like I said... I'm not trying to say that it's not bad what happened to the people in London... I'm just saying that to use the kind of terminology that CNN was using while not paying attention to what's happening in the middle east... what kind of destruction of innocent human life we're causing... and ignoring how our actions there both in the past and currently is motivating these attacks... we're doing a horrific disservice to ourselves.
as a sign once said... "bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity."
think about that at the very least. violence begets violence... and the seeds of this animosity go back quite a ways and involve religion as much as anything else... and that is a topic that the government and media has very conveniently found a way to sweep under the rug. people just don't really think about it. all they think is "muslim = terrorist".
there's SO MUCH MORE TO IT.
simply saying that they're "evil" like that absolute idiot anonymous moron did... that's so stupid and ignorant that I can't even put it into words. that kind of painfully blind mindset is going to get us nothing but deeper into violence and bloodshed... and isn't going to solve anything.
here in the USA you really don't. it's illegal to show the pictures of the dead american soldiers or coffins or anything... and they don't show any of the dead civilians or children unless they can make it look like it was the fault of the "insurgents" etc. (and even then, you probably wouldn't see ANY of the pictures in that collage on any mainstream american media no matter what, aside from the Abu Ghraib images)
the Abu Ghraib ones were the only ones that really got into the media, and that was really NOT something the government wanted... but I think that once they got into the media, there wasn't much they could do about it... it became a news story.
however, it still got covered up quite a bit compared to the reality of what went on, and what still is going on.
the government here does a very good job of making sure we get as much of a biased view of things as possible.
The media in Mexico is worst, we don't to know anything real about tha world except for: "The agentins kicked the mexican's ass because we were winning in a football game".
That's is why I try to watch CNN and BBC. And also internet.
Here in my beautiful country corruption is everywhere. And until recently, you could even get killed for showing real news. Just by talking abut corruption or drug lords or even some minor fraud. You talk, they pay, you get killed.
Which is exactly why many people are afraid of really taking action here.
Even our president never takes real action. And when he does, oh dear god, when he does he just makes a fool of himself and ridiculizes our country by not even taking a close look to what he would say.
But anyway, tha's not important in this blog. And not in your country actually.
So hey, just keep trying to find the truth behind the media. Not everything is true.
And yes, terrorists have no reason to do the atrocties they do, and foreing armies and goverments should stop "figthing fire with fire" for they also can get burned. And their people are the ones who pay.
anonymous#2: this blog is as good a place as any to discuss the problems in your country. I care about this kind of trouble wherever it is, not just in the USA. I like to hear what is happening in other countries, from the people who are actually living there, you know?
lisa: How many years did that take Saddam?.. over 20?.. and we managed to match that amount directly in 2 years?.. and double or triple it "indirectly"?
Don't fall prey to the hype. Removing Saddam from power is not, was not and will not be worth the massive destruction, loss of global stability, loss of life and fuel for "terrorist" recruitment it has caused. Period.
you mention accuracy? well, I'm a lot closer to the mark than you. :-/ sorry.
notice the people with the burns on their chest and stomach, missing their hands and/or feet? those are generally the result of stepping on or picking up unxploded cluster bombs, which looks sort of like pop cans. there is also a large problem with "collateral damage" when bombing buildings in "surgical strikes" etc.
not to mention that you overlook the images from Abu Ghraib and the caskets of the American soldiers which are illegal to show pictures of by federal order etc.
I never said that there wasn't bad things happening... I said that we've made it MUCH worse and exaggerated the problems that were there. you can't even TRY to argue (unless you're stupid or insane) that Iraq is a better place today than it was when Saddam was in power. that's simply ludicrous and patently false. PERIOD.
my dad was a medic in Viet Nam. he also has his own opinions about the war... for instance, he HATED John Kerry with a passion... at the time I first spoke to him about it, I hadn't done my research on Kerry and was troubled by his allegations and position on John Kerry... I then spent a month researching and studying what Kerry had said and done... and when I talked to my father again and laid out ALL OF THE FACTS to him... you know what? he said "I guess I never looked at it that way. I can't really argue with that." and coming from my father in that position, that meant a lot.
