|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:00 pm Post subject: On Katrina : Galloway Won't Go Away |
 |
|
From The Capitol Times, Web Edition :
"The scenes from the stricken city almost defy belief. Many, many thousands of people left to die in what is the richest, most powerful country on Earth. This obscenity is as far from a natural disaster as George Bush and the U.S. elite are from the suffering masses of New Orleans. The images of Bush luxuriating at his ranch and of his secretary of state shopping for $7,000 shoes while disaster swamped the U.S. Gulf Coast will haunt this administration.
"In the most terrible way imaginable they show to the whole world that it is not only the lives of people in Baghdad, Fallujah and Palestine that Bush holds cheap. It is also his own citizens - the black and poor people left behind with no food, water or shelter. This is not simply manslaughter through incompetence, though the White House's incompetence abounds. It is murder - for Bush was warned four years ago of the threat to New Orleans, as surely as he was warned of the disaster that would come of his war on Iraq. ...
"His is the America of Halliburton, the M-16 rifle, the cluster bomb, the gated communities of the rich and of the billionaires he grew up with in Texas. There is another America. It is the land of the poor of Louisiana, it is the land of the young men and women economically conscripted into the military. It is the land of the glorious multiethnic mix that was New Orleans, it is the land of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and of great struggles for justice." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Galloway is a radical. And he is a friend of dictators. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Galloway is a radical. And he is a friend of dictators. |
Well, aren't you just the king of ad-homonyms.
Yes, he does keep to some radical politics, and he has met with very bad people (by your logic, making him guilty by association, perhaps?).
This doesn't mean that his position is inherently untrue.
Lets focus on what the man says, not what you think of him personally, shall we?
His assertion that the Iraq war was based upon a "pack of lies" is, by any reasonable measure, True.
If you disagree with the validity of the above position, I'd like to hear your reasoning.
Cheers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| In the most terrible way imaginable they show to the whole world that it is not only the lives of people in Baghdad, Fallujah and Palestine that Bush holds cheap. |
Jesus, Bob. You know, I'm quite rancored at Bush over the Katrina thing, but the hyper-Leftists you pull out almost make me feel sorry for Bush. People didn't die in Baghdad, Fallujah, and Palestine simply because of Bush. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Quote: |
| In the most terrible way imaginable they show to the whole world that it is not only the lives of people in Baghdad, Fallujah and Palestine that Bush holds cheap. |
Jesus, Bob. You know, I'm quite rancored at Bush over the Katrina thing, but the hyper-Leftists you pull out almost make me feel sorry for Bush. People didn't die in Baghdad, Fallujah, and Palestine simply because of Bush. |
You are certainly correct, but the larger question is more difficult and much more important. To what extent did American policy and American war contribute to the flood of blood recently seen in that area? Sure, people die for lots of reasons, and by lots of hands, but the big fu**ing foreign army in that desert certainly contributed sufficiently. No? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| To what extent did American policy and American war contribute to the flood of blood recently seen in that area? Sure, people die for lots of reasons, and by lots of hands, but the big fu**ing foreign army in that desert certainly contributed sufficiently. No? |
Yes. A lot of policy decisions made directly or at least permitted by Bush have resulted in the deaths of Iraqis. Some people died directly at the hands of American bombings. Some people die because of American forces screw-ups. Some members of the insurgency are there because the Americans incensed them by engaging in searches, seizures, and arrests on dubious grounds without any sort of due process (or at least any readily discernable or transparent to Iraqis).
OTOH, America is not the one detonating its agents on the streets of Iraqi cities, and America is not the one who reniged on treaty agreements in relation to Fallujah's status. In terms of Fallujah, the US gave that city an extra chance in order to avoid spilling blood. The mullahs and militiamen and councilmen in charge there took it as a sign of weakness and Fallujah immediately became a place where not only the broader Sunni insurgency was supplied, but so destabilized that Jihadists were running out of it. As for Palestine. WTF? Is Bush responsible for every act that Israel does? Is Israel even responsible for all the deaths that happen in Palestine?
