Are All Cultures Created Equal & Endowed With Inalienable Rights?

[Ouroboros]

Sage and Dave, I agree.

 

N.Korea was and is a higher threat than Iraq ever was, and now Iran is joining their side (in a sense).

 

And I believe too that Saudi was involved in 9/11, because they're making money from this. Usually in business and war, to know who is behind things, follow the money.

[Dave]

The real issue right now - is the fight Bush and Company...

 

Are you referring to the Bush Crime Family?

 

will put up in pulling out of Iraq. Remember - if we pull out and leave those oil fields behind - Bush and Company will have lost what they've been fighting for. They're not going to give up so easily.

if we leave now, we'll still get the oil, if not directly but by buying it from others, we just won't be in control and have the power that comes with that control.

 

Why do you think he's in such a hurry to put a surge of troops into the middle of all this. Once we have more troops on the frontlines of this mess - congress won't deny him any money.

 

It is starting to appear that our Great New Hope, the Democratic Congress, is not so great after all. The boss lady just doesn't seem to have the guts to tell the prez no new troops.

 

Can we last another 697 days?

 

All of this information sort of puts the original post in a new light....

 

...I wonder if the average citizen of Iraq thinks America and Britian are more "evil" than their culture.

 

They look around at the long history of industrialized nations attacking them and setting up puppet governments to control their oil.

 

They look around at the long history of industrialized nations attacking them and changing borders to nations all for the control of oil.

 

I wonder what they think of us???????

 

Certainly we're not the saviors Bush told us we'd be seen as while marching into Bagdad.

 

I don't think our civilization or culture is bad, or evil.... our leaders have been evil.... and I guess... by association.... then we are too. We elected the idiot and have kept him in power. That doesn't look good for us.

[Open_Minded]

The real issue right now - is the fight Bush and Company...

Are you referring to the Bush Crime Family?

Partially the Bush family, but also Cheney and all the large oil companies they're all indebted to.

 

Why do you think he's in such a hurry to put a surge of troops into the middle of all this. Once we have more troops on the frontlines of this mess - congress won't deny him any money.

It is starting to appear that our Great New Hope, the Democratic Congress, is not so great after all. The boss lady just doesn't seem to have the guts to tell the prez no new troops.

I agree - to a degree. She (and the congress) only have control over the purse strings. In addition - she can only do as much as she can get the votes for. And the sad truth - is our democracy has been sold to the highest bidder. The rest of congress and the senate is as much in hock to their various "special interests" as Bush is to oil. And what's your bet that the oil lobby has representatives and senators in their back pocket?

 

Can we last another 697 days?

Good question.

 

 

I don't think our civilization or culture is bad, or evil.... our leaders have been evil.... and I guess... by association.... then we are too. We elected the idiot and have kept him in power. That doesn't look good for us.

I don't think our culture is "evil" either. I don't think any culture is innately "evil". I really do believe most people are good at their core and I hope that people around the world know that America is not George Bush.

 

As far as electing the idiot. To a degree you're right. But, remember the corruption with election system. Remember Gore and Bush ended up in the Supreme court. That election could easily have been stolen.

 

___________

 

I guess my reason for bringing up the original post was to point out - from the perspective of the average citizen in the Middle East - America (and the west in general) could be perceived as "evil". Our actions do not reflect well on our culture. So, why is it any surprise that the extremist elements in the Middle East are so successful in recruiting and training men to their terrorist organizations?

 

Earlier in the thread I pointed out that we - in America - need to tend to our own problems before assuming we have the right to impose our values, political and economic system on other cultures.

[Dave]

The real issue right now - is the fight Bush and Company...

Are you referring to the Bush Crime Family?

Partially the Bush family, but also Cheney and all the large oil companies they're all indebted to.

Yep... that's the Bush Crime Family.