it's very easy to listen to the story of 1 person, or even a handful of people about the horrors they went through... but you're losing perspective. as I said before, based on the number you stated, 50,000 people... it took Saddam almost 25 YEARS to kill that many people in his country, mainly the Kurds... (and don't forget that we sold him his WMD's at that time etc, and then defended his gassing of the Kurds at that time as well.)... and then we come in and in 2 years, not only flat out match the number of dead, but indirectly cause 3 or 4 times that amount through sickness and starvation by embargos, destruction of basic infrastructure, lack of medical supplies, food, clean water, sewage treatment etc. not to mention that on top of that, we have absolutely created a highly unstable den of violence and chaos in the center of the middle east which has become a haven and training ground for terrorists that WERE NOT THERE AT ALL BEFORE THIS. we have created a self-fulfilling prophecy for the "terrorists", who all claimed that we weren't going to just go in and "liberate the people" by removing Saddam, but were going to move in and become an occupying force... which is PRECISELY what we've done. and now even the American government is admitting that this is, AND I QUOTE: "A GENERATIONAL COMITTMENT". THAT is why the violence just keeps increasing and why the insurgency won't die. THE IRAQI PEOPLE DIDN'T WANT US THERE TO BEGIN WITH. we had no right to go in there, and we have no right to still be there. and the longer we stay, the worse it's going to get. they (not all either) only tolerated it the beginning because they figured it wasn't a bad idea to get rid of Saddam, as long as we were there, but that we had to leave immediately afterward. once the realized that we weren't leaving, the insurgency intensified.
this is an echo of the Gulf War, when Bush Sr. only got the aid of some of the other Arab nations because he promised not to go into Iraq or go after Saddam etc. Muslims are VERY touchy about infidels being on their soil.. it's an affront to their god and their religion etc. you need to research that as well.
to further illustrate my point about Kerry, and hopefully get it through your head that just because people are dying, doesn't always justify the actions of our government, or invalidate the aims of people who are against the war, nor does it invalidate the facts... which are almost always what people like myself are fighting to make clear.
my fathers position about Kerry was that he was a traitor to his country, a communist, and that he had undermined the war effort by rallying against it, and that that had been an absolute betrayal of his fellow soldiers and had made worse or cost the lives of some of the POWs that were there. he said that Kerry was such a dispicable person for this that if he were the last man on earth he would never vote for him for president or support him in any way and would just as soon see him tried and sentenced to death for treason.
now, having actually gone and done the research on this... I clarified a few things for him. Kerry, being from the social circles he was and is, was set to be posted as an officer on a ship in the Gulf, but insisted he be sent in on the swift boats to be with his men... a very dangerous assignment. he was wounded 3 times and awarded numerous medals for heroism for saving the lives of his fellow soldiers, he volunteered for a second tour of duty doing the same thing after his first was complete and was only pulled out because he had received his 3 purple hearts for injuries which he still carries the shrapnel from buried against his femur from one... when he went back to the US, he rallied against the war because he had seen first hand what was happening there... and he knew that the government had LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE about the Gulf of Tonkin incident as an excuse to get us into the war (look it up), he wanted to make sure the American people knew what their sons and daughters were dying for and he wanted to stop it, and MAKE SURE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. these were his fellow soldiers who he served side by side with who were dying... he wanted to save their lives and prevent this kind of waste of life from happening again... when he testified before congress (which you can watch for yourself here before you make any ignorant assumptions about it), it was intelligence, well spoken and very clear. the congressmen praised him as such a fine spokesman for their cause etc.
I pointed out a few things to my father... I said "John Kerry is a very intelligent man, right? much much more so than Bush, right?" and he conceded that he was. so I went on "so, knowing that his fellow soldiers were dying for a lie, which is now open historical record about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, he wanted to make sure that not only were those 58,226 lives not wasted on a lie, but that the government would not be able to lie to it's people and get away with it again in the future. he weighed the options and felt that risking possible worse treatment of the ~2,000 possible POW's was worth the risk. also considering that the actual number was likely much smaller, considering that around 500 of those were known to be pilots who had gone down in the ocean etc. he was a smart man who proved his love and loyalty to his fellow soldiers through his military record, which I read, and he made a choice to stand up against the wrong actions of the US Government for the sake of his fellow soldiers, for the American people and for a love of his country and it's most sacred ideals. it's a downright shame that he was slandered the way he was. in recent years, the military has released the records showing that his other allegations of war crimes committed by the American soldiers were true. there were slaughters of entire villages, woman and babies, rapes etc. all documented and corroborated by the US military records. for as much as the US government hated Kerry for standing up against them, and as much as they wanted to pin something on him, they couldn't... because he was right and the facts backed him up and they knew it.
the point being, with the war in Iraq, yes, people are dying, but you're being painfully myopic and a sucker for propaganda if you can't see what's really going on.
