NO "Not clean" war - BUT CLASS WAR

[rasrave]

Fair enough, Steelgate, but don't you find that "fighting capitalism" might better be achieved at the root of the problem (ie: third world countries) rather than in the UK...or is that a little easier? For all the wannabe anti-capitalists out there, there is plenty of room (and need for help) in some of the impoverished (and oppressed) countries in the third world...although, as I have said before, you might be shocked to find that a lot of the people who live in those countries would thoroughly resent your intrusion into their affairs (something like what you blame the Americans for...bears some thought, no?). It is way too easy to claim that you know what they want as you sit in the comfort of your local pub or living-room spouting on about how they shoud live...you, by the way, have time to afford for such luxuries...they do not. It is the same patronizing attitude that you lot blame the "yanks" of, except that yours is "better", right??

 

[ttaM]

rasrave, we ARE the the cause of the problem we enjoy our plush western lifestyle BECAUSE they are poor. The western industralised world became wealthy through the exploitation of the less developed world if not through British imperalism, then through American corporate hegemony. God the Brittish army introduced opium to China in order to establish control of its markets! We developed at their expence and now we come up with notions of 'free trade' so that they can never have a fair playing field to develop.

I think what happened on Sept 11th was abborent but no state has the power to stand up to the west thus the only forme of resistance possible is non-state action. I dont agree with OBL or the repressive Taliban but this war on terrorism is simply to crush all opposition to the rich states and corporations that affectivally rule the world and the anti-globialisation movement WILL be next. The same laws that will apparently "stop terrorism" will be even MORE affective against the movement.

 

[mobymonster]

big_red_one,

Even if what you have said above is true, and some of it's open to debate, All the people that post here if given a choice would rather live in the west with what that brings than live under a regime such as the Taliban.

rasrave, careful you might get called a dickhead by the ones that are always right and incapeable of allowing a difference of opinion.

mobymonster

 

[ttaM]

mobymonster, I WOULD rather live in the west with all that brings than under Taliban rule, but that does not mean I dont want to change the west.

Or can accept the dirtier aspects of American/British foreign policy even though they make life here more cosmetic to some extent!

 

[General Ludd]

Mobymonster: Can't you get it into your thick head that just because we oppose the USA and its imperialistic foriegn policy doesn't mean we support bin Laden. I oppose both, Capitalist fundamentalism (ie Neo-liberalism) and Religous fundamentalism (of all creeds) are desructive, murderous forces that between them cause most (if not all) of the major ills in the world (poverty, war, lack of drugs, no education for most people in the third world), it can't be too hard for you to understand that I want to see the ending of both (put in bold so you can't miss it). Get it?

 

[General Ludd]

Going way back here but I just read the parts of this thread that I'd missed.
Man of Kent: That factory was not used to make biological weapons, but vaccines. Even the US military admitted later that they had got it wrong and that it was purely civilian.

 

[mobymonster]

big_red_one, meanoldman, I too would like to see peace and an end to poverty with all people treated with respect and equality, I just think it's something that is never going to happen.

I accept you both are as anti bin laden as you are the west.

But what I see on this forum is far more condemnation of the US, UK and the West than directed at terrorists, any condemnation of the terrorists is pretty much a token effort, if you go through the posts the West is according to many, responsible for everything that happens which just isn't true.

If the WTC attacks had not happened the Taliban would not be getting attacked it's that simple. However this is the cue for everyone to pile in with reasons why the WTC attack was justified.

mobymonster

 

[ttaM]

I here by condem the terrorist act that took place on the 11th of September, with out reservation. At the same time it must be held in mind that I value all life equely and thus am equely concerned to discove that the US last night killed 4 UN aid workers, in Afganstan to clear mines left by years of war, after they bombed their NON-MILITARY building.

 

[mobymonster]

Any death anywhere is terrible.

mobymonster

 

[ttaM]

AMEN

 

[ttaM]

And yet Mobymonster you said that you could not care less how many members of the Taliban die in another line... so what gives?

 

[mobymonster]

I do see any death as terrible and a waste of a life but I'm not going to lose any sleep over members of the Taliban being killed or any other terrorist come to that.

mobymonster

 

[ttaM]

Seem like your holding two contradictory notions in your head; all life is equaly valuable and if some people die you could not care less

 

[mobymonster]

I will not lose sleep if terrorists die, their death is a waste of life, far better they live in peace but they choose the path of terrorism and death comes with the "job".

mobymonster

 

[ttaM]

So it is ok to kill Bush and the people who determin US foreign policy then as "death comes with the job"

[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: big_red_one ]

[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: big_red_one ]

 

[PatelsCornerShop]

Mobymonster.

