will be unfortunate in the extreme. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: GUEST,Greg F. Date: 25 Oct 01 - 10:34 AM Larry, I didn't say that I thought it WAS the case, but that it is not outside the realm of possibility in light of things they've done before now. I doubt they'd necessarily avoid doing it because someone might leak the story; the U.S. "Intelligence" community has done some incredibly stupid things as well as incredibly nasty ones. As far as lying and "disinformation", that's what they're paid to do. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: SharonA Date: 25 Oct 01 - 11:30 AM ddw says: "If one of the earliest stories of mankind (Adam and Eve and their offspring be pretty close to the origin of the Judeo-Christian myth, wouldn't you say?) shows greed and jealousy were strong enough then to lead to murder and mayhem, isn't that a pretty good indication that they are fundamental to human nature? That is not to say they are good or desirable for living in society, but if they existed then and have resisted all the teachings of all the major religions in the world for however long Man has been around, I think your chances of altering them are pretty slim." David, thank you! That was exactly what I was saying when I cited the Adam & Eve story. My belief is that the tale is an allegory of human nature, anyway, not a historical record. Larry says: "Does history show there has always been war, well, yes and no. In fact if one goes well into our pre-history..." Hello? If one goes into pre-history, one is no longer talking about history (as in a record or chronicle), but about a past we can only theorize about from scanty evidence. It's not possible to prove or disprove an argument about pre-history so, please, let's not go there. Larry also says (in answer to my request for a definition of 'working' peace): "There are many examples of peacemaking, that as artists we have a responsibility of sharing and teaching." Here's the KKK example he gave earlier: "...a Rabbi who was being daily threatened by the head of his local KKK, here in the states, each time would say, why do you hate me so much when I love you. It must be so painful to carry such hate. Not only did the fellow leave the Klan, he converted, became Jewish." This story sounds allegorical, too, from the way it's phrased, but if it's true then what happened? The guy left the Klan, but did that change the Klan? I'm guessing the locals just chose another Imperial Dragon, and continued to threaten the Rabbi AND the newly-Jewish former Klansman. I would be surprised if the Klansman's conversion didn't INCREASE the local chapter's hatred of Jews. So did peacemaking lose more than it gained? (and without a historical record, how would we know ;^) ?) As to the Mohawks making a separate peace with the Quakers during the Revolution, how did that "work" for them? It didn't keep the (greedy) post-Revolution United States from overrunning their homeland. Again, in the long run, did they gain or lose? So I still need a DEFINITION of your concept of "working." As David (ddw) said in this thread: "Sure peace works, but only for a little while at a time.... A perfectly peaceful group can spawn one greedy, ambitious person and — if that person has the ability to persuade people to follow him — he can wreak havoc on everyone around him, friend and foe alike." So a one-on-one peacemaking effort only works if you happen to make peace with ALL the "ones," ALL the time. And as I stated before, the United States has a (recorded) history of not pleasing everybody. Now, Larry, you also answered my request for a non-retributive definition of "justice": You spoke of consensus, and you described an Algonquin court that has criminal jurisdiction without a concept of criminality. Huh? Please describe this "consensus process" that involves "return[ing] the balance of the tribal community" – in layman's terms, so that I can understand it! How does this differ from the concept of retribution wherein the "balance" is an eye for an eye, or an execution for a murder, or a monetary payment for war crimes? Finally: you mention humor as a way of dealing with "frustration"; Amos cites it as part of a strategy of dealing with Taliban terrorists directly. A facetious question to you both: what are we supposed to do, make 'em die laughing? (Got news for you: they already are.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 11:47 AM Dear Sharon... My mentor in the legal profession Mary Pike, was not convinced that some communities do not have criminal law, it took about a half hour to describe the concept, but at some point I will try and put it in a nut shell for you. Unfortunately I am grabbing a few moments while cleaning the house for the Popular Halfwit and his dad are coming in from England tommorow and we need to shovel out the house... as to the aligoriacal nature of the Jewish and KKK story, it was a feature on I beleive iether Dateline or one of the other news magazine shows on network TV, if I find time and someone with NEXUS I will get you details, I am sure they are available from the Southern Poverty Law Center. As to scant evidence about pre history, which actually is the greater part of the history of humanity, all my science credits were Anthro, as my math skills were not great, it almost derailed my law carrer as I fell in love with anthropology, and it served me well in my career in Indian law. In fact there is huge amounts of evidence. We are only recently learning to read it. For example, we know know quite a lot about the shift from scavaging to hunting from the imprints of hunting nets in the hardened clay around fires - apparently early hunters snagged even large game before killing it with spears pre bow or atlatle. We are also learning huge amounts about the spread of modern human (45,000 years