Get a grip, Galloway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| To what extent did American policy and American war contribute to the flood of blood recently seen in that area? Sure, people die for lots of reasons, and by lots of hands, but the big fu**ing foreign army in that desert certainly contributed sufficiently. No? |
Yes. A lot of policy decisions made directly or at least permitted by Bush have resulted in the deaths of Iraqis. Some people died directly at the hands of American bombings. Some people die because of American forces screw-ups. Some members of the insurgency are there because the Americans incensed them by engaging in searches, seizures, and arrests on dubious grounds without any sort of due process (or at least any readily discernable or transparent to Iraqis).
OTOH, America is not the one detonating its agents on the streets of Iraqi cities, and America is not the one who reniged on treaty agreements in relation to Fallujah's status. In terms of Fallujah, the US gave that city an extra chance in order to avoid spilling blood. The mullahs and militiamen and councilmen in charge there took it as a sign of weakness and Fallujah immediately became a place where not only the broader Sunni insurgency was supplied, but so destabilized that Jihadists were running out of it. As for Palestine. WTF? Is Bush responsible for every act that Israel does? Is Israel even responsible for all the deaths that happen in Palestine?
Get a grip, Galloway. |
Perhaps we could agree that this silly little adventure has been proved akin to sticking your head in a beehive and then complaining about all the stings?
It is a horrible, awful, pointless disaster. Human life is ending, consistently, horrifically and without relent, and for a "pack of lies". A special place in hell, should it exist, will be reserved for the assh*les on both side of the fence who caused all this suffering. And the armchair warriors who support them.
Or, perhaps human life isn't all it is cracked up to be. What the hell do I know...
That's all for today, Cass is calling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Well, aren't you just the king of ad-homonyms.
Yes, he does keep to some radical politics, and he has met with very bad people (by your logic, making him guilty by association, perhaps?). |
He also supports very bad people.
| Quote: |
This doesn't mean that his position is inherently untrue.
Lets focus on what the man says, not what you think of him personally, shall we? |
why should he have any credibilty?
Besides he distorts things and he says what he says cause he hates the US and wants to appeal to radicals.
| Quote: |
His assertion that the Iraq war was based upon a "pack of lies" is, by any reasonable measure, True.
If you disagree with the validity of the above position, I'd like to hear your reasoning. |
I would say the US and others thought that Iraq had WMDS. WMDS weren't the reason for the war but the US thought that Saddam had them.
| Quote: |
| is a horrible, awful, pointless disaster. Human life is ending, consistently, horrifically and without relent, and for a "pack of lies". A special place in hell, should it exist, will be reserved for the assh*les on both side of the fence who caused all this suffering. And the armchair warriors who support them. |
I think there was a lot of suffering before the war.
The US didn't go to Iraq to save Iraqis but really how can you ignore what Saddam was and what he intended to do? Saddam Hussein killed 300,000 Iraqis (that doesn't include any Kuwaitis or anyone from anywhere else) in his 30 years in power, would have killed many more if he haded been stopped, and probably over the next 30 years Saddam and / or his kids likely would have repeated the trick.
The US war has freed 80% of Iraqis from Saddam and his supporters. And Saddam can't threaten anyone.
There is no moral case against the war. Sorry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lying to go to war is considered moral to those who follow Straussian philosophy.
Fortunately the US will be unable to afford similiar adventures for some time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
Well, aren't you just the king of ad-homonyms.
Yes, he does keep to some radical politics, and he has met with very bad people (by your logic, making him guilty by association, perhaps?). |
He also supports very bad people.
| Quote: |
This doesn't mean that his position is inherently untrue.
Lets focus on what the man says, not what you think of him personally, shall we? |
why should he have any credibilty?
Besides he distorts things and he says what he says cause he hates the US and wants to appeal to radicals.
| Quote: |
His assertion that the Iraq war was based upon a "pack of lies" is, by any reasonable measure, True.