 

I agree - to a degree. She (and the congress) only have control over the purse strings. In addition - she can only do as much as she can get the votes for. And the sad truth - is our democracy has been sold to the highest bidder. The rest of congress and the senate is as much in hock to their various "special interests" as Bush is to oil. And what's your bet that the oil lobby has representatives and senators in their back pocket?

Only Congress can authorize a war. Bush is going to enter into a war with Iran without permission and then fight about it in court. We'll be stuck in another war that we can't get out of. This whole thing is reminding me more and more about the USSR/Afghanistan conflict that brought down the USSR. It's scary.

 

I don't think our culture is "evil" either. I don't think any culture is innately "evil". I really do believe most people are good at their core and I hope that people around the world know that America is not George Bush.

 

I hope so too. I agree that most people are good at their core. They don;t care what religion anyone is. They don't care about politics. They just want to feed their families in peace.

 

As far as electing the idiot. To a degree you're right. But, remember the corruption with election system. Remember Gore and Bush ended up in the Supreme court. That election could easily have been stolen.

 

It was stolen and there were many, too many, questions about his re-election. And his tactics were less than honorable.

 

I guess my reason for bringing up the original post was to point out - from the perspective of the average citizen in the Middle East - America (and the west in general) could be perceived as "evil". Our actions do not reflect well on our culture. So, why is it any surprise that the extremist elements in the Middle East are so successful in recruiting and training men to their terrorist organizations?

 

Earlier in the thread I pointed out that we - in America - need to tend to our own problems before assuming we have the right to impose our values, political and economic system on other cultures.

 

Agreed.

[Vigile]

I have a better idea. How about we just don't invade any countries that didn't invade us first?

[Dave]

I have a better idea. How about we just don't invade any countries that didn't invade us first?

but they are a threat, you just don't know it yet.

[Vigile]

I wonder if the average citizen of Iraq thinks America and Britian are more "evil" than their culture.

 

They look around at the long history of industrialized nations attacking them and setting up puppet governments to control their oil.

 

They look around at the long history of industrialized nations attacking them and changing borders to nations all for the control of oil.

 

I wonder what they think of us???????

 

Certainly we're not the saviors Bush told us we'd be seen as while marching into Bagdad.

 

Exactly OM. But if you point out that the terrorists have a legitimate bone to pick with the US, you are labeled a terrorist sympathizer. I don't support terrorism, but certainly donning army fatigues and invading by tank and by plane is no more noble endeavor than arming oneself with box knives and taking down planes.

[Ouroboros]

I have a better idea. How about we just don't invade any countries that didn't invade us first?

but they are a threat, you just don't know it yet.

Exactly. Preemptive war against all nations, to create democracy (to vote for Bush), freedom (to shut up and believe in only on religion) and peace (because no one is allowed to do anything but mr bigshot himself) everywhere.

[The Sage Nabooru]

Just a general question.... what's going to happen when the oil runs out? What will we have to fight over then?

 

I've been thinking about this. Right now, what runs the Islamic theocracies in the Middle East's economies is the oil. As much as they begrudge it against us - and with good reason - their money simply would not be there without it. Saudi Arabia would probably still be nothing more than a desert where different tribes regularly raided each others' tents.

 

Once the oil runs out, or new energy sources take over, whichever comes first, their money will disappear quite suddenly, as suddenly as it came to them. Now the war will be fought against those evil Americans who took their standard of living away and forced them into poverty.

[Vigile]

The thing about oil running out is the rule of scarcity and elastic demand. Until legitimate alternative energy resources are established, the price of oil is only going to go higher and higher, making those who have access to it richer and richer. I suspect this is why the US has been so aggressive in the ME. From a realist perspective, as much as it begrudges me to say so, the Bushies are probably right.

[Dave]

Exactly. Preemptive war against all nations, to create democracy (to vote for Bush), freedom (to shut up and believe in only on religion) and peace (because no one is allowed to do anything but mr bigshot himself) everywhere.

That does sound awfully familiar..... I remember hearing that during the Cold War.... from the USSR.