No doubt some terrorists are saying the same about Americans - soldiers or civilians. In their eyes it is Americans who are terrorists.

So, when Americans go and bomb other countries this only reinforces their views of Americans as terrorists.

Is this going to make America any safer to live in? I think not.

But thats OK. You, and other people like you are entitled to your own views. Just don't blink an eyelid next time when another WTC incident happens.

[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]

 

[mobymonster]

BR1, if you think Bush is a terrorist then what you think should happen to him is up to you.

---------------

PCS,

No doubt some terrorists are saying the same about Americans - soldiers or civilians. In their eyes it is Americans who are terrorists.

> I'm sure you are correct

So, when Americans go and bomb other countries this only reinforces their views of Americans as terrorists.

>again you would be correct

Is this going to make America any safer to live in? I think not.

> I don't know, the hope is that it will make life safer everywhere

But thats OK. You, and other people like you are entitled to your own views. Just don't blink an eyelid next time when another WTC incident happens.

>As you have your views. I will blink an eyelid if there is another WTC. I hope there is never another WTC or war that follows but there is as much chance of that as me keeping my shoes dry while pissing in the wind.

MM

 

[johnwisehammer]

"there is as much chance of that as me keeping my shoes dry while pissing in the wind."

Surely it depends which way the wind is blowing and which you are you facing, to extend your analogy. Actually, that's too subtle for you, so I'll say it in full: there are ways to act in an international sphere without alienating everyone around you. Got that?

 

[mobymonster]

JWH, thanks for making things simple for me to understand that's really nice of you.

Actually, that's too subtle for you, so I'll say it in full: there are ways to act in an international sphere without alienating everyone around you. Got that?

>yes, I get the general idea but can you give me an instance, most things seem to end up in war.

MM

 

[johnwisehammer]

Okay, here's an example: since the breakup of the Soviet Union, the UK Dept for International Development and Ministry of Defence has been engaged in a long-term project of helping demobilised ex-Soviet military officers reskill and find employment in the private sector across the territory of the Former Soviet Union. This has largely succeeded in heading off a crisis within Russian society as a whole by moving huge numbers of politically influential officers from a position where they are threatened by transition and democratisation, and thus likely to agitate for a foreign policy that is aggressive and militaristic or even launch domestic coups. In the process, this has led to an expansion of the private sector and civil society in the titchiest little places in the middle of Russia, to the deepening of professionalism in the Russian military and to intergovernmental mutual confidence and understanding. And (in no small part) has been influential in stopping the Russians invading Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Azerbaijan and possibly the Baltics for a while too.

There are similar projects ongoing in sub-Saharan Africa to help militarised populations (often deskilled, traumatised and very young) make the transition from violent conflict to peacetime. Angola is always cited as a prime example, so I am going to cite it as well.

Although this may not make as good TV as blowing up bridges and electricity stations, it has got to be said that this contributes far more to a country's long-term stability and economic growth which (if you want to get all basic and enlightened self-interest about it) means that the richer they get, the more i-Macs you can sell to them and the more receptive their economies are going to be to inward investment. Perhaps if the USA had invested a tenth of the amount they had spent on arming the Afghan mujaheddin during the 1980s (or even 10% of the annual arms gifts to Israel in Palestine) on demilitarisation and social infrastructure in the early 1990s, then there wouldn't be quite so many pissed off impoverished people who don't seem to share Tony Blair's enthusiasm for US foreign policy.

It's also got to be noticed that these programmes cost far less than air raids and invasions - though perhaps that's the heart of the problem from Gadge Bush's point of view which seems to be when organising foreign policy, the guiding principal should ultimately be to transfer cash from the American taxpayer to the accounts of Lockheed, Rand and the rest of the military-industrial complex.

 

[mobymonster]

JWH, again thanks. I had no idea.

mobymonster

 

[rasrave]

JWH, is this the same former Soviet Union where the military has not been paid in months, or where people cannot earn enough to buy food because of rampant inflation?
The only bunch having profited from the "growth of the private sector" are the Russian Mafia
And when you talk of "inward investment in the economy", I hope that you don't mean that the Big Bad US of A gets panned again when they attempt to kickstart these economies...because most of the time, they are first in line for the "charity", and first in line to bitch about "foreign (ie:US) interference in their economies/lifestyles/politics...

 

[rasrave]

I also have to ask something...when you guys get rid of the oppressing capitalist/bourgeois/big money system, what actually is going to take its place...I am asking this as it seems to me that the alternative economies that have been attempted have a way of falling apart at the seams...
The only constant is that when "Western style" governments are pushed out, the power vacuum is filled by either Dictatorships or Socialist style regimes that are equal in their shabby treatment of the people...