If you disagree with the validity of the above position, I'd like to hear your reasoning. |
I would say the US and others thought that Iraq had WMDS. WMDS weren't the reason for the war but the US thought that Saddam had them.
| Quote: |
| is a horrible, awful, pointless disaster. Human life is ending, consistently, horrifically and without relent, and for a "pack of lies". A special place in hell, should it exist, will be reserved for the assh*les on both side of the fence who caused all this suffering. And the armchair warriors who support them. |
I think there was a lot of suffering before the war.
The US didn't go to Iraq to save Iraqis but really how can you ignore what Saddam was and what he intended to do? Saddam Hussein killed 300,000 Iraqis (that doesn't include any Kuwaitis or anyone from anywhere else) in his 30 years in power, would have killed many more if he haded been stopped, and probably over the next 30 years Saddam and / or his kids likely would have repeated the trick.
The US war has freed 80% of Iraqis from Saddam and his supporters. And Saddam can't threaten anyone.
There is no moral case against the war. Sorry. |
You are, without a doubt, the biggest clown I have come across. If you call the current situation in Iraq liberation, then you are far beyond anything resembling credibility.
You get the cookie.
It does not matter why somebody believe something, rather, what matters if if that which he believe is True. This war was sold to the American population (rather, a specific section of the population) by suggesting that 1) it had WMD's (so does most every other country, including the one you defend) and 2) that Iraq had significant connections to OBL. Both of these claims are certainly false.
If Iraq was attacked to liberate her population (or, if even that this was a lovely outcome of an otherwise necessary action), and without any other motive, then I suppose that Zimbabwe and NK should be feeling the wrath of Baptist Liberation any day now. And if she was attacked for another reason, and the liberation was only a corollary, then the current state of affairs in that destroyed country also speak to the futility of that position.
I agree with you, he is a lefty tool, in every way. But the war in Iraq is a miserable mistake. There is nare a person left on this messed up planet, who has any degree is intellectual credibility who can assert that this War in Iraq was a good idea.
Just because someone disagrees with what you say (as I do) do not mean that they (I) hate America. It is possible for me to hate this silly war simply because I love the idea of America so much.
I promise you, this war will absolutely be remembered as the second Vietnam. The ideal that is America is totally blown. And the result will be more Islamism, more lefty wackos and more WMD's.
You really need to reevaluate you intellectual assumptions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is no moral case against the war. Sorry.[/quote]
| Quote: |
| You are, without a doubt, the biggest clown I have come across. If you call the current situation in Iraq liberation, then you are far beyond anything resembling credibility. |
yawn
| Quote: |
You get the cookie. |
Yawn
| Quote: |
| It does not matter why somebody believe something, rather, what matters if if that which he believe is True. This war was sold to the American population (rather, a specific section of the population) by suggesting that 1) it had WMD's (so does most every other country, including the one you defend) and 2) that Iraq had significant connections to OBL. Both of these claims are certainly false. |
Well the US thought Saddam had them. But anyway the US went into Iraq to change the mideast situation and to be in a position to force other mideast regimes chiefly Saudi Arabia to crush Al Qaida.
| Quote: |
| If Iraq was attacked to liberate her population (or, if even that this was a lovely outcome of an otherwise necessary action), and without any other motive, then I suppose that Zimbabwe and NK should be feeling the wrath of Baptist Liberation any day now. And if she was attacked for another reason, and the liberation was only a corollary, then the current state of affairs in that destroyed country also speak to the futility of that position. |
No Iraq was not attacked to free Iraqis but you seem to be opposing the US action on humanitarian grounds .There is no sound humanitarian argument against the war.
| Quote: |
| I agree with you, he is a lefty tool, in every way. But the war in Iraq is a miserable mistake. There is nare a person left on this messed up planet, who has any degree is intellectual credibility who can assert that this War in Iraq was a good idea. |
Well Saddam was hard to contain. Perhaps impossible to contain over the long term. But all the results are not in.
| Quote: |
| Just because someone disagrees with what you say (as I do) do not mean that they (I) hate America. It is possible for me to hate this silly war simply because I love the idea of America so much |
.