[Dave]

....Once the oil runs out, or new energy sources take over, whichever comes first, their money will disappear quite suddenly, as suddenly as it came to them. Now the war will be fought against those evil Americans who took their standard of living away and forced them into poverty.

 

It looks like we will always be the bad guys and war will never go away. I think that it's not us that are the bad guys but that we have "things" and they do not. Which goes back to that inalienable rights thing. They believe (and may have a good case) that they have too little because we have too much. Isn't that the main beef of the terrorists; they are basically disenfranchised and have no say in their lives? They want what we have and do not have a way of getting it.

[Ouroboros]

Exactly. Preemptive war against all nations, to create democracy (to vote for Bush), freedom (to shut up and believe in only on religion) and peace (because no one is allowed to do anything but mr bigshot himself) everywhere.

That does sound awfully familiar..... I remember hearing that during the Cold War.... from the USSR.

Urgh. I doesn't surprise me at all. Did anyone ever consider that almost all wars started with the idea of "protection" and being "preemptive"? Even though the words maybe wasn't used, but I mean some wars starts just because of greed and the desire to expand, but there must be quite a number of wars that started because of fear of begin attacked. And I thought UN's security council was supposed to be the final solution to his not happening anymore. Of course Iran is making nuclear bombs because they want to start a preemptive war too against who they consider enemies. It was the most stupid idea any president ever have had in this country.

[Dave]

The thing about oil running out is the rule of scarcity and elastic demand. Until legitimate alternative energy resources are established, the price of oil is only going to go higher and higher, making those who have access to it richer and richer. I suspect this is why the US has been so aggressive in the ME. From a realist perspective, as much as it begrudges me to say so, the Bushies are probably right.

In my way of thinking that's all the more reason we need to wean ourselves off of the oil before it runs out.

[Open_Minded]

WOW - I'm reading all these posts - so many good points and so little time to respond.

 

Dave:

Only Congress can authorize a war. Bush is going to enter into a war with Iran without permission and then fight about it in court. We'll be stuck in another war that we can't get out of. This whole thing is reminding me more and more about the USSR/Afghanistan conflict that brought down the USSR. It's scary.

It is scary - isn't it. You may want to check out the following story.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/22/AR2007022201743.html

Democrats Seek to Repeal 2002 War Authorization

 

Do you think they stand a chance of succeeding? Remember they have to get enough votes to withstand the veto.

 

Exactly OM. But if you point out that the terrorists have a legitimate bone to pick with the US, you are labeled a terrorist sympathizer. I don't support terrorism, but certainly donning army fatigues and invading by tank and by plane is no more noble endeavor than arming oneself with box knives and taking down planes.

Just my point. Even our troops on the ground can see this. The young man I wrote about earlier in the thread - the one who told me the story about guarding oil fields. He has said - more than once - if the tables were turned he'd do anything he could to protect his homeland - including making roadside bombs. We are increasingly seen as occupation forces.

 

What would any one of us do if another country occupied our homeland?????

 

Sage

Once the oil runs out, or new energy sources take over, whichever comes first, their money will disappear quite suddenly, as suddenly as it came to them. Now the war will be fought against those evil Americans who took their standard of living away and forced them into poverty.

Sad but true. In my heart I believe those of us in industrialized nations have to take responsibility for our oil consumption. Not only for environmental reasons, but for reasons of peace in the world.

 

But, Sage - you are right - the standard of living is also a factor. If, world-wide, we don't work together and build productive ways to raise the standard of living, then we're all in trouble. We can either productively work to even out the gap between the wealthiest and poorest - or we can let nature take it's course. If nature takes it's course those of us in wealthier countries will be forced out of our current standard of living. Greed can only go so far.

 

A perfect example is the gap between rich and poor right here in our own country. It has grown much wider with Bush in the White House. There hasn't been such a huge gap between rich and poor in this country since before the Great Depression. People say the Great Depression can't happen again, because we have checks and balances in place. I don't buy it - we're setting ourselves up for another Great Depression - and all of it because of greed.

