Subject:
|
Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 29 May 2005 17:29:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1950 times
|
| |
|
|
| |
1. Get rid of Bush.
His handling of this entire debacle has been nightmarishly inept and
short-sighted. His removal would go a long way toward demonstrating that we
| |
have recognized his many errors and are willing to pursue a course different
from the madness he initiated.
|
|
While almost half of the American population agrees with you, a little more than
half felt otherwise. And, here soon, someone else will have to handle this mess.
And, you are correct, this is a mess. What would really go far in cleaning it up
is for various violent, militant and often power hungry interests, whether true
terrorists or religious fanatics, to stop putting explosives into cars and
driving them into public places to blow people all to smithereens. Once these
fanatics have stopped with the killing, they can step up to the democratic
podium that America keeps trying to offer them and tell America, in a democratic
way, what it can go do with itself. Then, in a democratic way, vote to
re-establish Iraq into being the dictatorship, theocracy, oligarchy, or whatever
it is that they want so badly enough to kill people for. Bush is a leader who is
trying to lead. From what he believed as a leader and the information that was
acquired, he took the actions that he believed right. It seems that he realizes
that he made a mistake and is now doing what he can, according to his beliefs
and his abilities, to further lead this whole situation to resolution. However,
he is being fought against on all sides, which means that he is not really
leading anyone. He is a leader with no followers. He governs a nation split with
people who curse him and demand their own myriad ideas to be put into action,
and with people who hope that he will prove their faith in him by somehow
accomplishing what he promised to get done. His actions in trying to generate a
global community have been much akin to stomping on toes, a lot more patience
and indulgance would have gone a lot further toward engendering a community, but
he believed that quick and decisive action was required.
| |
2. Apologize for our mistakes to date.
Should be self-evident, but it hasn’t happened so far.
|
Who is “our”? There are mistakes on all sides. SH made mistakes, Osama made
mistakes, the U.S. made mistakes, The Dems and Reps made mistakes. The first
mistake I think that needs to be apologized for is not following the Monroe
Doctrine and keeping out of the affairs of other countries. Remember, SH was put
into power by the U.S. oh so many years ago.
| |
3. State our mission goals clearly.
Why did we start this war? All of the reasons given to date have been shown
| |
to be false, so it looks more and more like our intent is just to kill as
many Muslims as we can. If we have another objective in mind, we should
declare it concretely, and we should articulate a means by which we may
|
objectively >assess our success or failure. An exit strategy would also be
helpful, as >would a rough timeframe so that it does not appear to be a
deliberately >eternal war.
|
Now there are some more of those mistakes. But, at the time that everyone was
making the decisions that led to these mistakes, very very few thought that they
were mistaken in making these decisions. America cried out for blood and on
everyone’s lips were the words, We shall never forget (forgive). Kind of hard to
think logically when everyone is all fired up like that. As for timeframe, those
are hard to stick to when only one side of a multi-faceted issue wants to stick
to a timeframe. Right now, there are a lot of mixed emotions in Iraq -- some
people are afraid that when the U.S. pulls out, the fanatics who are busy right
now blowing people up will rise up and militarily take power and establish a new
regime. Others want the U.S. out and are confident that the above scenario will
not happen. And still yet others are fighting hard every day to get the U.S. out
so that they can rise up and militarily take power before someone else does.
Then there’s the U.S. who wants to be sure that when they leave, someone is not
going to rise up and militarily begin a new regime. It’s quite a mixed bag.
By the way, many of the muslims, and arabic christians, that I have talked to
don’t really see the madness as coming from the U.S. -- yes, they do not favor
what the U.S. has done, but the reason why they are here in the U.S. and working
hard to be successful citizens is because they do not have to live in fear from
radical fanatics and unstable politics (as well as the rich opportunities that
are afforded them here in the U.S.). Although, I have heard many arabic and
coptic christians say that they are proud to have a leader who is a christian
and that is the primary reason why they voted for Bush in the last election.
| |
4. Eliminate all “crusade” overtones.
That means Boykin and his ilk must be formally censured. That means that
everyone who refers to “our God” or “their God” in the context of this >stupid
war must be formally censured. It means that any serviceman or woman >who
desecrates a Quran must be formally censured. It means that every public
official involved in the conflict must act and speak with courtesy and
consideration of the differences at play here. Our blindness makes our
| |
national egocentrism indistinguishable from deliberate hostility toward other
cultures.
|
|
That’s great for those who work for the state (seperation of church and state),
but as I came close to saying, there are many people in these other cultures who
strongly relate all of this with their religious and spiritual beliefs. (As do,
ironically, many many people here in the U.S. I can name at least three large
Baptist churches that relatives of mine attend who are espousing this war as the
beginning of a holy war against Islam. The church members agree.) Some do so
fanatically and put explosives where they should not go, and some pack up their
bags and come to America where they can be free in their strongly religious
influenced ideas and beliefs. Many Coptic and arabic christians are here to
escape the Islamic world. Their differences were given no consideration before
now. Those other nations are as diverse as the U.S. is; they have people who are
very egocentric and offer no cultural understanding, and they have people who
are very peaceful and considerate. It is, unfortunately, the arrogant who are
the loudest on both sides.
| |
5. Act with humility.
It’s bad enough that we lied to get into this war. Dubya’s subsequent
| |
arrogance (and that of his subordinates) has made it impossible to hold the
|
so-called “Coalition” together, and it certainly hasn’t made us any new
friends in the aftermath of the invasion.
