Noam Chomsky's Profit Over People would also be a very good read for anyone interested.
I just find it really hard to take seriously the justification of saving Iraqi's from their dictator as a viable reason why the American Government is thinking of going in . . .
While Saddam is a f***ing bastard (according to our press) to his own people, it is really a matter of being a bastard to those over whom one has power. In America's case, this includes very many countries round the world. And America's record in these countries is horrendous. Arming the fascist armies of dictators against 'rebel' democratic liberals - generally beating up and squeezing all the cash and oil they can out of every other country they can.
If Bush uses human rights to justify attacking Iraq, why is he so nice to Saudi Arabia ? Anyone who thinks this is a Moral War or Benevolent war really should look at the history of those propagating it. Diplomacy is never about Morals, it is always about Money.
Unfortunately, THE WAR IS AGAIN HERE
I just can't see why Bush & Blair want to attack Iraq.
* The prospect of war is unpopular. Why would these two leaders risk their domestic popularity and mobilise all the diplomatic muscle available to pursue an unpopular policy ? What's in it for them ? We're talking about politicians here - they only ever risk mass rejection of their policies if it's something of abolutely fundemental importance. There must be a good reason !
* If there is a good reason for attacking why can't the public be told ? Let's say Iraq was going to have 20 ICBMs ready by November (highly unlikely). Why couldn't the public be told ? It's not as if we'd lose the element of surprise - the US has been talking about attacking for months.
* What's suddenly changed about Iraq ? Hasn't the regime been continuing in much the same way since the end of the Gulf War ? Why the big hurry now ?
So please, this really stumps me. Tell me why these politicians are so desperate to risk their political futures on such an unpopular scheme ?
* The prospect of war is unpopular. Why would these two leaders risk their domestic popularity and mobilise all the diplomatic muscle available to pursue an unpopular policy ? What's in it for them ? We're talking about politicians here - they only ever risk mass rejection of their policies if it's something of abolutely fundemental importance. There must be a good reason !
* If there is a good reason for attacking why can't the public be told ? Let's say Iraq was going to have 20 ICBMs ready by November (highly unlikely). Why couldn't the public be told ? It's not as if we'd lose the element of surprise - the US has been talking about attacking for months.
* What's suddenly changed about Iraq ? Hasn't the regime been continuing in much the same way since the end of the Gulf War ? Why the big hurry now ?
So please, this really stumps me. Tell me why these politicians are so desperate to risk their political futures on such an unpopular scheme ?
hi spirit,
my idea is that g.bush electoral campaign was financially covered by weapon and oil american companies, and he is doing what he is been sponsored for, on the other side blair removed any chance for the tories to regain popularity in g.b., considering that nothing is moving at his left, and both are convinced that the majority of western populations are too involved in selfishness (so well built from the media) and fear of everything, and don't care much about others suffering.
my idea is that g.bush electoral campaign was financially covered by weapon and oil american companies, and he is doing what he is been sponsored for, on the other side blair removed any chance for the tories to regain popularity in g.b., considering that nothing is moving at his left, and both are convinced that the majority of western populations are too involved in selfishness (so well built from the media) and fear of everything, and don't care much about others suffering.
-
algorhythm
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Tennessee, USA
- Contact:
here are my thoughts Spirit:
* Why risk it politically?
The idea of war is unpopular in US, & UK even more so. But IF and when the war starts, people will get all patriotic in the US and Bush's popularity rating will go up. I'm not sure that I can say the same for what happens in the UK . . .
* Why can't the public be told?
Well, I have seriously considered the possibility that the origins of some of these weapons is the US or some of its allies. It would look pretty bad if the US revealed that they know that Iraq has WMD because we sold them to him or some such. For example: Senator Byrd on Bio/Chem Weapons
* Why the Big hurry now?
Popular fervor in the US over 911 is dying down and Bush's ratings have dropped. Bush needs new fuel to feed the progaghanda machine. Also let us not forget: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." - White House Chief of Staff Andy Card. Really though, it is a good idea to introduce a new product, like war, after labor day. It keeps your consumer base interested in your company.
_________________
algorhythm its coming!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: algorhythm on 2002-09-29 12:27 ]</font>
* Why risk it politically?
The idea of war is unpopular in US, & UK even more so. But IF and when the war starts, people will get all patriotic in the US and Bush's popularity rating will go up. I'm not sure that I can say the same for what happens in the UK . . .
* Why can't the public be told?
Well, I have seriously considered the possibility that the origins of some of these weapons is the US or some of its allies. It would look pretty bad if the US revealed that they know that Iraq has WMD because we sold them to him or some such. For example: Senator Byrd on Bio/Chem Weapons
* Why the Big hurry now?