I am not saying that anyone who opposes the war hates American but some who oppose the war including a big chuck of the antiwar movement hate America.
| Quote: |
| I promise you, this war will absolutely be remembered as the second Vietnam. The ideal that is America is totally blown. And the result will be more Islamism, more lefty wackos and more WMD's. |
Well there was a big problem with terror before the US went into Iraq. Indeed 70,000 trained in Al Qaida camps in the 1990's. What was the problem then" I will tell you the real cause of terror in the middle east is that mideast regimes, too many clerics. many elties and the media over there teach hate , and incite violence.
If mideast regimes cracked down on Al Qaida then there wouldn't be any Al Qaida.
| Quote: |
| You really need to reevaluate you intellectual assumptions. |
You should do likewise. Please read this it explains why the US went to war better than I can.
| Quote: |
The "real reason" for this war, which was never stated, was that after 9/11 America needed to hit someone in the Arab-Muslim world. Afghanistan wasn't enough because a terrorism bubble had built up over there ?a bubble that posed a real threat to the open societies of the West and needed to be punctured. This terrorism bubble said that plowing airplanes into the World Trade Center was O.K., having Muslim preachers say it was O.K. was O.K., having state-run newspapers call people who did such things "martyrs" was O.K. and allowing Muslim charities to raise money for such "martyrs" was O.K. Not only was all this seen as O.K., there was a feeling among radical Muslims that suicide bombing would level the balance of power between the Arab world and the West, because we had gone soft and their activists were ready to die.
The only way to puncture that bubble was for American soldiers, men and women, to go into the heart of the Arab-Muslim world, house to house, and make clear that we are ready to kill, and to die, to prevent our open society from being undermined by this terrorism bubble. Smashing Saudi Arabia or Syria would have been fine. But we hit Saddam for one simple reason: because we could, and because he deserved it and because he was right in the heart of that world. And don't believe the nonsense that this had no effect. Every neighboring government ?and 98 percent of terrorism is about what governments let happen ?got the message. If you talk to U.S. soldiers in Iraq they will tell you this is what the war was about. |
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/04/nyt.friedman/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
Lying to go to war is considered moral to those who follow Straussian philosophy.
Fortunately the US will be unable to afford similiar adventures for some time. |
Lying isnt' good however not winning is certainly worse than lying, but I don't think Bush lied. Most of the world thought Saddam had WMDs and their was good reason not to trust him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
Lying to go to war is considered moral to those who follow Straussian philosophy.
Fortunately the US will be unable to afford similiar adventures for some time. |
You have no clue what you are talking about. This has been discussed on here before. Basically, Strauss has opponents on the ultra-left who would like to tarnish his reputation, and the ultra left-wing blogosphere is too robotic to any research that might do anything besides confirm their pre-concieved notions.
I studied under a host of Straussians for 4 years, and I can confidently say that being a Straussian does not mean that you think that lying in politics is okay. As for Wolfowitz, he may have studied under Strauss, but that doesn't mean that what he does was taught or even suggested by him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As much as I would like to debate you for pages on end about silly stuff, lets get back to the main point.
The Iraq war was sold on a "pack of lies". True or not true?
The Iraq war is a miserable failure. True or not true.
Answer these questions with at least a small degree of intellectual fortitude or take your proper place beside the Koreans playing Special Force, where you can pretend that you have the balls to fight the wars you support.
Last edited by thepeel on Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Galloway is a radical. And he is a friend of dictators. |
So are you. How strange!!
I always find it interesting that someone on the far right only sees people on the far left, or any other direction for that matter, as radicals. Your statements here are as far right as it is possible to go. Thus you are a radical. I refer you to the bell curve: either end is major standard deviations from the norm. Both are "radical" and extreme.
And Bush is every bit the dictator any of those you criticise is. The only difference is that he had to start from a more democrtic base to begin with and has to move much more carefully. But, he has taken us into an illegal war, has literally taken over two nations, has eroded personal freedom in a way no other US president has done, has raided the environment, shamelessly enriched his friends, etc., etc.
Make no mistake: a friend of Dumbya is a friend of extremists, dictatorship, murder and mayhem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
