Something to Think About

[Professor S]

No matter what your views on President Bush's statement of upcoming war, this, from an English journalist, is very interesting. Just a word of background, for those of you who aren't familiar with the UK's Daily Mirror. This is a notoriously left-wing daily that is normally not supportive of the Colonials across the Atlantic.

Tony Parsons Daily Mirror September 11, 2002

ONE year ago, the world witnessed a unique kind of broadcasting ----the mass murder of thousands, live on television. As a lesson in the pitiless cruelty of the human race, September 11 was up there with Pol Pot's mountain of skulls in Cambodia, or the skeletal bodies stacked like garbage in the Nazi
concentration camps. An unspeakable act so cruel, so calculated and so utterly merciless that surely the world could agree on one thing - nobody deserves this fate. Surely there could be consensus: the victims were truly innocent, the perpetrators truly evil. But to the world's eternal shame, 9/11 is increasingly seen as America's comeuppance.

Incredibly, anti-Americanism has increased over the last year. There has always been a simmering resentment to the USA in this country - too loud, too rich, too full of themselves and so much happier than Europeans - but it has become an epidemic. And it seems incredible to me. More than that, it turns my stomach. America is this country's greatest friend and our
staunchest ally. We are bonded to the US by culture, language and blood. A little over half a century ago, around half a million Americans died for our freedoms, as well as their own. Have we forgotten so soon? And exactly a year ago, thousands of ordinary men, women and children -not just Americans, but from dozens of countries - were butchered by a small group of religious fanatics. Are we so quick to betray them?

What touched the heart about those who died in the twin towers and on the planes was that we recognized them. Young fathers and mothers, somebody's son and somebody's daughter, husbands and wives, and children, some unborn. And these people brought it on themselves? And their nation is to blame for
their meticulously planned slaughter? These days you don't have to be some dust- encrusted nut job in Kabul or Karachi or Finsbury Park to see America as the Great Satan. The anti-American alliance is made up of self-loathing liberals who blame the Americans for every ill in the Third World, and conservatives suffering from power-envy, bitter that the world's only
superpower can do what it likes without having to ask permission. The truth is that America has behaved with enormous restraint since September 11.

Remember, remember. Remember the gut-wrenching tapes of weeping men phoning their wives to say, "I love you," before they were burned alive. Remember those people leaping to their deaths from the top of burning skyscrapers. Remember the hundreds of firemen buried alive. Remember the smiling face of
that beautiful little girl who was on one of the planes with her mum. Remember, remember - and realize that America has never retaliated for 9/11 in anything like the way it could have. So a few al-Qaeda tourists got locked without a trial n Camp X-ray? Pass the Kleenex... So some Afghan wedding receptions were shot up after they merrily fired their semi-automatics in a sky full of American planes? A shame, but maybe next time they should stick to confetti.

AMERICA could have turned a large chunk of the world into a parking lot. That it didn't is a sign of strength. American voices are already being raised against attacking Iraq - that's what a democracy is for. How many in the Islamic world will have a minute's silence for the slaughtered innocents of 9/11? How many Islamic leaders will have the guts to say that the mass
murder of 9/11 was an abomination? When the news of 9/11 broke on the West Bank, those freedom-loving Palestinians were dancing in the street. America watched all of that - and didn't push the button. We should thank the stars that America is the most powerful nation in the world. I still find it incredible that 9/11 did not provoke all-out war. Not a "war on terrorism."
A real war.

The fundamentalist dudes are talking about "opening the gates of hell," if America attacks Iraq. Well, America could have opened the gates of hell like you wouldn't believe. The US is the most militarily powerful nation that ever strode the face of the earth. The campaign in Afghanistan may have been less than perfect and the planned war on Iraq may be misconceived. But don't
blame America for not bringing peace and light to these wretched countries. How many democracies are there in the Middle East, or in the Muslim world? You can count them on the fingers of one hand - assuming you haven't had any chopped off for minor shoplifting.