 

[Nemo]

Mobymonster, once again you HAVE NOT READ MY POST I said that (and I quote once again if you would care to read it before once agin libelling me):

"This is unbelievable. An utterly calous act desgined to hurt innocent civilians. Most likely, thousands of people will die as a result of this thoughtless, selfish action. My fury, disgust, and shock at this attack cannot be expressed. I may hate the American government but I would not wish this upon anyone. Whoever is responsible is an utterly reprehensible bastard with utter contempt for life.
I hope all the US posters and everyone else is okay."

Is this merely "utter distaste and anger?" This was my first reaction on the boards btw., as I believe is what you quoted. It sounds like you are doing me an injustice.

You are once again showing that you have not read what I have written before libelling me. Also, have I been profane to you? I don't think I have, but if I have I appologise. However, given that you have been libelling/slandering me, perhaps you are breaking the terms too.

As for your "anti-west" point, I will reiterate this once, and once only, I DO NOT HATE THE WEST. I hate some of the things the west does and the reasons that they do it but I do not hate the west per se. If you fail to understand this, I am afraid that I cannot break it down further, I generally decide my opinion on an issue by issue basis.

" What a joke..at least the rest of us are not trying to claim to be political science majors, just trying to debate and learn something..."

Contrary to what you seem to believe Rasrave, that is all we want to do. I know of no one on this site who has a politics degree. Just because we actually believe in something other than money and death is no reason to try and flame us.

"why don't you go into these other countries that you so admire and help the people there, you could for instance go and help the Taliban fight against these westen terrorists"

I have stated catagorically many times that I loath the Taliban. The argument that 'if you are not with us, you are against us' is so old that it was probably in use in Biblical times.

"But what I see on this forum is far more condemnation of the US, UK and the West than directed at terrorists, any condemnation of the terrorists is pretty much a token effort, if you go through the posts the West is according to many, responsible for everything that happens which just isn't true."

I won't accept that any condemnation of terrorists is a 'token effort.' If you believe that you obviously believe that we are bogeymen with no human emotions. Of course we loath death, of course we detest terrorism. Our voices were just as loud as any other forums in condemning the attacks so why do we get singled out as 'supporters of terror?' Did you read that crappy article in New Republic or something? I also do not accept that we see the west as the root of all evil. We have condemned China, the Taliban, Israel, Palestinian terrorists, Australia, and many other non-western people.

Incidentally Mobymonster, what do you think of the death of 4 innocent UN workers in Kabul? Is that justified by the 'war against terrorism' or is it another crime for which Bush, Blair et al must be brought to book?

PEACE TO ALL!

 

[rasrave]

Still waiting for "replacement form of government" answer...but it could tale a while

 

[Johnny Canuck]

Well, here it is, the next day, and not one post explaining a viable solution to the problem caused by Sept. 11, that doesn't involved armed conflict. I'm waiting..

 

[johnwisehammer]

Rasrave - are you some sort of imbecile or what? I was asked to provide an example of ethical foreign policy that did not end up in war where a developed, richer country engaged with an unstable, less developed country with a successful outcome in risk reduction. I gave one. And then you went and said that the country was unstable.

Well, of course it was, you thick bastard, otherwise there wouldn't have been a problem in the first place! Honestly, if all you are interested in is proving your own smartarsed self-righteousness, then you could have given up long ago.

 

[rasrave]

JWH, no, I do not think that I am an imbecile (even if i do have my doubts about some the people posting here..).I was merely pointing out the obvious fact that people will resent the US (or the West) for interfering with their economies...
You have still not told me which type of government would be in place instead of the dreaded Capitalist one...Communist, Socialist,Dictatorship, all have their flaws to say the least, with persecution of their own people, poverty, lack of infrastructure and education being the most obvious...Could you enlighten me on all this??

 

[mobymonster]

Nemo, I hope 4 innocent people have not died, in fact I wish no one had or will die.

As at the last news proggy I saw the 4 deaths are NOT confirmed, I hope it is propagander on the part of taliban as that would mean 4 less deaths.

I'm not sure what to believe. In the news clip of the house the trees still had leaves on and when ever I've blown something up and trees were near the leaves got blown off so ????

Thanks to the accuracy of the bombing there have so far been very few deaths, which is good.

If it turns out that the 4 have died, no it is not a crime for bush or blair to be brought to book for as you say, at least in my opinion.


And lastly what's the New Republic ?

mobymonster

 

[elnino]

Quick reminder, folks

if recent memory serves me correctly, there are over 6,000 CIVILIANAmericans no longer living AT ALL simply because they went to their office buildings to try and pay their bills. So let's try to keep a little perspective here and not get our panties (knickers) in a twist over the Taliban's claims that these military strikes are "terrorist attacks against the entire Islamic world".