Popular fervor in the US over 911 is dying down and Bush's ratings have dropped. Bush needs new fuel to feed the progaghanda machine. Also let us not forget: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." - White House Chief of Staff Andy Card. Really though, it is a good idea to introduce a new product, like war, after labor day. It keeps your consumer base interested in your company.
_________________
algorhythm its coming!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: algorhythm on 2002-09-29 12:27 ]</font>
-
lifechanger
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
EXPANSION AND PEACE
By Theodore 'Teddy' Roosevelt
PUBLISHED IN THE "INDEPENDENT," DECEMBER 21, 1899
IT was the gentlest of our poets who wrote:
"Be bolde! Be bolde! and everywhere, Be bolde";
Be not too bold! Yet better the excess
Than the defect; better the more than less.
Longfellow's love of peace was profound; but he was a man, and a wise man, and he knew that cowardice does not promote peace, and that even the great evil of war may be a less evil than cringing to iniquity.
Captain Mahan, than whom there is not in the country a man whom we can more appropriately designate by the fine and high phrase, "a Christian gentleman," and who is incapable of advocating wrong-doing of any kind, national or individual, gives utterance to the feeling of the great majority of manly and thoughtful men when he denounces the great danger of indiscriminate advocacy of peace at any price, because "it may lead men to tamper with iniquity, to compromise with unrighteousness, soothing their conscience with the belief that war is so entirely wrong that beside it no other tolerated evil is wrong. Witness Armenia and witness Crete. War has been avoided; but what of the national consciences that beheld such iniquity and withheld the hand?"
Peace is a great good; and doubly harmful, therefore, is the attitude of those who advocate it in terms that would make it synonymous with selfish and cowardly shrinking from warring against the existence of evil. The wisest and most far-seeing champions of peace will ever remember that, in the first place, to be good it must be righteous, for unrighteous and cowardly peace may be worse than any war; and, in the second place, that it can often be obtained only at the cost of war. Let me take two illustrations:
The great blot upon European international morality in the closing decade of this century has been not a war, but the infamous peace kept by the joint action of the great powers, while Turkey inflicted the last horrors of butchery, torture, and outrage upon the men, women, and children of despairing Armenia. War was avoided; peace was kept; but what a peace! Infinitely greater human misery was inflicted during this peace than in the late wars of Germany with France, of Russia with Turkey; and this misery fell, not on armed men, but upon defenseless women and children, upon the gray-beard and the stripling no less than upon the head of the family; and it came, not in the mere form of death or imprisonment, but of tortures upon men, and, above all, upon women, too horrible to relate—tortures of which it is too terrible even to think. Moreover, no good resulted from the bloodshed and misery.
Unjust war is a terrible sin. It does not nowadays in the aggregate cause anything like the misery that is caused in the aggregate by unjust dealing toward one's neighbors in the commercial and social world; and to condemn all war is just as logical as to condemn all business and all social relations, as to condemn love and marriage because of the frightful misery caused by brutal and unregulated passion. If Russia had acted upon Tolstoi's philosophy, all its people would long ago have disappeared from the face of the earth, and the country would now be occupied by wandering tribes of Tartar barbarians. The Armenian massacres are simply illustrations on a small scale of what would take place on the very largest scale if Tolstoi's principles became universal among civilized people. It is not necessary to point out that the teaching which would produce such a condition of things is fundamentally immoral.
Again, peace may come only through war. There are men in our country who seemingly forget that
Wars between civilized communities are very dreadful, and as nations grow more and more civilized we have every reason, not merely to hope, but to believe that they will grow rarer and rarer. Even with civilized peoples, as was shown by our own experience in 1861, it may be necessary at last to draw the sword rather than to submit to wrong-doing. Scant attention is paid to the weakling or the coward who babbles of peace; but due heed is given to the strong man with sword girt on thigh who preaches peace, not from ignoble motives, not from fear or distrust of his own powers, but from a deep sense of moral obligation.
The growth of peacefulness between nations, however, has been confined strictly to those that are civilized. It can only come when both parties to a possible quarrel feel the same spirit. With a barbarous nation peace is the exceptional condition. On the border between civilization and barbarism war is generally normal because it must be under the conditions of barbarism. Whether the barbarian be the Red Indian on the frontier of the United States, the Afghan on the border of British India, or the Turkoman who confronts the Siberian Cossack, the result is the same. In the long run civilized man finds he can keep the peace only by subduing his barbarian neighbor; for the barbarian will yield only to force, save in instances so exceptional that they may be disregarded. Back of the force must come fair dealing, if the peace is to be permanent. But without force fair dealing usually amounts to nothing. In our history we have had more trouble from the Indian tribes whom we pampered and petted than from those we wronged; and this has been true in Siberia, Hindustan, and Africa.