I love America, yet America is hated. I guess that makes me Bush's poodle. But I would rather be a dog in New York City than a Prince in Riyadh. Above all, America is hated because it is what every country wants to be - rich, free, strong, open, optimistic. Not ground down by the past, or religion, or some caste system. America is the best friend this country everhad and we
should start remembering that. Or do you really think the USA is the root of all evil? Tell it to the loved ones of the men and women who leaped to their death from the burning towers. Tell it to the nursing mothers whose husbands died on one of the hijacked planes, or were ripped apart in a collapsing skyscraper. And tell it to the hundreds of young widows whose husbands
worked for the New York Fire Department.

To our shame, George Bush gets a worse press than Saddam Hussein. Once we were told that Saddam gassed the Kurds, tortured his own people and set up rape-camps in Kuwait. Now we are told he likes Quality Street (a type of chocolate candy). Save me the orange center, oh mighty one!

Remember, remember, September 11. One of the greatest atrocities in human history was committed against America. No, do more than remember. Never forget.

An Englishman said it better than I ever could.

[GameMaster]

That was a good piece. Thanks for sharing.

[TheGame]

that was a good read

[gekko]

Damn good article.

[playa_playa]

To be honest, it's neither refreshing nor original. I understand that in the midst of all the anti-America sentiments, an essay written in praise of America not coming from an American could seem like the greatest thing since the invention of the wheelbarrow. But this article's mindless praise of America and the ideals that America stands for is simply being trivialized by the overly sycophantic and subordinate tone.

Put it in perspective, this article's backbone for all the praise is the fact that America withstood one of the greatest tragedies - in the article's view - in the history of mankind and that it took all the actions proper and did so democratically. That's swell. Except for the fact that these "democratic" actions are what's proper and essential in a democracy. Had America not taken the actions that it did in the manner it did (which is still up for debate; not to mention the expediency with which it was executed keeping in mind that Al-Qaida has not been thwarted nor Osama Bin Laden apprehended, or lack thereof), we should be properly criticized for it. The moment we take things that we must reasonably do as something to be praised, we begin to lose our position in ensuring that the country remains a faithful manifestation of its intents.

Of course, that's not to say that doing what's reasonable does not deserve a praise. Of course it does. However, such a praise in the sense that the writer of this article delineates:

"So a few al-Qaeda tourists got locked without a trial n Camp X-ray? Pass the Kleenex... So some Afghan wedding receptions were shot up after they merrily fired their semi-automatics in a sky full of American planes? A shame, but maybe next time they should stick to confetti."

A praise like this is disturbing. Both disturbing and corrupting. If the writer were basing his praise on the fact that we behaved how a democracy should behave, why is he making a disobediance of the dictates of the international rights of man trivial? Is it because we have, as he puts it "suffered an abomination," and they have not? So in his words, suffering a big injustice should be an excuse for inflicting smaller injustices?

Before anyone gets the wrong impression, I love America and the ideals it stands for. And it is because I love America that I try to veer away from corrupting, sycophantic praises like these that only serve to gain popular support.

"I love my country too much to be an ultranationalist"

[Rndm_Perfection]

It's always good to see an intelligent pro-American voice outside of its borders. Thank you for posting this piece.

[Professor S]

Originally posted by playa_playa
To be honest, it's neither refreshing nor original. I understand that in the midst of all the anti-America sentiments, an essay written in praise of America not coming from an American could seem like the greatest thing since the invention of the wheelbarrow. But this article's mindless praise of America and the ideals that America stands for is simply being trivialized by the overly sycophantic and subordinate tone.

Put it in perspective, this article's backbone for all the praise is the fact that America withstood one of the greatest tragedies - in the article's view - in the history of mankind and that it took all the actions proper and did so democratically. That's swell. Except for the fact that these "democratic" actions are what's proper and essential in a democracy. Had America not taken the actions that it did in the manner it did (which is still up for debate; not to mention the expediency with which it was executed keeping in mind that Al-Qaida has not been thwarted nor Osama Bin Laden apprehended, or lack thereof), we should be properly criticized for it. The moment we take things that we must reasonably do as something to be praised, we begin to lose our position in ensuring that the country remains a faithful manifestation of its intents.

