Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

I'm new here from NYC, thoughts about the "War"

<wearing my "Can the RIGHT stop being so intolerant, ignorant, arrogant and abusiveness of the 57 varieties of non mainstream views to be found on Urban 75" hat, ONCE MORE AND AGAIN (yawwwwwnnnnn)>

Sorry, all, to feel obliged to regress a little again, but just to clarify for mobymonster, and others, I don't really have too many problems with you having/expressing right wing opinions (although I disagree with most of them, unsurprisingly, but others are covering that!). Also, whoever called you a twat wasn't me.

My objection was to your assumption that all or most people on this site express some sort of identikit toeing the party line view. Even if you exclude the right wing folks, this suggestion is so untrue as to be insulting, nay slanderous! It's also a "view" VERY often unthinkingly trotted out by right wing trolls and over the last few months has become a tedious bore.

If you don't like left wing/anti establishment/anti war opinions at least try and make the effort to understand the nuances and differences over what are a vast range of various opinions expressed here.

Speaking personally, I do try to be tolerant of all shades, and I think it's interesting, and sometimes informative, when people more inclined to support the establishment come here and offer a different perspective (which many of us inevitably start arguing against! ;)

The real trouble is the sheer abusiveness of some of these recent posters, especially some of the Americans such as Otto, Darin, Tribal etc., who have IMO at least, been a damned sight more abusive to us, and far more intolerant/ignorant/wilfully misunderstanding of our views, than has been the case the other way about -- any abusiveness from us has mainly been in response to being slandered as some kind of monolithic Stalinist-type clique of crypto communist hippy peaceniks just because we don't unquestioningly swallow the US military line.

In my view, in general, we're mainly very friendly here and open to all :)

But Go Fuck Yourselves from Tribal's first post, just because we dare to have a slightly different view from Bush/the Pentagon, does try the patience! No wonder a lot of U75ers were united in opposing that kind of arrogant gung ho ness, opposing the belligerant and aggressive use of "grief fascism" to FORCE everyone to sign, repeatedly, a twenty page statement of compassion for all WTC victims with a shutting-up cluase attached, undertaking not to dare to express any possibility that whats being done in Afghanistan now might make another such tragedy MORE LIKELY.

**THAT'S** intolerance.

I oppose all war, death and terrorism.

Peace to all :)

W of W

[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: William of Walworth ]
 
Calico - right on!

"intolerence to anything that doesn't tow your "party" line"

You know, I really object to being patronised by the semi-literate!
 
hey kissthecat, heres another look at your cartoon.

bell1.jpg
http://angelfire.com/dc/tribal/images/bell1.jpg

ps - i still dont see any solutions for this problem, all i see is US/UK bashing. give me some propositions, anything, theres nothing here but criticism.

[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: tribal ]
 
Stick to international law Tribal. Not only the bits that the US/UK like.
 
WofW

Oh dear
:eek: :eek: :eek: levels reaching record heights in London SE17.

I thought we went over Stephen Lawrence ad nuaseam in the thread last month. If you've forgotten what I said then your memory bank must be as leaky as the Oxford Utd defence (this is a :) :) by the way). I'll reopen the thread if you answer my question about spellchecking facilities. :p
 
Mobymonster, if we are talking about mantras, why are we told every ten minutes that 6000 people died? We know the figure (and a horrifying figure it is) but continually quoting it a.) makes it sound like your only arguments are based on the heart rather than the head, and b.) devalues it because if it is continuously quoted, people will become indifferent to it. A.) may well not be true (in fact I am inclined to doubt it), but continuous re-hashing of the same number and the same arguments gets very boring frankly.

PEACE TO ALL!
 
This is not off message:
1 If the west were not so profligate, none of this would have happened.
2 Had we bothered to develop alternative enery sources we would not have been involved in the gulf war.
3 Bin Ladens main arguement with the US is over the stationing of US troops in Saudi, a Holy land to all Muslims. They were only there to re-invade/liberate Kuwait cos of the oil.
4 The shock of the OPEC 1974 price rise that sent the world economy into resession has not yet faded, there is deep terror of being held to ransome over oil.
5 What this has brought about is blind support by Western Governments for ANY stable regime, military, fascist, whatever, so long as the oil flows.
6 This rigidification means there is a massive amount of resentment in the populations of these states, who blame the west for supporting oppresive regimes.