Every expansion of civilization makes for peace. In other words, every expansion of a great civilized power means a victory for law, order, and righteousness. This has been the case in every instance of expansion during the present century, whether the expanding power were France or England, Russia or America. In every instance the expansion has been of benefit, not so much to the power nominally benefited, as to the whole world. In every instance the result proved that the expanding power was doing a duty to civilization far greater and more important than could have been done by any stationary power.
Take the case of France and Algiers. During the early decades of the present century piracy of the most dreadful description was rife on the Mediterranean, and thousands of civilized men were yearly dragged into slavery by the Moorish pirates. A degrading peace was purchased by the civilized powers by the payment of tribute. Our own country was one among the tributary nations which thus paid blood-money to the Moslem bandits of the sea. We fought occasional battles with them; and so, on a larger scale, did the English. But peace did not follow, because the country was not occupied. Our last payment was made in 1830, and the reason it was the last was because in that year the French conquest of Algiers began. Foolish sentimentalists, like those who wrote little poems in favor of the Mahdists against the English, and who now write little essays in favor of Aguinaldo against the Americans, celebrated the Algerian freebooters as heroes who were striving for liberty against the invading French. But the French continued to do their work; France expanded over Algiers, and the result was that piracy on the Mediterranean came to an end, and Algiers has thriven as never before in its history.
The rule of law and of order has succeeded to the rule of barbarous and bloody violence. Until the great civilized nations stepped in there was no chance for anything but such bloody violence.
So it has been in the history of our own country. Of course our whole national history has been one of expansion. Under Washington and Adams we expanded westward to the Mississippi; under Jefferson we expanded across the continent to the mouth of the Columbia; under Monroe we expanded into Florida; and then into Texas and California; and finally, largely through the instrumentality of Seward, into Alaska; while under every administration the process of expansion in the great plains and the Rockies has continued with growing rapidity.
While we had a frontier the chief feature of frontier life was the endless war between the settlers and the red men. Sometimes the immediate occasion for the war was to be found in the conduct of the whites and sometimes in that of the reds, but the ultimate cause was simply that we were in contact with a country held by savages or half-savages. Where we abut on Canada there is no danger of war, nor is there any danger where we abut on the well-settled regions of Mexico. But elsewhere war had to continue until we expanded over the country. Then it was succeeded at once by a peace which has remained unbroken to the present day. In North America, as elsewhere throughout the entire world, the expansion of a civilized nation has invariably meant the growth of the area in which peace is normal throughout the world.
Fundamentally the cause of expansion is the cause of peace.
With civilized powers there is but little danger of our getting into war.
Nations that expand and nations that do not expand may both ultimately go down, but the one leaves heirs and a glorious memory, and the other leaves neither. The Roman expanded, and he has left a memory which has profoundly influenced the history of mankind, and he has further left as the heirs of his body, and, above all, of his tongue and culture, the so-called Latin peoples of Europe and America. Similarly to-day it is the great expanding peoples which bequeath to future ages the great memories and material results of their achievements, and the nations which shall have sprung from their loins, England standing as the archetype and best exemplar of all such mighty nations. But the peoples that do not expand leave, and can leave, nothing behind them.
It is only the warlike power of a civilized people that can give peace to the world.
The Arab wrecked the civilization of the Mediterranean coasts, the Turk wrecked the civilization of southeastern Europe, and the Tatar desolated from China to Russia and to Persia, setting back the progress of the world for centuries, solely because the civilized nations opposed to them had lost the great fighting qualities, and, in becoming overpeaceful, had lost the power of keeping peace with a strong hand.
Their passing away marked the beginning of a period of chaotic barbarian warfare. Those whose memories are not so short as to have forgotten the defeat of the Greeks by the Turks, of the Italians by the Abyssinians, and the feeble campaigns waged by Spain against feeble Morocco, must realize that at the present moment the Mediterranean coasts would be overrun either by the Turks or by the Sudan Mahdists if these warlike barbarians had only to fear those southern European powers which have lost the fighting edge.
Such a barbarian conquest would mean endless war; and the fact that nowadays the reverse takes place, and that the barbarians recede or are conquered, with the attendant fact that peace follows their retrogression or conquest, is due solely to the power of the mighty civilized races which have not lost the fighting instinct, and which by their expansion are gradually bringing peace into the red wastes where the barbarian peoples of the world hold sway.