 

The same holds true world-wide.

[Dave]

Urgh. I doesn't surprise me at all. Did anyone ever consider that almost all wars started with the idea of "protection" and being "preemptive"? Even though the words maybe wasn't used, but I mean some wars starts just because of greed and the desire to expand, but there must be quite a number of wars that started because of fear of begin attacked.

 

Wasn't WWII started for that reason? What about Stalin and Mao? Weren't they just "protecting" their country? I remember reading something long ago that explained that the USSR wanted peace... but that could only be achieved under their rule. Sound familiar?

 

And I thought UN's security council was supposed to be the final solution to this not happening anymore. Of course Iran is making nuclear bombs because they want to start a preemptive war too against who they consider enemies. It was the most stupid idea any president ever have had in this country.

 

That's exactly why bush went against the wishes of the UN and it's members. They wanted a peaceful solution, bush wanted war.

 

Just a side line.... I'm not all that sure Iran wants a nuclear bomb. We might just be getting a boat load of propaganda (along with other boat loads) that Iran is the aggressor. They might realize that their oil is running out and they need another source of energy - like they say they are doing. bush has lied so many times I cannot believe a word he says.

[Ouroboros]

Just a side line.... I'm not all that sure Iran wants a nuclear bomb. We might just be getting a boat load of propaganda (along with other boat loads) that Iran is the aggressor. They might realize that their oil is running out and they need another source of energy - like they say they are doing. bush has lied so many times I cannot believe a word he says.

So very true. Just like Saddam in Iraq probably was playing a game of bluff by pretending he had the weapons by denying, but yet not really in a convincing way, the existence of the weapons. Iran might be bluffing too, just trying to scare the western world, "look at us, we are dangerous, so watch out." But I guess Bush doesn't play poker well, he goes for the bluff, and go all in. It means we either win all or lose all. Being from Texas and a "cowboy" he should be better at poker, damn it!

[Dave]

Do you think they stand a chance of succeeding? Remember they have to get enough votes to withstand the veto.

 

I don't think they'll succeed. There's too many Republican chicken hawks around.

 

But, Sage - you are right - the standard of living is also a factor. If, world-wide, we don't work together and build productive ways to raise the standard of living, then we're all in trouble. We can either productively work to even out the gap between the wealthiest and poorest - or we can let nature take it's course. If nature takes it's course those of us in wealthier countries will be forced out of our current standard of living. Greed can only go so far.

 

Agreed.

[Dave]

So very true. Just like Saddam in Iraq probably was playing a game of bluff by pretending he had the weapons by denying, but yet not really in a convincing way, the existence of the weapons.

 

I'm convinced much of the bravado Saddam was putting out was for internal consumption. He wanted his people to think he still had WMDs so they wouldn't revolt against him.

 

Iran might be bluffing too, just trying to scare the western world, "look at us, we are dangerous, so watch out." But I guess Bush doesn't play poker well, he goes for the bluff, and go all in. It means we either win all or lose all. Being from Texas and a "cowboy" he should be better at poker, damn it!

 

North Korea is the one trying to look dangerous so they can get attention and play with the big boys. Iran may be telling the truth, they just want an energy source. I heard one Texan say; "That load of manure isn't a Texan." Someone else said he's "all hat and no horse." The guy is a idiot, a dangerous one too.

[Vigile]

It is scary - isn't it. You may want to check out the following story.

 

The good news is that life goes one even if the country doesn't. I see it all around me.

[Open_Minded]

It is scary - isn't it. You may want to check out the following story.

The good news is that life goes one even if the country doesn't. I see it all around me.

Yes indeed...