What we need to do;
Leave them alone to fight it out among themselves, after all they are the population of those states they ought to determine their own future- we have got to stop going around telling others what to do as if we were perfect.
Had their been some kind of revolution in Saudi, by now, Bin Laden/Robspierre would probably be dead, killed by his own people.
Where from here;
We can in a very short time actually do without the gulfs oil.
Non OPEC production is higher than it has ever been.
We have the technology for wind, wave etc generation of electricity.
The analysis that said the Gulf oil was vital to to the wests success is wrong- OPEC produces LESS oil now than it did 10, 20 maybe even 30 years ago- WE DO NOT NEED IT!!
So lets stop sticking our noses in- even the most hawkish should see, its totally self defeating.
Enough, this entire topic goes round in rather pointless circles.
 
Agreed Hipipol. Ne'er a truer word said.

Quoting from the American Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.
Click to expand...

It is time for the Arab States to declare themselves free and independent from Imperial America and their puppets, and choose their own path, free from interference by anyone else.

[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
 
Grasshopper: I am afraid that you are the one who is not getting it. My post pointed out (yet again) that it's OK to "talk nice". No big deal there. I fail to see where I am being offensive anywhere here (unless questioning someone else's opinions is offensive?). If you think that I have had nothing to add to this board, that is your right, but it is also mine to carry on posting. It's kind of like the TV channel thing, if you don't like it, change the channel (or thread ;) )
I will refer you to my ending comments on the post that displeased you so much, ie: I have learned a great deal on these threads, from Patel, Nemo, JWH, Appolochild, and many others. They are capable of offering an argument and backing it up, and that's the way I like it...You are obviously a better person than them, as they are still answering my posts, offering information, and debating whichever point may be offered...which, incidentally is the agenda on a MESSAGE board :)
Ps If you thread the threas that I have posted, you will discover 2 things.
1) Some of the people disagreeing with me have conceded that at the very least I may have input to offer to the discussion
2) Once again, I am NOT an American. This has come up a few times and shows a lack of belief that only Americans or Canadians (hi Johhny!) could argue against your opinions in this thread. this is a small-minded way of looking at things ;)
 
Many of those who support Blair and Bush's war in Afganistan constantly refer to the "6000 dead" in the WTC, as if this is some sort of justification. But some families of the dead do not feel the same, as the quote below shows:

"Our son Greg is among the many missing from the World Trade Centre attack ... our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands dying, suffering, and nursing grievances against us. It is not the way to go. It will not avenge our son's death. Not in our son's name."

- Phyllis and Orlando Rodruguez, New York.
 
Perhaps 'the 6000' get mentioned from time to time as a way to ground us, when we stray too far into the philosophic ether, like a slap in the face with a dead flounder. Keeps us focused.

Tall Chris: If I sell you a gun, and you take it and blow away your girlfriend, who is guilty of murder?

Patel: I have an inkling what the term means. But for the purpose of my post, I was harkening back to OBL's call for a jihad of all Muslims against the US because of the bombing of Afghanistan. The anthrax may be an answer to his call.

13 anthrax cases in the last two weeks? You go do a little research and find out the incidence over the last 20 years. Looks planned to me. One letter came from Malaysia. Maybe it is the Posse Comitatus (look it up), but I'd say it was less than likely.

When Oklahoma happened, I felt the US was wrong to immediately point at Muslim extremists. It was too unlikely and obscure a target for someone not of this culture. It was Oklahoma City, for Christ's sake.. Foreigners would go for the big, obvious things, well known the world over, like... the WTC.

For your edification, I think McVeigh was even more despicable than OBL. It was my opinion that if the US didn't have the resolve to execute a psychotic mass baby killer like him, then it didn't have the resolve to continue as a country.

By the way, McVeigh's cause was against the US government and its allies, the Jews and the UN.He considered the US govt. to be the ultimate opressor. So you see, not everything can be painted totally with a religious brush.


WoW: you should finish the sentence I wrote, something like - 'faces frozen into smiles of self satisfaction and self congratulation.'

So I was in a bad mood that day... but the remark was spawned by a line of posts all patting one another's backs for their witty reconfirmation of their political correctness. Why waste the space?