"The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic." -Josef Stalin.
that one always seems pertinent. you get so caught up in the story of 1 or a few people that you overlook the fact that WE have caused FAR FAR FAR more death and destruction... more chaos and yes, MADE THE WORLD A FAR FAR WORSE PLACE then Saddam EVER did.
sorry, but the facts back that up, and as much as you want to cry about a very small minority of the real situation, it doesn't change the facts. not to mention that you're WRONG about where a lot of those casualities and deaths are coming from. the US would like you to believe that it's the "terrorists" doing... and for good reason.
not to mention that the US military had actually resorted to handing out candy to children to gather crowds of them around important buildings during unveilings, in hopes that the "terrorists" wouldn't bomb them. ie; using children as human shields. and eventually the terrorists bombed them anyway. I'm sure you can try to twist that and ignore the fact that the US soldiers were using children as human shields... which is a fact. that was their intent, written in their reports etc. like I said, there's a lot more to this that you're willing to admit obviously. and you seem to have a lack of understanding as to what is really going on over there... the holistic viewpoint... weighing what is right and the good of many over the lives of a view. open your eyes and look at the big picture, weigh all of the FACTS here... and don't just fall for the bullshit propaganda hook line and sinker.
I'm sure we could go on about this... but in light of reality, I think that's a bit silly.
9 comments:
like I said... I'm not trying to say that it's not bad what happened to the people in London... I'm just saying that to use the kind of terminology that CNN was using while not paying attention to what's happening in the middle east... what kind of destruction of innocent human life we're causing... and ignoring how our actions there both in the past and currently is motivating these attacks... we're doing a horrific disservice to ourselves.
as a sign once said... "bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity."
think about that at the very least. violence begets violence... and the seeds of this animosity go back quite a ways and involve religion as much as anything else... and that is a topic that the government and media has very conveniently found a way to sweep under the rug. people just don't really think about it. all they think is "muslim = terrorist".
there's SO MUCH MORE TO IT.
simply saying that they're "evil" like that absolute idiot anonymous moron did... that's so stupid and ignorant that I can't even put it into words. that kind of painfully blind mindset is going to get us nothing but deeper into violence and bloodshed... and isn't going to solve anything.
eerieblue: I was afraid of that. :( but it's true.. the media doesn't really talk much about that part of what's happening over there.
here in the USA you really don't. it's illegal to show the pictures of the dead american soldiers or coffins or anything... and they don't show any of the dead civilians or children unless they can make it look like it was the fault of the "insurgents" etc. (and even then, you probably wouldn't see ANY of the pictures in that collage on any mainstream american media no matter what, aside from the Abu Ghraib images)
the Abu Ghraib ones were the only ones that really got into the media, and that was really NOT something the government wanted... but I think that once they got into the media, there wasn't much they could do about it... it became a news story.
however, it still got covered up quite a bit compared to the reality of what went on, and what still is going on.
the government here does a very good job of making sure we get as much of a biased view of things as possible.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/22/1082616268111.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6078.htm
etc.
The media in Mexico is worst, we don't to know anything real about tha world except for: "The agentins kicked the mexican's ass because we were winning in a football game".
That's is why I try to watch CNN and BBC. And also internet.
Here in my beautiful country corruption is everywhere. And until recently, you could even get killed for showing real news. Just by talking abut corruption or drug lords or even some minor fraud. You talk, they pay, you get killed.
Which is exactly why many people are afraid of really taking action here.
Even our president never takes real action. And when he does, oh dear god, when he does he just makes a fool of himself and ridiculizes our country by not even taking a close look to what he would say.
But anyway, tha's not important in this blog. And not in your country actually.
So hey, just keep trying to find the truth behind the media. Not everything is true.