By Theodore 'Teddy' Roosevelt
PUBLISHED IN THE "INDEPENDENT," DECEMBER 21, 1899
IT was the gentlest of our poets who wrote:
"Be bolde! Be bolde! and everywhere, Be bolde";
Be not too bold! Yet better the excess
Than the defect; better the more than less.
Longfellow's love of peace was profound; but he was a man, and a wise man, and he knew that cowardice does not promote peace, and that even the great evil of war may be a less evil than cringing to iniquity.
Captain Mahan, than whom there is not in the country a man whom we can more appropriately designate by the fine and high phrase, "a Christian gentleman," and who is incapable of advocating wrong-doing of any kind, national or individual, gives utterance to the feeling of the great majority of manly and thoughtful men when he denounces the great danger of indiscriminate advocacy of peace at any price, because "it may lead men to tamper with iniquity, to compromise with unrighteousness, soothing their conscience with the belief that war is so entirely wrong that beside it no other tolerated evil is wrong. Witness Armenia and witness Crete. War has been avoided; but what of the national consciences that beheld such iniquity and withheld the hand?"
Peace is a great good; and doubly harmful, therefore, is the attitude of those who advocate it in terms that would make it synonymous with selfish and cowardly shrinking from warring against the existence of evil. The wisest and most far-seeing champions of peace will ever remember that, in the first place, to be good it must be righteous, for unrighteous and cowardly peace may be worse than any war; and, in the second place, that it can often be obtained only at the cost of war. Let me take two illustrations:
The great blot upon European international morality in the closing decade of this century has been not a war, but the infamous peace kept by the joint action of the great powers, while Turkey inflicted the last horrors of butchery, torture, and outrage upon the men, women, and children of despairing Armenia. War was avoided; peace was kept; but what a peace! Infinitely greater human misery was inflicted during this peace than in the late wars of Germany with France, of Russia with Turkey; and this misery fell, not on armed men, but upon defenseless women and children, upon the gray-beard and the stripling no less than upon the head of the family; and it came, not in the mere form of death or imprisonment, but of tortures upon men, and, above all, upon women, too horrible to relate—tortures of which it is too terrible even to think. Moreover, no good resulted from the bloodshed and misery.
Unjust war is a terrible sin. It does not nowadays in the aggregate cause anything like the misery that is caused in the aggregate by unjust dealing toward one's neighbors in the commercial and social world; and to condemn all war is just as logical as to condemn all business and all social relations, as to condemn love and marriage because of the frightful misery caused by brutal and unregulated passion. If Russia had acted upon Tolstoi's philosophy, all its people would long ago have disappeared from the face of the earth, and the country would now be occupied by wandering tribes of Tartar barbarians. The Armenian massacres are simply illustrations on a small scale of what would take place on the very largest scale if Tolstoi's principles became universal among civilized people. It is not necessary to point out that the teaching which would produce such a condition of things is fundamentally immoral.
Again, peace may come only through war. There are men in our country who seemingly forget that
Wars between civilized communities are very dreadful, and as nations grow more and more civilized we have every reason, not merely to hope, but to believe that they will grow rarer and rarer. Even with civilized peoples, as was shown by our own experience in 1861, it may be necessary at last to draw the sword rather than to submit to wrong-doing. Scant attention is paid to the weakling or the coward who babbles of peace; but due heed is given to the strong man with sword girt on thigh who preaches peace, not from ignoble motives, not from fear or distrust of his own powers, but from a deep sense of moral obligation.
The growth of peacefulness between nations, however, has been confined strictly to those that are civilized. It can only come when both parties to a possible quarrel feel the same spirit. With a barbarous nation peace is the exceptional condition. On the border between civilization and barbarism war is generally normal because it must be under the conditions of barbarism. Whether the barbarian be the Red Indian on the frontier of the United States, the Afghan on the border of British India, or the Turkoman who confronts the Siberian Cossack, the result is the same. In the long run civilized man finds he can keep the peace only by subduing his barbarian neighbor; for the barbarian will yield only to force, save in instances so exceptional that they may be disregarded. Back of the force must come fair dealing, if the peace is to be permanent. But without force fair dealing usually amounts to nothing. In our history we have had more trouble from the Indian tribes whom we pampered and petted than from those we wronged; and this has been true in Siberia, Hindustan, and Africa.