Of course, that's not to say that doing what's reasonable does not deserve a praise. Of course it does. However, such a praise in the sense that the writer of this article delineates:

"So a few al-Qaeda tourists got locked without a trial n Camp X-ray? Pass the Kleenex... So some Afghan wedding receptions were shot up after they merrily fired their semi-automatics in a sky full of American planes? A shame, but maybe next time they should stick to confetti."

A praise like this is disturbing. Both disturbing and corrupting. If the writer were basing his praise on the fact that we behaved how a democracy should behave, why is he making a disobediance of the dictates of the international rights of man trivial? Is it because we have, as he puts it "suffered an abomination," and they have not? So in his words, suffering a big injustice should be an excuse for inflicting smaller injustices?

Before anyone gets the wrong impression, I love America and the ideals it stands for. And it is because I love America that I try to veer away from corrupting, sycophantic praises like these that only serve to gain popular support.

"I love my country too much to be an ultranationalist"

1) Using large words doesn't make you sound intelligent when what you are saying lacks any facts to back it up.

2) The writer never said that America never made any mistakes. Of course we do, but when America makes mistakes it is because they are actually trying to make the world a better place to live. Its very easy to criticize a country for making mistakes, when other countries don't make any simply because they don't do anything.

3) America has done far more good than bad in history, despite what negative self-hating pseudo-intellectuals like to say. Has America also acted in its own best interests? Of course, why should we be held so far above any other country in the world. The fact of the matter is that most of the time what is in our best interest is in the best interest of world democracy and freedom.

4) I notice you have quoted the most negative part of the article to defend your statements. How even handed. You would almost think that nothing of value was said in the article by reading your post.

We cannot "save" everyone, but we can do the best that we can with what we have, and we do.

[playa_playa]

Originally posted by The Strangler
1) Using large words doesn't make you sound intelligent when what you are saying lacks any facts to back it up.

2) The writer never said that America never made any mistakes. Of course we do, but when America makes mistakes it is because they are actually trying to make the world a better place to live. Its very easy to criticize a country for making mistakes, when other countries don't make any simply because they don't do anything.

3) America has done far more good than bad in history, despite what negative self-hating pseudo-intellectuals like to say. Has America also acted in its own best interests? Of course, why should we be held so far above any other country in the world. The fact of the matter is that most of the time what is in our best interest is in the best interest of world democracy and freedom.

4) I notice you have quoted the most negative part of the article to defend your statements. How even handed. You would almost think that nothing of value was said in the article by reading your post.

We cannot "save" everyone, but we can do the best that we can with what we have, and we do.

I'm amazed you could somehow extract unpatriotism from my post. The original intention of my post was to point out that America is a country far too great to be praised by such a blatanly sycophantic and useless literature. I_never_mentioned that America is somehow inherently evil due to the mistakes it makes or due to the selfishness with which it operates in international affairs.

My original point, is that doing ethically sound actions in the face of a tragedy is something to be praised for but not worshipped; and that in dealing with the tragedy, any infliction of injustices in reparation of the tragedy is equally unjust. As I have pointed out in my previous post, the sort of "you did so much to us that doing some unjust things to you back isn't much of a problem" attitude does not exist to serve justice. On the contrary, it is a disservice to it.

Do you get that? It doesn't matter how many people lost their lives. In doesn't matter what kind of cruelty was inflicted. If you use injustice as a means to carry out justice, a contradiction and a wrongdoing occurs.

But in any case, let's tackle your "points" one by one.

1) I'm sorry you feel that vocabulary of this magnitude seems "large" to you in a sense that I am trying to be merely pretentious or pedantic. As for not backing up my point with facts; my point is not about facts or statistic or hard data. It's about a fundametal idea with which this very nation was founded on. Can you think of a "fact" or data to negate the idea that employing injustice in the face of a tragedy is an ethically wrong idea of creating justice?