Truth be told, I feel less than admiration for anyone who is sure he has all the answers, whatever he thinks the answers might be. I dislike smug and biased narrow mindedness, and I feel that I see that exhibited here from time to time. I know, you feel that way about me. But look at a couple of posts that follow the earlier thread. People point out those they consider to be balanced and logical, but surprise! It's always those that they agree with. I know you may not like our ideas, but please! Not all truth, goodness, and especially logic, exists only on your side. That way of thought leads to totalitarianism.

...More later, must go to a meeting. And I'm sure you want to hear more of my views...
 
Johnny,

If you paint OBL as a devil, you can always attribute lots of things to him. Evidence doesn't matter, and neither does the fact that US authorities don't know who on earth has done it.

Which is dangerous. Because if you concentrate all your resources on trying to pin down Arab and Muslims, then you might well be unguarded against other groups who might actually be carrying this out, which is why Timothy McVeigh is an excellent example. If we don't know who has done this, then the finger of suspicion will point at everyone, including yourself. In this climate of hysteria nobody wins. So its best just to cool off and make no further assumptions to add to the frenzy that is already going on.

As an example of a recent case in America, there were two people belonging to the white Christian supremacist Aryan Nation who were charged with possessing Anthrax for use as a weapon.

Read here for more information.

Let this serve as a warning not to point fingers, which seems to be speciality of yours.

And Timothy McVeigh is an interesting further example. Because he actually served in the Gulf against Iraq didn't he? Wasn't it his experiences in the Gulf, including his killings of Iraqi soldiers and witnessing of the horrors of actual reality, that turned him into the monster he became?

So how many soldiers are we sending to Afghanistan again?

There is a saying that exists about 'lies, damned lies and statistics'. If you want to get into the game of quoting statistics all the time, then there are far larger numbers than 6,000, let me tell you.

And for your information, the actual number turns out to be just below 5,000 if you're going to get all anal about numbers.

As far as being grounded in reality goes, you're still up there in the air over Afghanistan with those American bombers. Completely oblivious.

[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
 
"Tall Chris: If I sell you a gun, and you take it and blow away your girlfriend, who is guilty of murder?"

No, if you're determined to use dippy analogies, the question should be: if I give you a truckload of guns so you can shoot a guy a don't like, then betray you while giving your brother a kicking on a daily basis, then go around and burn your mother's and your uncle's house down, who is guilty of stupidity?
 
Were the US really planning action against Afghanistan two months before S11?
Because a large British naval force just happened to be on 'exercises' in the Gulf on S11.
 
Can one ever be anything but fascinated by life's ironies?

After drowsing through my meeting for a couple hours, I drag my sorry carcass back to work to find...wait for it.... motorcycle cops, yellow tape,and HazMat trucks. Powder in the basement... an anthrax scare to call my own. Perhaps I will make CNN tonight...


Guys, I swear! I will never disagree with you again, about anything! How did you get my address anyway? (I apologize for this tasteless joke)

However, the anthrax scare bit is real enough. My kids don't want me to return to work, ever. (If they only knew I've wanted that for years. That, or at least a union job...)

Patel, I'm not using the word devil, you are. I am talking about him fomenting terrorist attacks that have killed many; interesting that the word 'devil' is the one that should come to your mind...

I have used 'snivelling coward', but not devil. I will never argue that in his own mind, he does not believe in what he is doing.

You then go on to say that, because of my accusation of OBL and al Qaida, I am "concentrating resources on trying to pin down Muslims and Arabs". Whoa, boy! Whoa!

I would like to see OBL and Co. pinned down. Other terrorists as well. If they happen to be Muslim, so be it. If they are American fanatics.... bitches gotta go.

To target one group, who are of the Muslim faith, is not the same as targeting all Muslims.

The breadth of such a leap of illogic is truly breathtaking. You may be prepared to do it; don't ascribe such foolishness to me.


(Here comes the insult; I just don't know what else to do in the circumstances..) The anthrax/gun thing. Did the comparison fly over your heads? I hope not. Let's try again, without the simile...

Government makes and stockpiles anthrax. Terrible thing, but government doesn't use it. Maybe government sells it to friend government, but they don't use it either.