Every expansion of civilization makes for peace. In other words, every expansion of a great civilized power means a victory for law, order, and righteousness. This has been the case in every instance of expansion during the present century, whether the expanding power were France or England, Russia or America. In every instance the expansion has been of benefit, not so much to the power nominally benefited, as to the whole world. In every instance the result proved that the expanding power was doing a duty to civilization far greater and more important than could have been done by any stationary power.
Take the case of France and Algiers. During the early decades of the present century piracy of the most dreadful description was rife on the Mediterranean, and thousands of civilized men were yearly dragged into slavery by the Moorish pirates. A degrading peace was purchased by the civilized powers by the payment of tribute. Our own country was one among the tributary nations which thus paid blood-money to the Moslem bandits of the sea. We fought occasional battles with them; and so, on a larger scale, did the English. But peace did not follow, because the country was not occupied. Our last payment was made in 1830, and the reason it was the last was because in that year the French conquest of Algiers began. Foolish sentimentalists, like those who wrote little poems in favor of the Mahdists against the English, and who now write little essays in favor of Aguinaldo against the Americans, celebrated the Algerian freebooters as heroes who were striving for liberty against the invading French. But the French continued to do their work; France expanded over Algiers, and the result was that piracy on the Mediterranean came to an end, and Algiers has thriven as never before in its history.
The rule of law and of order has succeeded to the rule of barbarous and bloody violence. Until the great civilized nations stepped in there was no chance for anything but such bloody violence.
So it has been in the history of our own country. Of course our whole national history has been one of expansion. Under Washington and Adams we expanded westward to the Mississippi; under Jefferson we expanded across the continent to the mouth of the Columbia; under Monroe we expanded into Florida; and then into Texas and California; and finally, largely through the instrumentality of Seward, into Alaska; while under every administration the process of expansion in the great plains and the Rockies has continued with growing rapidity.
While we had a frontier the chief feature of frontier life was the endless war between the settlers and the red men. Sometimes the immediate occasion for the war was to be found in the conduct of the whites and sometimes in that of the reds, but the ultimate cause was simply that we were in contact with a country held by savages or half-savages. Where we abut on Canada there is no danger of war, nor is there any danger where we abut on the well-settled regions of Mexico. But elsewhere war had to continue until we expanded over the country. Then it was succeeded at once by a peace which has remained unbroken to the present day. In North America, as elsewhere throughout the entire world, the expansion of a civilized nation has invariably meant the growth of the area in which peace is normal throughout the world.
Fundamentally the cause of expansion is the cause of peace.
With civilized powers there is but little danger of our getting into war.
Nations that expand and nations that do not expand may both ultimately go down, but the one leaves heirs and a glorious memory, and the other leaves neither. The Roman expanded, and he has left a memory which has profoundly influenced the history of mankind, and he has further left as the heirs of his body, and, above all, of his tongue and culture, the so-called Latin peoples of Europe and America. Similarly to-day it is the great expanding peoples which bequeath to future ages the great memories and material results of their achievements, and the nations which shall have sprung from their loins, England standing as the archetype and best exemplar of all such mighty nations. But the peoples that do not expand leave, and can leave, nothing behind them.
It is only the warlike power of a civilized people that can give peace to the world.
The Arab wrecked the civilization of the Mediterranean coasts, the Turk wrecked the civilization of southeastern Europe, and the Tatar desolated from China to Russia and to Persia, setting back the progress of the world for centuries, solely because the civilized nations opposed to them had lost the great fighting qualities, and, in becoming overpeaceful, had lost the power of keeping peace with a strong hand.
Their passing away marked the beginning of a period of chaotic barbarian warfare. Those whose memories are not so short as to have forgotten the defeat of the Greeks by the Turks, of the Italians by the Abyssinians, and the feeble campaigns waged by Spain against feeble Morocco, must realize that at the present moment the Mediterranean coasts would be overrun either by the Turks or by the Sudan Mahdists if these warlike barbarians had only to fear those southern European powers which have lost the fighting edge.
Such a barbarian conquest would mean endless war; and the fact that nowadays the reverse takes place, and that the barbarians recede or are conquered, with the attendant fact that peace follows their retrogression or conquest, is due solely to the power of the mighty civilized races which have not lost the fighting instinct, and which by their expansion are gradually bringing peace into the red wastes where the barbarian peoples of the world hold sway.
-
algorhythm
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Tennessee, USA
- Contact:
That is what I thought, lifechanger. So, allow me to quote myself from earlier.
Ya done me proud!
links to outside text only please? You seem to be quite good at quoting others at length, and a bit short on independent thought and writing. We could all flood this thread with long text from our others that share our perspective. But that isn't dialogue . . .
algorhythm wrote:
I just love the conservative understanding of what is going on - there is genuine EVIL in the Third World and we must ERADICATE IT. Such gross oversimplification.