And yes, terrorists have no reason to do the atrocties they do, and foreing armies and goverments should stop "figthing fire with fire" for they also can get burned. And their people are the ones who pay.
(and yeah, I'm anonymous #2 from the other post)
anonymous#2: this blog is as good a place as any to discuss the problems in your country. I care about this kind of trouble wherever it is, not just in the USA. I like to hear what is happening in other countries, from the people who are actually living there, you know?
thank you for your input. :)
superman: way to make a statement that really accomplishes nothing. :)
taramonster: I agree.
lisa: How many years did that take Saddam?.. over 20?.. and we managed to match that amount directly in 2 years?.. and double or triple it "indirectly"?
There are worse atrocities happening elsewhere in the world, and you don't see us getting involved. and hell, a number of them have been directed by us. Please read the "U.S. Foreign Policy in the Periphery: A 50-Year Retrospective" paper linked off of my Post for the ignorant post.
Don't fall prey to the hype. Removing Saddam from power is not, was not and will not be worth the massive destruction, loss of global stability, loss of life and fuel for "terrorist" recruitment it has caused. Period.
you mention accuracy? well, I'm a lot closer to the mark than you. :-/ sorry.
notice the people with the burns on their chest and stomach, missing their hands and/or feet? those are generally the result of stepping on or picking up unxploded cluster bombs, which looks sort of like pop cans. there is also a large problem with "collateral damage" when bombing buildings in "surgical strikes" etc.
not to mention that you overlook the images from Abu Ghraib and the caskets of the American soldiers which are illegal to show pictures of by federal order etc.
I never said that there wasn't bad things happening... I said that we've made it MUCH worse and exaggerated the problems that were there. you can't even TRY to argue (unless you're stupid or insane) that Iraq is a better place today than it was when Saddam was in power. that's simply ludicrous and patently false. PERIOD.
my dad was a medic in Viet Nam. he also has his own opinions about the war... for instance, he HATED John Kerry with a passion... at the time I first spoke to him about it, I hadn't done my research on Kerry and was troubled by his allegations and position on John Kerry... I then spent a month researching and studying what Kerry had said and done... and when I talked to my father again and laid out ALL OF THE FACTS to him... you know what? he said "I guess I never looked at it that way. I can't really argue with that." and coming from my father in that position, that meant a lot.
it's very easy to listen to the story of 1 person, or even a handful of people about the horrors they went through... but you're losing perspective. as I said before, based on the number you stated, 50,000 people... it took Saddam almost 25 YEARS to kill that many people in his country, mainly the Kurds... (and don't forget that we sold him his WMD's at that time etc, and then defended his gassing of the Kurds at that time as well.)... and then we come in and in 2 years, not only flat out match the number of dead, but indirectly cause 3 or 4 times that amount through sickness and starvation by embargos, destruction of basic infrastructure, lack of medical supplies, food, clean water, sewage treatment etc. not to mention that on top of that, we have absolutely created a highly unstable den of violence and chaos in the center of the middle east which has become a haven and training ground for terrorists that WERE NOT THERE AT ALL BEFORE THIS. we have created a self-fulfilling prophecy for the "terrorists", who all claimed that we weren't going to just go in and "liberate the people" by removing Saddam, but were going to move in and become an occupying force... which is PRECISELY what we've done. and now even the American government is admitting that this is, AND I QUOTE: "A GENERATIONAL COMITTMENT". THAT is why the violence just keeps increasing and why the insurgency won't die. THE IRAQI PEOPLE DIDN'T WANT US THERE TO BEGIN WITH. we had no right to go in there, and we have no right to still be there. and the longer we stay, the worse it's going to get. they (not all either) only tolerated it the beginning because they figured it wasn't a bad idea to get rid of Saddam, as long as we were there, but that we had to leave immediately afterward. once the realized that we weren't leaving, the insurgency intensified.
this is an echo of the Gulf War, when Bush Sr. only got the aid of some of the other Arab nations because he promised not to go into Iraq or go after Saddam etc. Muslims are VERY touchy about infidels being on their soil.. it's an affront to their god and their religion etc. you need to research that as well.
to further illustrate my point about Kerry, and hopefully get it through your head that just because people are dying, doesn't always justify the actions of our government, or invalidate the aims of people who are against the war, nor does it invalidate the facts... which are almost always what people like myself are fighting to make clear.
