Job Discussion Forums

[moonraven]

Good post, Roger!

[ls650]

[moonraven]

So far as I know, when there has been a standoff, cold war, active war, or any other sort of conflict between/among powerful countries, all parties have been bad numbers.

Evil against evil? Certainly not good against evil. You don't become a superpower by being Little Mary Sunshine, after all.

[moonraven]

And here's an article of interest, from today's BOSTON GLOBE:

Published on Friday, January 7, 2005 by the Boston Globe
The Tsunami Victims That We Don't Count
by Derrick Z. Jackson

Secretary of State Colin Powell tours tsunami-stricken Banda Aceh and says, "I cannot begin to imagine the horror that went through the families and all of the people who heard this noise coming and then had their lives snuffed out by this wave."
Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a resolution that said: "The tsunami disaster constitutes a humanitarian tragedy of incredible proportions. . . . My heart goes out to the victims of this tragedy."

Last and hardly least, President Bush said: "The devastation in the region defies comprehension. . . . Our flags will fly at half-staff to honor the victims of this disaster. We mourn especially the tens of thousands of children who are lost. We think of the tens of thousands more who will grow up without their parents or their brothers or their sisters. We hold in our prayers all the people whose fate is still unknown."

In the abstract, the outpouring was appropriate. In context, the sympathy was a stench unto itself. Tens of thousands of people die by an act of nature and we say we cannot imagine the horror. We say it defies comprehension. We call it a catastrophe.

In Iraq we kill off thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of innocent civilians with our own hands, and we reject any attempt to comprehend what we have done. Countless Iraqi civilians are homeless. We call it liberation.

Bush quoted all the numbers for the tsunami in speeches this week: 150,000 lives lost, including 90,000 in Indonesia; perhaps 5 million homeless; millions vulnerable to disease. That stands in hypocritical contrast to the refusal to count the Iraqi civilians killed in his invasion over false claims of weapons of mass destruction and the crime-ridden chaos of an occupation that did not plan on an "insurgency."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former Iraqi commander Tommy Franks both said, "We don't do body counts." Then, right in our faces, Powell said civilian casualty figures were "relatively low." Central Command spokesman Pete Mitchell hailed the invasion for its "unbelievably low amount of collateral damage and needless civilian death." Paul Bremer, Bush's former civilian reconstruction envoy, said, "We have freed people with one of the great military battles of all time, in a period of three weeks, with almost no collateral damage, very few civilian deaths, and they are now free."

The White House left the counting to journalists, doctors, think tanks, and human rights groups. The numbers range from conservative guesses of 3,200 in the first few weeks of the war and occupation estimates ranging from 15,000 to 100,000. No matter if the number was 3,200 or 32,000, this atrocity of silence makes the torture in Abu Ghraib pale in comparison.

No flags have been flown at half-staff for Iraqi civilians. There have been no moments of silence in Congress. There have been no speeches by Bush mourning "the tens of thousands of children who are lost." Americans have not been asked to think of the "tens of thousands more who will grow up without their parents or their brothers or their sisters."

In a nation that supposedly reelected Bush on "moral values," there have been no prayers from the White House for "all the people whose fate is still unknown" in Iraq. This was a bipartisan hypocrisy. Even Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, fell into the trap of favoritism, fueling the appearance that this war was a religious crusade.

At the beginning of the war she said, "We pray for the swift and successful disarmament of Iraq with the least possible loss of life among our forces and the civilians of Iraq." But then she closed her message with: "May God bless our courageous forces and their brave families. May God bless the president of the United States. And may God bless America."

Not once did Pelosi or any American politician say in the last two years, "God bless Iraqi civilians" or any variant. Only one time has Bush uttered "God bless the people of Iraq," and that was in announcing Saddam Hussein's capture. Not once has he asked God's blessing for the courageous civilians and the families of Iraq who had no choice but to brave our bombs.