Ya done me proud!
links to outside text only please? You seem to be quite good at quoting others at length, and a bit short on independent thought and writing. We could all flood this thread with long text from our others that share our perspective. But that isn't dialogue . . .
-
lifechanger
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
Gee whiz, youngster...do you even know who I quoted? One Hundred Three years ago, but pretty relevant to my mind...
But then...you hail from a state that has been suffering from deep, deep "eclipse" for years. Or...are you really descendent from the Dasshole clan??
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lifechanger on 2002-09-29 13:02 ]</font>
But then...you hail from a state that has been suffering from deep, deep "eclipse" for years. Or...are you really descendent from the Dasshole clan??
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lifechanger on 2002-09-29 13:02 ]</font>
When someone tries to kill your daddy it is natural that you would want to try and kill him. It's not what I would do. I think Bush ought to listen to Jesus and turn the other cheek. I guess Bush can talk the talk but not walk the walk. Iraq is nothing but a big scapegoat. Bush lost the election and he is still bitter that more than half the americans did not vote for him. I figure roughly half of all americans are complete and total idiots. It is no wonder we are going to war and not listening to our friends in the EU. I would expect anyone who pronounces Iraq as "I-Rack" to be a moron as I would someone who insists on saying "NU-Q-Lar" rather than nuclear. It is a very scary situtation to have the richest country run by rednecks and hicks who don't even have a command of the english language. Of course people from the wild west would love guns. Naturally since they can no longer kill native americans they have to find some other people to kill. It's all about dominating other people and nations. I also think the southerners have a chip on their shoulder about losing the civil war and having slavery made illegal.
-
lifechanger
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
It's all about the resurgence of Barbarians who would hold the free people of the world hostage to their barbaric minds....
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!
Gerard Chaliand, a respected specialist on strategy and a consultant to the French government, says he’s convinced that the United States has taken the decision to attack Iraq, that it will stage its attack “much earlier” than the Feb. 15, 2003, date it’s heretofore evoked, and that the US attack will most probably take place following the end of the month Ramadan which this year ends around Dec. 4. “That way,” he says, “the war will probably be over by the end of the year.”
I still think "hot times over Bagdad will be 3 AM, on the seventh. Any money takers here?
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!
Gerard Chaliand, a respected specialist on strategy and a consultant to the French government, says he’s convinced that the United States has taken the decision to attack Iraq, that it will stage its attack “much earlier” than the Feb. 15, 2003, date it’s heretofore evoked, and that the US attack will most probably take place following the end of the month Ramadan which this year ends around Dec. 4. “That way,” he says, “the war will probably be over by the end of the year.”
I still think "hot times over Bagdad will be 3 AM, on the seventh. Any money takers here?
-
lifechanger
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
I've been to Beruit and Mogodishu...why would I wanna push my luck. Wanna stay healthy till my 69th birthday, in February.
You guys remind me of the pecussion "effects" on Trio Mocoto's "Auas De Marco"...on the Album "Samba Rock". I'm for Bossa Nova...not Bossa Rova...I stay in Chi-town where it's a simple life, altho we have double Bagdad's population, (puts us at about 10 Million.... gettin' ready for war, ready or not!
You guys remind me of the pecussion "effects" on Trio Mocoto's "Auas De Marco"...on the Album "Samba Rock". I'm for Bossa Nova...not Bossa Rova...I stay in Chi-town where it's a simple life, altho we have double Bagdad's population, (puts us at about 10 Million.... gettin' ready for war, ready or not!
-
ernest@303.nu
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:00 pm
- Contact:
they now got the I-rack at on sale at http://www.marathoncomputer.com/irackfaq.html
Anyone tried it with SFP?
Anyone tried it with SFP?
-
algorhythm
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Tennessee, USA
- Contact:
Um, yeah, I know who wrote the speech you posted, but you did a lot more than quote someone . . . And your right, pretty relevant. It IS a shame that people still think that way, isn't it?On 2002-09-29 13:00, lifechanger wrote:
Gee whiz, youngster...do you even know who I quoted? One Hundred Three years ago, but pretty relevant to my mind...
On 2002-09-29 13:26, lifechanger wrote:
It's all about the resurgence of Barbarians who would hold the free people of the world hostage to their barbaric minds....
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!
.............................................
I still think "hot times over Bagdad will be 3 AM, on the seventh. Any money takers here?