 

My father always told us children to "take a long view of history". Life does go on and I'd like to believe humanity has matured - that we've become more compassionate, more tolerant, more accepting than our ancestors. Strictly speaking - survival of the human species depends upon humanity becoming more compassionate, more tolerant, more accepting and just plain wiser.

 

We will need wisdom and love and compassion and tolerance to overcome all the problems we bring upon ourselves through ego and greed.

 

And in the middle of all the pain, it's not only important to take the long view of history, it's also important to simply live. Live in the here and now accepting that there are certain things we have no personal or immediate control over, and just live "in the moment". Find our peace right here and now - and do what we are able to do (right here and now) to contribute to peace in the larger context.

[chefranden]

...

Who's curriculum? And how would you propose to get this education into hermetically sealed Middle Eastern, Stanian, and north African clans or past the Mullahs elsewhere.

 

I don't see this to be much better than "Jesus is the Answer".

I can see your point... but what's the answer then? When I say education I don't mean indoctrination, just plain old education... you know.... science math and all that stuff. Not even saying, or teaching that religion is bunk, but just a good general all round education.

 

Plus, I don't think the elimination of religion should be the goal of this education. I just think that that education would tone down the radical fundamentalists. Isn't it those fundamentalists that take away the rights of others? I keep having to remind myself that religion is not the enemy, fundamentalism is.

 

Sorry, sundry problems have kept me from keeping up with my own thread, but I'm glad to see that discussion has blossomed.

 

That is the kind of education that I thought was being suggested. However, that is just the sort of thing that is suspect to religion.

 

Why isn't acceptable religion the enemy? Without it these fundies wouldn't have any safe place to be. That is if they were blowing stuff up in the name or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, they would all be in jail now instead of being considered "freedom fighters". And no one could send armies of revenge after them to kill 1000's more.

[chefranden]

A non-religious society? Do you really think that it would be all that better?

 

The Soviet Union was a non-religious society......didn't really work out.

 

I disagree. The Soviet Union was not a non-religious society. You might make a case that it was a godless society, but it was not non-religious. Stalin's idol was Ivan Grozny who's savagery was informed by his religion. Stalin's religion didn't have a god, but it did have a savior and the savior was Stalin.

[chefranden]

Since I don't have any power to effect anything out there in this matter, should I just become a provincial and not worry my pretty head about it? Should I be a know-nothing? That doesn't seem right either, but it may just be more comfortable.

 

The short answer is yes. For if you and other westerners take it upon themselves as some duty to change parts of the world that don't belong to them, they/you will end up doing more damage than good. We've already seen that. The weight of the whole world must not be born upon your shoulder's Chef.

 

Thanks, I shall now log off and watch Gilligan's Island, until I rot.

 

I suppose that one shouldn't worry about things outside one's sphere of influence. If I can figure out the mileage on that puppy, I'll know when an event is close enough to get pissed off about.

 

My wife is a happy person. She doesn't watch or read the news, theory, opinion, or what ever of anything political or religious. My congressman was in town last week and I went to see him to argue for Impeachment. I didn't get anywhere -- he's not going to waste is time on something that can't happen, I'm told. So much for standing up for something simply because it is right. (The Honorable man said he'd like to hang the bastard if he could.) Anyway, when I told Sweetie, "I'm going to see Obey", she just said, "Who's that?" (As you can see, my sphere of influence is small. I think I may rule this small room containing my computer. At least I'm not required to keep it neat.) Funny thing is though, she's not an air-head either and could find Nepal on a map.

[Dave]

Why isn't acceptable religion the enemy?

 

Why should they be? If we see an idea as an enemy, then doesn't that lower us to their level?

 

Without it these fundies wouldn't have any safe place to be. That is if they were blowing stuff up in the name or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, they would all be in jail now instead of being considered "freedom fighters". And no one could send armies of revenge after them to kill 1000's more.

 

Granted the vast majority that is the middle does not do anything to rein in the extremists that blow things up, but does that make them an enemy? We should be enlisting their help instead of condemning them with guilt by association.