Let us do what we can for the victims of the tsunami. But no matter how much we weep for them, no matter what donations we spare, the offerings will not spare us from history's judgment, if not God's. Lugar said his heart goes out to the victims of the tsunami. No hearts have gone out to Iraqi civilians in this heartless coverup.

Powell said of the tsunami, "The power of the wave to destroy bridges, to destroy factories, to destroy homes, to destroy crops, to destroy everything in its path is amazing." He said, "I have never seen anything like it in my experience."

Yes, he has. It was in Iraq. The tsunami was us.

� 2005 Boston Globe

[homersimpson]

moonraven, you make many valid points and your apparent hatred of your home country is obvious, but have you renounced your U.S. citizenship or do you still carry a U.S. passport?

[peabody]

...

[Horizontal Hero]

ss

[Horizontal Hero]

edit

[Horizontal Hero]

[ls650]

[ls650]

[moonraven]

Leave it to homersimpson to start beating the pan of "love it or leave it". And now he apparently believes that folks who feel it is their civic duty to hold the government of their country accountable should lose their passports!

Homer, I think you should reconsider that belief. It is anti-human rights and it is fascist.

The moonraven is not into hatred--of anything. There are far too many projections flying around on this forum and I refuse to have them stuck onto me.

[AsiaTraveller]

What did I tell you guys?

When people dare to contradict homersimpson's views about the U.S., we find that the Doh!Boy hurls the hate word at them.

At least he's consistent and thoroughly predictable.

[homersimpson]

I've criticized the U.S. gov't and Bush in particular about the Iraqi War, so I have no problem with honest critique. But when people start saying things like, "Bush stole the (last) election," "9/11 wasn't terrorism," "the U.S. is stingy" and only helping out disaster victims so it can eventually overtake them, etc. you can expect people are going to challenge you. These things are not honest criticism but conspiracy-theory lunacy.

[Roger]

Horizontal Hero:
I do not understand what you were trying to prove. What did I say? I have no stats to support any contention, and personally speaking, I hate these comparisons! I clearly distanced myself in my prvious post from anyone who is trying to establish a kind of honours' hierarchy!

What I purported to say was that now the media and authorities are using hastily-compiled figures to paint their own governments into the most charitable corner. I don't know if any Usanian ever said their government was the most generous in the world; we all do know, howevr, of the colossal gaffe George Bush committed when he emerged from his holiday home to announce to the world at large how the U.S. is going to address the issue. I think we all are agreed that his announcement earned him the low esteem he fully deserved. That this reflected poorly on the general American populace is an unfortunate fact.

Another fact is that China has successfully cashed in on the donation concept. That Hongkongers did likewise, and far more "generously", should not surprise us too much although Hongkongers in the past were infamous for being stingy under such circumstances.
However, this time Li Kashing and other VIPs committed enormous amounts immediately, and the general public followed suit. The English Schools Foundation raised several hundred thousand HK dollars - which might be a useful fact considering the image problem this institution has.
So, did all these fundraising activities take place to enhance the image of certain institutions? No doubt this was a medium consideration of those who organised them.
But the fact that CHinese this time did contribute out of their own pockets is remarkable. I don't think it is necessary to differentiate between HK and the mainland any more! I do dispute the factor of 2100 you mentioned - the average Hongkonger didn't spend 2100 times as much as the average mainlander, difference in standards of living notwithstanding!

You professed having doubts as to the generosity of Chinese; who collected on the mainland? The Chinese Red Cross collected funds, a total of RMB 105 million. COnsidering how few mainlanders can afford to make any donations this is a respectable amount!

Finally, these threads should be stopped now! What's there to discuss when each government is trying to beat its rivals by raising the donations at taxpayers' expense again, without public consultation? The final tally will be established months if not years later.

Meanwhile, thousands of families are still homeless; thousands are hungering and needing clean potable water; thousands are missing - mostly forever - kin; thousands have lost their livelihoods. Several economies are ruined.
Is there a silverline on the horizon?

Maybe. I have come across reports of new-found solidarity and even cooperation between governments and rebel forces.
Maybe the tsunami has dealt terrorism a blow!