However, anthrax, through sale or theft, ends up in hands of true believer, who begins mailing it out and killing stock clerks and babies.

Yes, government was bad, but true believer actually did the envelope stuffing. He 'took it up a notch', as it were.

If he couldn't get the anthrax, true believer would still want to kill, but would have to use different weapon, maybe truck bomb. Who would you blame then? U Haul?

Did Timothy McVeigh become insane as a result of the Gulf War? Maybe. Then again, maybe he was raped by his brothers when he was a kid. Maybe he ate American breakfast cereal with a high sugar content, and developed Attention Deficit Disorder.

Then again, maybe he weighed the evidence available, and came to the conclusion that the US was the Great Satan.

'Fact That Doesn't Fit' of the day: Since the Second World War, the US has expended something in excess of one trillion dollars in foreign aid. Those Devils!

p.s. Next time I present an idea, besides telling me it is stupid (which it may be), try explaing what it is about the idea that is stupid. (Owww! My head is hurting...!)

And no - I won't tell you my address...
 
I almost forgot.... I have more to say!


Way back on page 2, Nemo and Calico accuse me of using - I can't remember the exact phrasing - it amounted to an accusation of using purple prose. They said it clouded my message.

One of the fun things about language is that it is such a neat tool. You can say the same things many ways. Sometimes, if you're lucky, you can even give amusement or pleasure, while passing along a fairly regular idea.

I write like I do deliberately. The internet is a great place for trying things you can't always do at home. We all do it, and that's one of the reason we get to use pseudonyms. Then, if you want to try swearing at total strangers, for example, you can, and there's absolutely no penalty!

For me, besides calling you names, I can experiment with saying things in different ways, without getting laughed out of the bar by my drinking bros. You guys might laugh, but let's face it. You are merely a computer screen, just as I am to you.

An example: the bear thing I wrote a while ago. Pretty cliched. You probably aren't aware of it, but a few(!) years ago, when Ronald Raygun was running for president, he ran an ad campaign. One of the ads featured a forest shot, with a bear trotting through. The low, deep voiceover said: "There's a bear in the woods...."

At the time, the US was still afraid of the USSR. The ad was intended to play upon the American fear of Russians, and make them want to elect the 'no nonsense' Reagan.

I found it amusing to give an analogy where I compared the US to 'the bear'.

Calico: there's that twat thing again. Why is it, when you guys want to be really insulting, you reach deep into the pungent lexicon of the female anatomy? You got something against twats?

Just because Hitler tried to justify his insane bullshit with the theory of evolution, doesn't invalidate the theory. Just because OBL says that blowing up the WTL is okayed by the teachings of the Quran, doesn't make it so. Just because the Spanish Inquisition used Christianity as an excuse for torture, doesn't make all of Christian teachings bad.

Do you not believe that evolutionary theory applies to humans? Do you not believe that evolution is at work in the interplay of human society? Do you not believe that humans are descended from animals?

William of Walworth opposes "all war, death and terrorism". OK, the last one is a gimme. Death? Unpleasant, but probably unavoidable, even if opposed.

What about war. William, is there absolutely nothing in your life that you are prepared to fight or die for? I know it's a big sacrifice, but is your own survival the highest aspiration of your intellectual and moral code?

Would you die to save the lives of ten Afghani refugees? How about ten thousand?

Would you die to save your own children? How about to preserve your freedom of speech.

Would you die to stop terrorists from crashing your commercial flight into a building full of people?

Should your country go to war if the US Army was in their landing craft, approaching the Thames Estuary, with their game faces on?

I know these are overly dramatic examples, but some of them have happened, or could. The overrriding question is, would you give up your life, or go to war, for anything.

Hipipol wants the US to keep its nose out of another country's business.

Left to their own devices, India and Pakistan would probably have had a nuclear exchange by now. Apart from the millions dead there, the radioactivity would probably change things in your and my neighborhood as well. Is it a good thing to butt in and try to stop it?

Same thing with Israel. Without intervention, some (note I say SOME) arab governments might have used weapons of mass destruction to drive out the Israelis. We know how the Israelis would have responded. Is there any good in trying to stop that?
 
JC said :

"witty reconfirmation of their political correctness"

To which there is only one possible response : "Political correctness"???