-
lifechanger
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
ernest@303.nu
This is a discussion about Iraq....not I-Mac
I know everything has some modicum of connection, but aren't you takin' this comparison too far?
iRack · Imagine your iMac as a wafer-thin CPU; a 233–333 MHz G3 processor, hard drive and CD-ROM drive, all in a single unit of rack space. That's what you get when you put your iMac inside our iRack enclosure. Compatible with all rev A–D iMacs. (1U)
Actually, I wouldn't mind one of those thangs, if you'd contribute it too an ol' frustrated Macophile:
Well...speaking of 'puters...I have a big fat Athlon for music...and, a itty bitty Powerbook 140, to write my poetry in the local Japanese Gardens...gosh, would I love one or two or three of those I-MAC-IRACK-OneRacks!!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lifechanger on 2002-09-29 17:32 ]</font>
This is a discussion about Iraq....not I-Mac
I know everything has some modicum of connection, but aren't you takin' this comparison too far?
iRack · Imagine your iMac as a wafer-thin CPU; a 233–333 MHz G3 processor, hard drive and CD-ROM drive, all in a single unit of rack space. That's what you get when you put your iMac inside our iRack enclosure. Compatible with all rev A–D iMacs. (1U)
Actually, I wouldn't mind one of those thangs, if you'd contribute it too an ol' frustrated Macophile:
Well...speaking of 'puters...I have a big fat Athlon for music...and, a itty bitty Powerbook 140, to write my poetry in the local Japanese Gardens...gosh, would I love one or two or three of those I-MAC-IRACK-OneRacks!!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lifechanger on 2002-09-29 17:32 ]</font>
-
ernest@303.nu
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:00 pm
- Contact:
)
ernest@303.nu:
It's interesting to note that Iraq borders a country named after a song by "A Flock of Seagulls".
It's interesting to note that Iraq borders a country named after a song by "A Flock of Seagulls".
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
Algorithm, Spirit, Eliam, Retro, Alfonso, thank you indeed for your good desires friends…
Don’t worry, I’m not as down as that. I do feel very sad, yes, and can’t avoid it, true, nevertheless I’m not giving up or something like that, I’m just observing something which reveals itself as being awfully obvious to my eyes, I’m not guessing about the future, waiting for something bad to happen or in a bad mood, this is already here! So I’m not feeling sort of a forewarning, I have been watching this process to become. Let say it’s like seen a tree falling after being cut, it’s not a negative perspective about life, it’s the actuality that the tree is falling down and seen it you say: “the tree is falling down, it makes me to feel sad because is dying”.
I agree on doing something, certainly! I do my part working with people for free with a Charity I belong to. I’ve been doing it for 13 years now, and I’ll never stop it till dying. That is way I’m moving from country to country, cos I like doing it apart of my music. I still believe in human beings!
To my understanding, there are too many confusing theories and versions of what is going on and the reasons for it in these writings and quotes. I don’t think anybody of us here can really tell what is going on, unless you are a very high member of the biggest countries of the world, cos there are, as far as I can see, two politics: one is the marketing politics, the one everybody talks about, the one you are pushed in intentionally, the one open to the masses to pull the attention to whatever else but the actuality. And there is the second one, hidden, absolutely unknown, where secrecy is the base line. Of course, I appreciate the intelligence of many of you exposing here your ideas – particularly when I myself am an ignorant about politics – I think we all need to reflect and try to understand what is going on, of course, but the obvious it’s not the real, least of all when talking about politics! Today, politics is for me “THE ART OF THE HIDDEN”.
All I can say is that observation is the only real medium to watch what is going on and that direct observation without prejudices of any kind, gives you a much objective view than any newspaper or TV news, or even the very well learned theorist raised at the best university of the world. I know that every political force is a hidden force with a hidden agenda, that every Prime Minister is nothing but a glove-puppet of these very forces which are the hands moving them; that there is no religion or philosophy to justify war, and if such philosophy or religion exist, it would be better to be without!
I can imagine with ease whole regions of our planet devastated and covered by rubble… I can imagine with ease soldiers raping innocent women here and there AGAIN… children being alone, crying, like it has always been since I was born… I can imagine with ease the mass forgetting its philosophy and religious principles to become a bloodthirsty beast of destruction!