my fathers position about Kerry was that he was a traitor to his country, a communist, and that he had undermined the war effort by rallying against it, and that that had been an absolute betrayal of his fellow soldiers and had made worse or cost the lives of some of the POWs that were there. he said that Kerry was such a dispicable person for this that if he were the last man on earth he would never vote for him for president or support him in any way and would just as soon see him tried and sentenced to death for treason.
now, having actually gone and done the research on this... I clarified a few things for him. Kerry, being from the social circles he was and is, was set to be posted as an officer on a ship in the Gulf, but insisted he be sent in on the swift boats to be with his men... a very dangerous assignment. he was wounded 3 times and awarded numerous medals for heroism for saving the lives of his fellow soldiers, he volunteered for a second tour of duty doing the same thing after his first was complete and was only pulled out because he had received his 3 purple hearts for injuries which he still carries the shrapnel from buried against his femur from one... when he went back to the US, he rallied against the war because he had seen first hand what was happening there... and he knew that the government had LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE about the Gulf of Tonkin incident as an excuse to get us into the war (look it up), he wanted to make sure the American people knew what their sons and daughters were dying for and he wanted to stop it, and MAKE SURE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. these were his fellow soldiers who he served side by side with who were dying... he wanted to save their lives and prevent this kind of waste of life from happening again... when he testified before congress (which you can watch for yourself here before you make any ignorant assumptions about it), it was intelligence, well spoken and very clear. the congressmen praised him as such a fine spokesman for their cause etc.
I pointed out a few things to my father... I said "John Kerry is a very intelligent man, right? much much more so than Bush, right?" and he conceded that he was. so I went on "so, knowing that his fellow soldiers were dying for a lie, which is now open historical record about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, he wanted to make sure that not only were those 58,226 lives not wasted on a lie, but that the government would not be able to lie to it's people and get away with it again in the future. he weighed the options and felt that risking possible worse treatment of the ~2,000 possible POW's was worth the risk. also considering that the actual number was likely much smaller, considering that around 500 of those were known to be pilots who had gone down in the ocean etc. he was a smart man who proved his love and loyalty to his fellow soldiers through his military record, which I read, and he made a choice to stand up against the wrong actions of the US Government for the sake of his fellow soldiers, for the American people and for a love of his country and it's most sacred ideals. it's a downright shame that he was slandered the way he was. in recent years, the military has released the records showing that his other allegations of war crimes committed by the American soldiers were true. there were slaughters of entire villages, woman and babies, rapes etc. all documented and corroborated by the US military records. for as much as the US government hated Kerry for standing up against them, and as much as they wanted to pin something on him, they couldn't... because he was right and the facts backed him up and they knew it.
the point being, with the war in Iraq, yes, people are dying, but you're being painfully myopic and a sucker for propaganda if you can't see what's really going on.
"The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic." -Josef Stalin.
that one always seems pertinent. you get so caught up in the story of 1 or a few people that you overlook the fact that WE have caused FAR FAR FAR more death and destruction... more chaos and yes, MADE THE WORLD A FAR FAR WORSE PLACE then Saddam EVER did.
sorry, but the facts back that up, and as much as you want to cry about a very small minority of the real situation, it doesn't change the facts. not to mention that you're WRONG about where a lot of those casualities and deaths are coming from. the US would like you to believe that it's the "terrorists" doing... and for good reason.
not to mention that the US military had actually resorted to handing out candy to children to gather crowds of them around important buildings during unveilings, in hopes that the "terrorists" wouldn't bomb them. ie; using children as human shields. and eventually the terrorists bombed them anyway. I'm sure you can try to twist that and ignore the fact that the US soldiers were using children as human shields... which is a fact. that was their intent, written in their reports etc. like I said, there's a lot more to this that you're willing to admit obviously. and you seem to have a lack of understanding as to what is really going on over there... the holistic viewpoint... weighing what is right and the good of many over the lives of a view. open your eyes and look at the big picture, weigh all of the FACTS here... and don't just fall for the bullshit propaganda hook line and sinker.
I'm sure we could go on about this... but in light of reality, I think that's a bit silly.
Post a Comment