| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:46 am Post subject: Why hasn't the US learnt from British incompetence? |
|
|
Reading through the following article, I was reminded of British folly in Northern Ireland. It was in fact the Catholics who requested the British army in, and they were welcomed warmly. The army squandered the Catholics goodwill by immediately acting like an arrogant occupying power, and aggravating the Catholic population to such an extent that they made the IRA (until that time not particularly well liked by the majority of the Catholic population) hugely popular.
At least from what I understand, the Iraqi population in general initially felt little rancour toward the US military - but instead of capitalising on this, it was foolishly squandered.
Why we are still getting it so wrong in the 'war on terror'
The ill-conceived and badly executed campaign in Iraq is directly responsible for spawning a new generation of terrorists
Henry Porter
Sunday October 1, 2006
The Observer
When Alexander the Great swept through Asia Minor in 337BC, he came to the impregnable mountain fortress of Termessos, not far from the modern-day Turkish city of Antalya. Termessos possessed a network of huge underground reservoirs and storerooms and, realising he would not bring the city to submission in a short time, Alexander ordered that the olive groves which provided Termessos with much of its income be levelled. It was an unusually spiteful act that was remembered for centuries afterwards.
I was reminded of the story when reading Patrick Cockburn's The Occupation, a vivid account of war and resistance in Iraq which is published by Verso this week. Cockburn describes a visit to Dhuluaya, a fruit-growing region 50 miles north of Baghdad, where, early on in the occupation, the American military cut down ancient date palms and orange and lemon trees as part of a collective punishment for farmers who had failed to inform them about guerrilla attacks. This vandalism will be remembered for generations because it was senseless and to the Iraqi mind powerfully symbolises the malice of the occupiers.
'At times,' Cockburn says of the period just after the invasion, 'it seemed as if the American military was determined to provoke an uprising.'
To read full article, click here |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Why hasn't the US learnt from British incompetence?
|
Ummm....dearie, we did. That's why we are independent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kiwi Paul
Joined: 29 Aug 2006 Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Why hasn't the US learnt from British incompetence? |
Maybe they're just perfecting their own special form of incompetence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Maybe they're just perfecting their own special form of incompetence. |
There is that, too.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Why hasn't the US learnt from British incompetence? |
Why didn't the British learn from Spanish incompetence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wangja

Joined: 17 May 2004 Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, that's really pertinent. The Spanish can at least build buildings that do not fall down after a minor fire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wangja wrote: |
| The Spanish can at least build buildings that do not fall down after a minor fire. |
Actually, now that you mention it, so could the Inca. Inca stonemasonry is really without peer.
And why, then, did the Spanish not learn from the Inca or the Aztecs? And why, indeed, did the Aztecs not learn from Teotihuacan or the Classic Maya?
And while we are at it, why did the Spanish not learn from the Romans, who, presumably, also "build structures that do not fall down after a minor fire"? And why didn't the Romans learn from the Athenians, either?
Perhaps we are looking not at the problem of "incompetence in the United States" inasmuch as human incompetence in human affairs, as spread equally around throughout human history? Just a thought.
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wangja

Joined: 17 May 2004 Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Wangja wrote: |
| The Spanish can at least build buildings that do not fall down after a minor fire. |
Actually, now that you mention it, so could the Inca. Inca stonemasonry is really without peer.
And why, then, did the Spanish not learn from the Inca or the Aztecs? And why, indeed, did the Aztecs not learn from Teotihuacan or the Classic Maya?
And while we are at it, why did the Spanish not learn from the Romans, who, presumably, also build structures that do not fall down after a minor fire? And why didn't the Romans learn from the Athenians, either?
Perhaps we are looking not at the problem of "incompetence in the United States" inasmuch as human incompetence in human affairs, as spread equally around throughout human history? Just a thought. |
Christ, that's almost as bad a start to the day as the fact that our espresso machine is kaput: I find myself agreeing with Gopher.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel

Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Christ, that's almost as bad a start to the day as the fact that our espresso machine is kaput: I find myself agreeing with Gopher. |
I sympathize with you on both counts; my espresso machine is also down (actually the transformer and the machine by default) AND I agree with Gopher.
Glad he didn't go into the usual strand of thought..........saying it is all just anti-Americanism and labeling others. Instead he opted for the simplest cause and was bang on.
Now if only Gopher could fix both our espresso machines and also tell us why it was wrong for the Spanish to bring coffee plants to S. America??? (or actually weren't they first brought to Haiti? by the French? dunno).
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wangja

Joined: 17 May 2004 Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| ddeubel wrote: |
| ...and also tell us why it was wrong for the Spanish to bring coffee plants to S. America??? (or actually weren't they first brought to Haiti? by the French? dunno). |
Don't ask me, ask Sidney Mintz. His is the best explanation I've seen thus far. And he talks about sugar, by the way, not coffee -- I do not know who does the coffee angle. But, in any case, it is probably the same story...and it is clearly related as all you coffee drinkers use sugar anyway.
|
Nope, no sugar for me, just pure unadulterated coffee.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cwemory

Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Location: Gunpo, Korea
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
Now if only Gopher could fix both our espresso machines and also tell us why it was wrong for the Spanish to bring coffee plants to S. America??? (or actually weren't they first brought to Haiti? by the French? dunno).
DD |
From what I understand, coffee was first introduced to the Americas by the French, starting in Martinique,and spreading to their other colonies in the West Indies.
Can't help you with your coffee machine though.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wangja

Joined: 17 May 2004 Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| There goes that Bob Newhart monologue ... busted! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel

Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wow! the book might get on my next order list! Sounds great and for a guy with an anthro background, might be just my pot of honey.
I bet it is a lot more accurate to say that Sugar caused the greatest change in human social evolution than say alcohol or coffee, which are the usual suspects. Sugar being a way to both.......
I remember a few years ago, a very highly regarded book on the history of alcohol, drinks, beer from an anthropological perspective.
Anyone know the name?
Sorry to destroy this thread, very surreal of me. And in vein with the bloody stream of consciousness that I usually right with.....
PS> thanks, thought the French had something to do with the spread of coffee, that drink that Balzac loved and died for and which the French made into an excuse to relax and converse for............ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|