2) I never said America should be scolded for every mistake we make. Neither did I ever say that we are just an evil empire of self-interests. Quite the opposite. I think we are in a just frame of mind. But when we become callused to making mistakes that create injustice, we need to evaulate ourselves and criticize ourselves for that.

This is a basic idea. It's okay to make mistakes. But it isn't okay to repeat the same mistakes again and again. When we become callused like "so what if they suffer, we suffered more," we become callused to injustice. And that, in my opinion, should never be condoned.

As for the intention of America acting out of world interest as opposed to its own, I have no idea how you are supporting this. I mean, look at what you are saying: we act out of other people's interests, not ours. This is a fundamentally debatable proposition as it ties with the idea (in your case, an assumption) of human nature. How do you ever know what human nature is really like? In other words, how do you know what motivates America is out of world interest and not of the self? How can you prove a motive? Motive is a mental state. How can you prove it? And if you can't prove it, why are you making the assumption?

I also see that you make a broad generalization about other countries doing nothing, while America is carrying the torch valiantly. Can't you see that you're merely buying into an ultranationalistic assumption? You told me that I have no facts to back up my claim in your first point. So what backing do you have for this sort of a broad generalization?

3) I would probably agree wholeheartedly with you in this regard. I think the good we have achieved far outweighs the bad.

What I'm saying is, we shouldn't become lenient on ourselves because of that. Why not? Well, you want the country to keep doing those good things, don't you? If you can't criticize your own mistakes, how can you ever know what's right and what's wrong?

I can argue for your case that what is good for America most of the time is good for the democracy of the world in general. But what relevance does this have? I never said the opposite was the case. Neither did I mention that we shouldn't act out of self-interest. I think you need to reread or something.

4) If you have a piece of pie that's rotten on one side but only that side, I would be hesistant to think you would eat it. A piece of literature, tainted by a total misconception, is not unlike the bad pie. Sure, you could cut off the rotten part and eat it. But that wouldn't change the uneasiness of digesting something that contained such malice.

Your last statement is puzzling. Of course we can't always do the best. But what's wrong with trying to do the best?

[Professor S]

We ARE trying to do the best, that was my point, but maybe I have to express that point in unnecessarily large words for you to understand it.

"I'm sorry you feel that vocabulary of this magnitude seems "large" to you in a sense that I am trying to be merely pretentious or pedantic."

LOL!!! Thank you for proving my earlier point.

As for repeating old mistakes, there is more evidence that ignoring a hostile, cruel dictator does more harm than good. While you contend that the U.S. would repeat old mistakes by going into Iraq, I contend that we will NOT repeat the old mistakes of WW2 by going into Iraq. I will repeat this from another thread: "Evil is doing nothing in the face of need"

Also, I never said that the U.S. wasn't acting out of self-interest, in fact a I made a point to say that we often do, but the fact is that more times than not what is in our best interests coincides with the best interests of the world in general and we share in the benefits. And if you are going to argue that leaving Hussein in power is in the world's best interest, you are a fool.

"I also see that you make a broad generalization about other countries doing nothing, while America is carrying the torch valiantly. Can't you see that you're merely buying into an ultranationalistic assumption? You told me that I have no facts to back up my claim in your first point. So what backing do you have for this sort of a broad generalization?"

Did you bother reading the article before you replied. The author pointed out one big one.

Lets see, WW2, Bosnia, Panama, Somalia, etc. Whether of not they were all successful is irrelevant. The point is that America went in there and did what it could. Bosnia was laughable. The U.N. didn't budge until the US gave support and made it an issue.

As for not being un-patriotic, I think think its obvious that you are. Despite whatever careful wording you use, you're themes are quite evident. You call a potential Iraq war "unjust", but why is that? Here's the facts:

1) Under international law Iraq is ALREADY guilty. The burden of proof in on Iraq to prove their innocence, not the other way around. Look it up.

2) They have over 1,000 tons of chemical and biological agents unaccounted for with no evidence of destruction. The Iraqi answer? We don't have it. I wonder where is went...

3) They violated their rules of surrender, did not let inspectors in for years, and have extremely uncooperative in the face of the new insppections. Blix has said this much. He has also said that the 12,000 page manifest that Iraq gave to the UN is worthless.