This is the problem as I understand it, the problem is not outside human being, but inside himself! INSIDE! And as Retro said, EGO is the real problem. I have observed it and EGO really is the problem, the germ of all decadence and destruction is within. It doesn’t matter which is your colour or philosophy, or religion, or way of thinking: as long as you have violence, destruction and war within yourself! Only those who are capable of destroying “violence” “war” and “destruction” within themselves can be part of a world without this calamities, no theory is enough to stop the war to start, but better human beings…
Don’t worry, I’m not as down as that. I do feel very sad, yes, and can’t avoid it, true, nevertheless I’m not giving up or something like that, I’m just observing something which reveals itself as being awfully obvious to my eyes, I’m not guessing about the future, waiting for something bad to happen or in a bad mood, this is already here! So I’m not feeling sort of a forewarning, I have been watching this process to become. Let say it’s like seen a tree falling after being cut, it’s not a negative perspective about life, it’s the actuality that the tree is falling down and seen it you say: “the tree is falling down, it makes me to feel sad because is dying”.
I agree on doing something, certainly! I do my part working with people for free with a Charity I belong to. I’ve been doing it for 13 years now, and I’ll never stop it till dying. That is way I’m moving from country to country, cos I like doing it apart of my music. I still believe in human beings!
To my understanding, there are too many confusing theories and versions of what is going on and the reasons for it in these writings and quotes. I don’t think anybody of us here can really tell what is going on, unless you are a very high member of the biggest countries of the world, cos there are, as far as I can see, two politics: one is the marketing politics, the one everybody talks about, the one you are pushed in intentionally, the one open to the masses to pull the attention to whatever else but the actuality. And there is the second one, hidden, absolutely unknown, where secrecy is the base line. Of course, I appreciate the intelligence of many of you exposing here your ideas – particularly when I myself am an ignorant about politics – I think we all need to reflect and try to understand what is going on, of course, but the obvious it’s not the real, least of all when talking about politics! Today, politics is for me “THE ART OF THE HIDDEN”.
All I can say is that observation is the only real medium to watch what is going on and that direct observation without prejudices of any kind, gives you a much objective view than any newspaper or TV news, or even the very well learned theorist raised at the best university of the world. I know that every political force is a hidden force with a hidden agenda, that every Prime Minister is nothing but a glove-puppet of these very forces which are the hands moving them; that there is no religion or philosophy to justify war, and if such philosophy or religion exist, it would be better to be without!
I can imagine with ease whole regions of our planet devastated and covered by rubble… I can imagine with ease soldiers raping innocent women here and there AGAIN… children being alone, crying, like it has always been since I was born… I can imagine with ease the mass forgetting its philosophy and religious principles to become a bloodthirsty beast of destruction!
This is the problem as I understand it, the problem is not outside human being, but inside himself! INSIDE! And as Retro said, EGO is the real problem. I have observed it and EGO really is the problem, the germ of all decadence and destruction is within. It doesn’t matter which is your colour or philosophy, or religion, or way of thinking: as long as you have violence, destruction and war within yourself! Only those who are capable of destroying “violence” “war” and “destruction” within themselves can be part of a world without this calamities, no theory is enough to stop the war to start, but better human beings…
-
lifechanger
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
Hey, homie boy...what if I done blew 3,000 of yo peeps to bits!!!...where you comin' from...you want peace...join the peace-meal corp!! Guess yo already tryin' to lick ass!
If yo pissed off at the cats, like Kopie...like BJ Clinton...like other fairies that wann give peace a chance...those f'in Barbarians you luv so much....well hear this...
"Bring it on if ya wanna, I stay ready to ride
I'm goin out like a soldier, I ain't scared to die
Secure the clips in the chopper, cock the firing pin
Grit your teeth, hold your nuts and let the war begin
Squeeze the trigger, buck em all, somebody gots to fall
I'm goin it, comin out wit it or aint comin out at all
You better kill me, do me in, boy put me to rest
Cause if you don't that homie you stole, we about that mess!"
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lifechanger on 2002-09-29 20:15 ]</font>
If yo pissed off at the cats, like Kopie...like BJ Clinton...like other fairies that wann give peace a chance...those f'in Barbarians you luv so much....well hear this...
"Bring it on if ya wanna, I stay ready to ride
I'm goin out like a soldier, I ain't scared to die
Secure the clips in the chopper, cock the firing pin
Grit your teeth, hold your nuts and let the war begin
Squeeze the trigger, buck em all, somebody gots to fall
I'm goin it, comin out wit it or aint comin out at all
You better kill me, do me in, boy put me to rest
Cause if you don't that homie you stole, we about that mess!"
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lifechanger on 2002-09-29 20:15 ]</font>
Impressive, lifechanger. I guess you know many of these quotes and themes by head. What you wrote is sick, and illegal as per law on racism where I'm from.
I tend do judge people by what their actions, not by nationality.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: at0mic on 2002-09-29 21:09 ]</font>
I tend do judge people by what their actions, not by nationality.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: at0mic on 2002-09-29 21:09 ]</font>