|
Right on! Patience, humility, forgiveness (for the whole 9/11 thing), compassion
-- its about time we started espousing these virtues, as Christian as they may
be, to forge a true and philanthropic global community.
| |
6. Remove corporate profit as an incentive in the theater.
In a true Free market this wouldn’t be a problem, but we’re nowhere near >that
market, and government-santioned corporate corruption, waste, and theft are
rampant. Since this was an unprovoked (and, some argue, an illegal war), the
subsequent profiteering only makes the war seem more obviously in the >service
of corporate greed. Corporate involvement, if any, should be 100% transparent
| |
and 100% accountable. A for-profit war is nothing but corporate-run mass
|
murder.
|
You know why we are not in a true free market system? Because the masses do not
have the foresight to see that a true free market system all balances itself
out. They only see the short term and cry out, “That’s not fair!” like some
simpering child. So, the government has to step in and make things fair and
equitable. It all spirals down hill from there.
| |
7. Allow broader access to reconstruction contracts.
Though France and Germany opposed our initiation of the war, they shouldn’t
| |
be excluded from the bidding process if they have something to offer.
Narrowing the field to only those who were cajoled into joining our war makes
|
it seem >that the war was intended for (generally American) corporate profit.
|
Sure, if their civilian population is willing to run the risk of kidnapping and
beheading. A lot of civilian reconstruction people from America and related
countries have lost their lives in Iraq. I guess that’s apart of the profit/risk
dynamic of economics.
| |
8. Secure the assistance of Arab nations.
This requires more diplomacy than we have, I know. Arab nations have been
largely excluded from the shaping and rebuilding of post-war Iraq, and our
continued failure to appreciate the extant cultural differences makes their
exclusion all the more costly and apparent. Additionally, the inclusion of
| |
Arab nations would further demonstrate that this is not a war to put the
|
middle >east under US rule.
|
That’s a great idea, however, those other Arab nations are still run under power
regimes much like SH’s regime. This whole democracy thing has made them nervous.
They would benefit much more and feel more comfortable if Iraq was more like
them. For that, it would require America to give up its notion of Democracy in
Iraq, and truly allow the Islamic nations to establish a theocratic/oligarchal
regime. That’s why their opinion has not been sought out too much to date. At
least America is keeping Isreal out of this too.
| |
9. Hand over the reins.
Despite providing the overwhelming majority of military forces, we are
| |
clearly unable to manage the disaster we have wrought. If we truly are part
|
of a Coalition rather than an Empire (with a few lackey nations), we should be
willing to submit to the authority of another power. No other nation would
command US forces, but the US would not be in charge of the whole quagmire.
|
No matter who we hand the reins over to, they will direct it in the direction
that they wish it to go. So, do we play the lesser of evils and see who would be
best to hand the reins over? See who would do the least amount of damage to this
house of cards?
| |
10. Let them choose the government that they want.
Dubya and co. endlessly prattle that “Freedom is on the March” and “We’re
| |
sowing the seeds of Democracy.” That’s all crappy sloganeering. If we really
respect the freedom that we pretend to have given these people, we should
|
support no candidate, we should offer no rules of our own, and we should
clearly not >object if the resultant government is entirely contrary to our
wishes. Otherwise >we are clearly showing our disdain for freedom and for
another nation’s >sovereignty.
|
Would you advocate the people of Iraq choosing an Islamic holy man to be their
leader? Many people in Iraq hold their religious beliefs close and dear to their
hearts. Some with anger, some with love. The American government does not wish a
theocracy. In which case, this is something akin to a crusade. Only, not of
Christians against Islam, but of non-religion against Islam. If the people of
Iraq do not want the seperation of church and state, then by promoting that and
Democracy, the U.S. is in a way crusading against Islam.
| |
11. Do something about Israel.
No, Israel’s not 100% wrong in all things, and yes, Palestinians are not
| |
without blood on their hands, either. But if we had to pick one thing (other
|
than cultural imperialism (as opposed to militaristic imperialism)) that
enflames Arab rage against the US, it’s our unwavering support of Israel no
matter >how many children they murder or Palestinian families they evict or
walls they build. If we’d only step up and say that Israel has sometimes acted
inappropriately and without matched provocation, we’d increase our
| |
credibility markedly. And we should require them to return our nukes, too.
|
|
Isreal will soon have problems of its own to contend with. No bully/loudmouth
can go about swaggering like that before those around him decide that it is time
to do something about it. If it weren’t for big brother (U.S.), then Isreal
would have been dealt a dose of humility already.
By the way, which Arab rage? the Arab christians, the Arab muslims, the peaceful
Arab muslims, the loud arrogant Arab muslims, who? Arab christians do not like
proudful Isreal zionism as much as American fundamental christians do, but their
beliefs keep them from being enraged because they have studied the Bible and
believe things about Isreal that I am not going to go into here.
I think everyone has to admit, handing out weapons is another one of those
mistakes that America needs to apologize for.
-Avery
P.S. Whether we like it or not, the world runs on belief. Right now, the world
runs on the beliefs of those whose beliefs are not the same as ours and who are
doing things that we do not like. Some day, when the majority changes, maybe
then the world will run on the beliefs that we find more agreeable.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
| Someone expressed frank misgivings about the formatting of this post: (URL) can I say? The FTX shows up just fine on my browser. But because I am a kind and generous soul, I am reposting in plain text -----repost begins here----- Here are a few (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