to 10,000) populations through the study of mitacondrail DNA, I would greatly recomend the book, the Seven Daughters of Eve. It is a great story as well as an eye opener about the overlapping rather than replacement of early human populations, in fact we find there are the decendants of neolithic Britons still inhabiting the same places, such as Wiltshire eons on. Did we screw over the Mohawks? Absoultly, but what is the lesson in that? Do the other guy first and better, some justice in that... as to a final and quick hypothetical in the concept of justice. very spesific. My mother said to me yesterday, with the death of her sister, "I am now the last of my name." She is, as most of her family were killed and most of them under the direction of Valerian Triffa, who now lives in the US, in Wesconsin. Now, in your deffinition of justice, must I, in order to be a richious man of justice kill him? For me, the answer is no. To do so is to say that the innocence of my cousins, of my uncles and such was only that they were not in power, that killing by those in power in one instance is right and in another is wrong. My family killed by Triffa was better than he, and I pray he comes to understand that now that I could kill him and turn aside, is proof of the wrong he did. I wish him a long and thoughtful life, so that he might come to the light and real justice would be the day he weeps for what he did from his own sence of conscience, not from me causeing him more pain than he brought into the world. As to changing the world, we can do no more than not be changed by the world, there is great power in the words of the song, we shall not be moved. All the best, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Donuel Date: 25 Oct 01 - 11:56 AM The deadly joke as per Monty Python? Actually if there was an incident that would cause every ossama supporter to hold him in ridicule or a joke to his cause , it would be of great benefit to our security. I think only Allah could pull off such a joke. So far he is riding a contagious wave of success. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: SharonA Date: 25 Oct 01 - 12:21 PM Thanks, Larry; I would appreciate receiving the details about that KKK story. Obviously I'm no anthropologist, but if the early hunters had spears, how can you say with certainty that they did not use those weapons against each other as well as for killing game? Who wrote "The Seven Daughters of Eve"? Is it in print? I look forward to reading your description of the concept of the "consensus process" whenever you get a chance to post it. No hurry. Please pardon my ignorance, but I do not know who Valerian Triffa is. But if he is arrested, convicted and punished for directing the murders of your family members, how does that in any way change the innocence of his victims? Wishing him a long life so that he someday understands the concept that your choice to abstain from seeking punishment for him proves that his actions were wrong, and weeps because his own conscience condemns him, is literally wishful thinking. If he doesn't "get it" and doesn't repent, he's free to cause the deaths of other innocents; would those deaths not prick your conscience because of your inaction to try to stop him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Whistle Stop Date: 25 Oct 01 - 12:58 PM I think Sharon has made some very compelling points in this thread. One of the most compelling is her last one: that failing to bring Valerian Triffa (sorry, I don't know who he is either) to justice for his actions leaves him free to repeat those actions. The point here is less about retribution, and more about prevention. We may be motivated to some extent by a thirst for vengeance, but what "we who wish for war" are seeking (yes, I object to the phrasing, but I'll let it pass for now) is primarily to prevent such things from being done in the future. I don't know if we will be completely successful, but I am convinced that we have to try. And most of us place more faith in the military and other efforts currently being pursued by the US and allied governments than we do in Larry's suggestion that we should instead change any behavior of ours that offends Mr. bin Laden in the hopes that he will stop on his own, because he will then have no quarrel with us. I don't know whether war is "natural" and unavoidable or not. I would like to think that we may be able to evolve out of it, although I am skeptical that we will ever do so. But it has always been true, in all societies, that if we are to have rules -- locally, nationally, or internationally -- we need some means to enforce those rules. Currently, most of us recognize that the "rule" against flying airliners into skyscrapers full of innocent people has been broken, and the organization that perpetrated this act has threatened to break this and other rules again in order to pursue its "Death To America" agenda. Whether you like it or not, the time has come for the world to enforce that rule and try to prevent a repetition of the act. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Donuel Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:09 PM To enforce that rule, should the US deploy a weapon that is far superior to nuclear and bio agents against the offending region? Rumsfeld is still speadking in terms of avoiding assymetric reponse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:16 PM The Seven Daughters of Eve is by Bryan Sykes and published by Norton. Well, how do we know? Once war begins in Human history it leaves a pretty obvious record. On the other had, in the remains of early humans there is a lot of evidence of us falling prey to lepards, and other misadventure. but there is no conclusive record of war until very late in our history. There is a strong natural tendancy among most animals against killing their own kind, and I suppose war comes out of becoming evolved enough to racialize each other by a set of very refined cultural abstractions. As evolved as that was in our history, it has outlived its use in that we now come to a point of being able to cause so much damage in war as to iliminate life on our planit. So, when and where do we begin the process of change? Well, if we wait until the final conflict, I believe chances are it will be to late, so each of us can begin to live in the world that we chose to live in, we can chose peace even when war comes to us. But it is not an inactive choice, in order to make the choice of peace work, we should be giving and careing and helpful to others. Most of us say, well, sure, I am but the other guy isn't and use that to a large degree to justify our apathry greed or conspicuous consumption. Well, we have the choice, safty and sharing or greed and a locked door which can never be truely safe. Valerian Triffa was the head of the Rumanian facsit party. After the war he and most of his movement, after never having been alter boys, took over the Rumanian orthodox church. They made him a bishop, and he was a great friend of the like of Richard Nixon. Attempts to bring him to justice have failed as he is so well conected, much to the pain of his victems. But forgiveness is not a gift to him, as it puts aside the pain, ends his ability to cause us pain, he is not worth our pain, but our loving actions towards him honnors our dead more than he as the object of that love. I must admit, it did not happen overnight for me to come to love Triffa, it is a road I walk at some point almost every week, something my mother says, a song, anything that reminds me of the empty places at our table takes me to a place where I have to replace pain and anger with love. But, Triffa is not worth the abandoning of the world. Evolution is the only alternative to extinction. I would rather we have a successful world than a grave for Triffa. All the best, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Whistle Stop Date: 25 Oct 01 - 01:53 PM I'm afraid I don't follow you, Donuel; can you try that again? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 02:01 PM Hi Sharon... I posted a description of the workings of our court for you. The post is 4 Sharon Native Courts and Justice. Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Amos Date: 25 Oct 01 - 02:02 PM As to who Valerian Trifa was, he was a bishop prosecuted as a WWII war criminal. Story here. Regards, A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: DougR Date: 25 Oct 01 - 02:04 PM SharonA: Great post! Your paragraph five is a real hoot. And I'm sure you are correct. Whistle Stop: Durn! You did it again! Very good post. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 02:35 PM Thanks Amos... I missed his deportation. Maybe I heard about it and put it out of my mind, more likely.. Well there it is, still alive and well, no doubt... here is an excerpt... Despite the seemingly minor treatment afforded these events on paper, the pursuit of Trifa and Soobzokov may well have been the genesis of International Educational Missions. If nothing else, Krieger undoubtedly honed his investigative skills researching the two men's lives.
Trifa was a prominent member of the anti-Semitic Romanian Iron Guard, a group that sprung up before World War II. "He committed massive atrocities against Jews and Gypsies," Krieger says. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Oct 01 - 02:53 PM 36 posts in chapter 2 already? Good lord! Someone mentioned that negative traits such as greed, fear, and violence were "fundamental" to human nature. Yes...so they are. BUT...so are postive traits such as love, sharing, and compassion...fundamental to human nature. All observable human traits are fundamental to human nature. Mastery of human life involves moving more and more into the positive traits and letting go of the negative ones. That is what civilization is based on, in fact...bringing out and encouraging the postive traits, and refusing the negative ones. To say that a negative thing is fundamental is not to say that it is the only choice available, and just because a positive thing is not easy, doesn't mean it's not worth doing. Obviously. Negative traits are generally those which look for the shortest, "easiest" solution to a perceived problem. You're hungry? Oh, well, go and hit your neighbour over the head and steal his food. Duh. You can only get away with that for a short time in a civilized human community, because most of us can see the value of positive traits, even though they require a bit more long range a plan than merely clubbing your next door neighbour. So if you're going to work with fundamentals, why not work with the positive ones and let the negative ones die an early death? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: SharonA Date: 25 Oct 01 - 03:14 PM Hear, hear, Whistle Stop! Thanks, Larry and Amos, for the info. Thank you, Doug, for the comment. Re Valerian Triffa: I'm going to make a comparison here, Larry, between the anti-Semitic, anti-Gypsy Triffa and the anti-Semitic, anti-American bin Laden.... Back in part 1 of this thread, you said of bin Laden's Taliban terrorists, "We have to address what it is that makes such people.... It is a deep sense of unfairness." I can't help wondering what unfairness Triffa sensed that made him commit the murders and other atrocities that he did. You has given several examples of ways in which the US can give humanitarian aid to countries that will dissuade them from lashing out at us through terrorism any longer; what humanitarian aid would Triffa's homeland have required, and from whom, in order to have satisfied him and to have made him feel that he didn't have to kill innocent people anymore, or to cause him to