MY ARSE, R, TM

:) :)

W of W
 
Johnny, when I used "the pungent lexicon of the female anatomy" (you really do have a way with words!) in comparison to yourself I was mearly, via a great swear word, calling you an idiot, or a fool.

I did not literally mean that you were in actual fact a vagina. That would be silly. The only thing that I have against twats is my face from time to time. Oooh sorry Johnny, I hope I didn't offend your sensitive poetic soul with my crudeness.

Now if I had called you a "cock" to use yet another enjoyable swear word I doubt very much you would have had the same reaction.

Now What, Johnny boy, would your reaction have been if you knew that I was a woman using such vile cunting language. Just because I use the word "twat" does not automatically make me a man.

If you'd perhaps stop being such a smug, self-satisfied, patronising
TWAT maby you'd actually start getting some sensible responses.

ps. TWAT! TWAT! TWAT! TWAT! TWAT! TWAT!
 
Johnny, I do believe that humans are descended from animals as its a scientific fact. However, using the survival of the fittest theory as a way do describe human beings is extreamly dubious and stinks of racism. Personally, I think that is capitalism, and therfore class conflict, that has always been the the reason for human compettion and greed.
 
Well, I personally believe in survival of the fittest.

We should pitch Johnny-boy against one of the Taleban fighters and see who comes out on top.

(Sounds of Canadian ass - ooh, is that a rude word too? - being kicked all the way back to the mounties, or wherever he comes from).
 
Hipipol wants the US to keep its nose out of another country's business.

Left to their own devices, India and Pakistan would probably have had a nuclear exchange by now
Click to expand...

Bollocks. :mad:
Good job the usa stepped in there then :confused:

I simply can't be bothered to list the many countries that america has fucked over at one time or another. How about selling arms in iran to help fund the destabilisation of nicaragua while at the same time banning trade with them? Funding TERRORISTS.

Btw: Get you head out of your arse.

[ 17 October 2001: Message edited by: fractionMan ]
 
As I understood it, Darwin was saying that survival of the fittest was more based on a species ability to adapt. Dinosaurs were big, bonecrushing bastards, but they're now extinct.

Edit to add: I agree with Calico on this one. The misinterpretation of Darwin's theory is always brought up by those trying to veil their racism. Go on, just say it JC, don't be a coward and all pseudo-intellectual hiding behind your misinterpretation of Darwin's theories, just say that you think your race is superior, it's what you mean anyway.

[ 17 October 2001: Message edited by: J-Bob ]
 
JC : might I be so bold as to point out a flaw of logic in your argument. (If it's not purple prose, what is it incidentally? Lilac language? Mauve meandering? Magenta musing? Anyway.)

You attack hipipol's statement that the US should keep out of this, and as a general principle the US should be less interventionist, on the basis of single events. If the US hadn't intervened in case X to save Israel, things would have been much worse, etc.

This doesn't make sense because the principle of general non-intervention does not say "the US should not have intervened in case X in the past but should have intervened in all the cases previous to that". In other words, your counterfactual assumes all US interventions prior to that point, which is inventing your own premises not demonstrating the faults in the argument against intervention.

Neither does it address the argument of "given the past events, the US should not intervene further" because as I'm sure you're aware, just because intervention has sometimes in the past been successful (you claim) doesn't mean it is a tool that will automatically lead to success in the future. That would be like saying, because you've shot a man in the past and saved someone else's life, shooting another man in a different situation in the future will automatically be good too.

This is a fairly obvious example of spurious rhetorical logic and its use might have something to do with why people are calling you a twat. I don't think anyone's called you a cunt yet though, so that's a good sign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
July 2005 London bomb blasts: UPDATES AND NEWS ONLY - NO DISCUSSION
66 67 68 69 70
Replies
2K
Views
125K
FridgeMagnet
FridgeMagnet
bezzer
protesting about war
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
Dane Meech
D
N
Stop the war now! But what AFTER the war?
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
johnwisehammer
J
M
no to war on iraq demo 28.9.02
Replies
15
Views
2K
Abu Arak
A
N
Just got back from anti-war demo
2 3
Replies
75
Views
23K
PatelsCornerShop
P
Back
Top Bottom