repent the murders he's already responsible for? Is this humanitarian aid part of your described plan for "justice" for Triffa, instead of just wishing for an epiphany for him? (Maybe you could send some money or food to him in Portugal?) You do mention "loving actions" toward him... and you say they honor him at least somewhat as the object of your love. Why honor him at all? You say forgiving him "ends" his ability to cause you pain, yet you say you're regularly challenged, by reminders of the pain he's caused, to "replace pain and anger with love." Sounds like he still does have the ability to continue to cause you pain.... without end... until you die. Meanwhile, this guy is likely to die laughing. Please tell me how it makes the world more "successful" when Triffa – and bin Laden – successfully evade capture while their victims fail to live. Please explain how wishfully thinking murdering terrorists to repentance while they continue to kill contributes more to our evolution than to our extinction. *sigh* I'd make a lousy Quaker... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: GUEST,petr Date: 25 Oct 01 - 03:39 PM bullshit to you donuel. theres nothing wrong with trying to understand history, ie. why did the holocaust happen - but that doesnt mean it was the wests fault because of the Versailles treaty - it wasnt it anymore than Bin Ladens belief in the wests oppression of the Islam. if you want to talk about root causes - perhaps there is an antipathy in the muslim world towards the west because they look at the Islamic world a 1000 years ago which was the pinnacle of civilization at the time, and wonder what happened. after a few hundred years they were surpassed by the west - which indeed owes a lot to their civilization as do they to the Greeks etc.) But ITs their fault they got left behind, Im not sure why they did but I would suggest it has to do with increasing emphasis on religious dogma, at the expense of the sciences as well as the position of women in their society. ANyway the simple fact is that by the rennaissance they were behind. (the flight of scholars from Constantinople who brought greek classics with them to the west, the invention of the printing press with its revolutionary spread of communications, the cutoff of the spice trade from the east which led to European exploration and growth in trade thanks to guns (gunpowder being a Chinese invention) and lateen sails (Arabic invention). All of those factors contributed to the triumph of the west and Like it or not, western civilization is the dominant world civilization. (and despite some of its shortcomings, runaway consumerism etc. I much prefer it to theirs, and their religious thought police) Certainly at times in the colonial past the west has exploited other nations but Bin Laden has no case against the west - they see that the west is rich and they are poor and they want to blame someone they are looking for a scapegoat as the Nazis did in the 30's and its easy to go America bashing, after the Soviets were kicked out of Afghanistan they needed a new enemy and since the ISlamic revolution in Iran they had one (America and the west) they latch onto the one major non-western development: fundamentalist Islam. They are however wrong, its not the wests fault they were left behind, its not up to America to topple every dictator in the world and install democracy. Hell the Americans were on their side plenty of times in the SUez crisis they backed Nasser. In Gulf war, and Bosnia they helped Muslims defend themselves. and even in Afghanistan they helped the Mujahadeen, the real turning point in that war was the CIA supplied STinger missiles, plus the fact that the Soviet Union was falling apart and did not have the will to fight. THe US has tried to broker a peace in Israel for years, and last year the Israelis came very close to offering them almost everything they wanted, the occupied territories, half of JErusalem, removal of the settlements. But many of them really want total removal of the Israelis out of Palestine and that will never happen. The argument about the sanctions against Iraq and all those that suffer because of them. Bin Laden should really be targeting Saddam because the money for humanitarian aid is there but he spends it on the military and building palaces. They requested 12,000 cases of WHiskey for petes sake, what do you need whiskey for when children need milk. Hussein is bent on building weapons of mass destruction, Im sure that people forgot about the Israeli bombing of Baghdads nuclear reactor in 81. Everyone was outraged but they were also glad a few years later. I say again, that anyone who says that somehow AMerica deserved it legitimizes Bin Ladens position. Its the same as the Kremlin apologists did whenever the Russians did something, oh well America did the same thing. It took someone like Reagan to call the USSR for what it really was, an evil empire. I know because I lived in that world, and saw the Russians invade my Country in 68. You seem to take a really gloomy view, that it is impossible to root these characters out, but in fact look at the way Jordan dealt with Abu Nidal terrorist group and where are they now. ANd you take away the haven where they operate it becomes much more difficult. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 04:16 PM Well Sharon, the second world war did not just happen. Unlike Pter, I don't think the injustices and enequality justify the wrongs, they only inspire them. For example, today in his new free Czech republic they are building Gheto walls around two Roma (Gypsy) communities. Where is the rest of the world in condeming this now when it can be opposed with reason and civilized methods, while skin head gangs in his land through a Romni (Gypsy woman) a mother of four off a bridge to her death and recieve four to six months in jail, so when do we deal with that terror and the hard hearts it creates? We can ignore the inhumanity until it hits our home or we can teach tollerance and peace. No, Trifa doesn't need aid from me now, and I could not care less if he is laughing at me, that is on his soul. Fact is, I have know few bigoted murderous bastards who were not scared and in pain on the inside, they make their own hell. I chose not to live in their hell. All the best, (don't worry about being a quaker be a good Sharon!) Cheers, Larry PS Pter, still have a pig farm on the cite of the Leti concentration camp? Be a good fellow, and ask your government to do what international law demands and put a gardin of rememberance there. All the best again, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 04:32 PM One more thing, Sharon, I tend to intelectualize things, but Quakerism is also experiencial. One has to experieice the peace of a Quaker community to understand how and that it works. We aren't big on missonary work, which is why we are a rather small community of faith, but, if you are really interested, come to a few Quaker meetings, you may find you begin to understand through silence what you aren't convinced of through conversation. So, not to convert you or anyone, but drop by and see if it makes sence for you. Peace is a really joyous thing. I would suggest, being my own upbrining, going to what we call an unprogramed silent meeting, of late there is a trend towards Quaker meetings with preachers and such, which I don't really understand myself, but there you are, different tribes even among us... I remember the moment when I was about 12 that I became convinced of the Quaker Peace testimony. It was a remarkable thing. As a kid growing up in a violent world, even Quaker kids don't often grow up being convinced of peace. I was in class, daydreaming as usual and suddunly it all just seemed right, I was absoultly overcome with a feeling of happyness and calm. I remember thinking, "why not?". So, there you are, have I never felt a violent moment since then, course not, do I have a better vission of what I feel is hope for the future, I am convinced. Cheers, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: SharonA Date: 25 Oct 01 - 05:06 PM Thanks for the thought. Larry (about experiencing Quaker community). I have some Quaker friends (no pun intended), and the local folk group of which I am a member meets at a Quaker Meeting House (at whose fundraisers we have performed!). I even have a copy of "Faith and Practice." But I don't think I'll ever be convinced; as my posts of the last couple of days suggest, the mindset that makes sense to me is quite different from that of a Quaker! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Oct 01 - 05:26 PM Larry, I have found Quakers to be admirable people, and I thoroughly appreciate what you have said in these various threads here. If you want peace, you must make peace inside yourself first...that's my belief. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Don Firth Date: 25 Oct 01 - 06:07 PM I discovered this while browsing through cyberspace and I'd thought I'd toss this into the mix for your consideration:-- My country, right or wrong. . . . It is important to note the complete quotation from which this incomplete and distorted notion arises. Carl Schurz (1829-1906) was a German army officer, politician and revolutionist who fled to the United States in 1852. He became a brigadier general of Union volunteer soldiers during the Civil War. His words were "My country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right." That is intelligent American patriotism. Without the qualifying second sentence, it is mere chauvinism or jingoism; but with it, moral considerations and justice—which are among the foundation values of America—become guides to public policy. Puts quite a different slant on things, doesn't it? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: InOBU Date: 25 Oct 01 - 06:12 PM Thanks Don, interesting! Sharon, the pun is Friends and friends, the capital you see, for example we ofter write to each ofther as Dear Friend and friend... Cheers, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: SharonA Date: 25 Oct 01 - 06:17 PM I Knew That! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: ddw Date: 25 Oct 01 - 06:18 PM M. Ted. — Can't for the life of me remember asking your opinion of the discussion I was having with Larry, Amos, et al, but I'll answer your question. I spent five years in the USAF (1961-66) and the last 30 years as a working journalist, trying to spread a little real information in the world. The fact that Larry is committed to his causes doesn't alter the fact that I think a lot of his positions are wrong — as he clearly does of mine. So what have you done that entitles you to an opinion? david |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: Donuel Date: 25 Oct 01 - 06:46 PM Don Thanks for putting right the "if wrong we will put it right" quote.
I think petr was upset with me, please understand I am all for historical introspections and intellectual understanding. I have learned this month more about Islam and the west's response than I have in 40 years. I made many historical overview posts prior to today.
However the war is here, now and far into the future.
Later I alluded to a US weapon so powerful as to make nuclear weapons look puny. It causes much collateral damage,knows no borders or well defined areas - but leaves no radiation or ongoing bio threat. My question is... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: for all who wish for war PART 2 From: DougR Date: 25 Oct 01 - 09:06 PM ddw: I was interested in your comment that you, as a journalist, "are trying to spread a little real information in the world." Are you a reporter, or a columnist? DougR |