4) Iraqi refugees in the US WANT the US to go to war. They have formed political organizations to work for this to happen. They know what goes on in Iraq. They experience friends and family members dissappearing and the oppression they lived under. Who are we to say we know better than them?

My question to you is this: What will it take for this war to be just? To find a smoking gun, it needs to be fired. What if that smoke takes the form of a mushroom cloud? And don't say it couldn't happen. We didn't think they could find a way to take out the world trade center either. Terrorists are resourceful and intelligent, even if deluded. So whats it going to take? Evidently common sense isn't enough to sway you.

[The Duggler]

North American lifestyle is certainly not an example of living for the rest of the planet. If the entire world population would be living like we are doing here in north america, it would take 5 planet earth to supply us. Yes we might be better than some others, but we are far from perfect, and we should try to fix our own problems before solving everybody else's problems.

[Professor S]

Ranzid, our problems pale in comparison to those of the people of Iraq and North Korea. Plus, Iraq directly affects the future of our country from economic and national security standpoints. Saddam Hussein is OUR problem too.

The US held the same nationalistic stance that you propose before, and that involved sitting idly by while Hitler slaughtered millions of people.

[The Duggler]

You don't know how it is in those country, all you know is what the US told you, your own version of the facts.

[playa_playa]

seriously, are you diabled? Because, you seem to be suffering from some sort of a relevancy disorder here. I wasn't making the claim that the impending war on Iraq is unjustified nor that the actions America has carried out thus far are necessarily unjust. I am making the claim, and I'll repeat for the last time, that reparations in the name of justice that harbors injustice is a contradiction and an injustice in itself. When the author of the original article was pointing out that it's "too bad" the pow didn't get a trial and was detained, I made the claim that this sort of callused behavior to injustices - even in the smalles kind - is too a sycophantic and corrupting literature in order to be considered a valid praise for America.

Do you get that? Let me put in in bold for you: Yes, we have done much good in the world. And for that, we should be commended for that. But we shouldn't be exempt from criticism because of this fact. Because the moment we become above criticisms, we begin to believe that we are inherently superior.

We ARE trying to do the best, that was my point, but maybe I have to express that point in unnecessarily large words for you to understand it.

Save me the limp personal insults. At least flame with some orginiality or something. Why do you keep bringing this up is beyond me. Confidence issues maybe.

As for repeating old mistakes, there is more evidence that ignoring a hostile, cruel dictator does more harm than good. While you contend that the U.S. would repeat old mistakes by going into Iraq, I contend that we will NOT repeat the old mistakes of WW2 by going into Iraq. I will repeat this from another thread: "Evil is doing nothing in the face of need"

Where in my original post did I ever mention that we will be making old mistakes if we go into Iraq? Find this make-believe claim I made. Or are you just *surprise, surprise* making this up?

Also, I never said that the U.S. wasn't acting out of self-interest, in fact a I made a point to say that we often do, but the fact is that more times than not what is in our best interests coincides with the best interests of the world in general and we share in the benefits. And if you are going to argue that leaving Hussein in power is in the world's best interest, you are a fool.

Ummmm...Right, of course I said leaving Hussein in power is in the world's best interest. Of course, of course! Wait, no I didn't. I think this is what I said - which, coincindentally, had nothing to do with leaving Hussein in power.

originally posted by playa_playaI can argue for your case that what is good for America most of the time is good for the democracy of the world in general. But what relevance does this have? I never said the opposite was the case. Neither did I mention that we shouldn't act out of self-interest. I think you need to reread or something.

I even said that I perceive that what's good for America most of the time is good for the democracy of the world in general. I am AGREEING with your case here. Remember what I said about being disabled? Now would be the good time to get it checked out.

Lets see, WW2, Bosnia, Panama, Somalia, etc. Whether of not they were all successful is irrelevant. The point is that America went in there and did what it could. Bosnia was laughable. The U.N. didn't budge until the US gave support and made it an issue.

Those cases, of course, represent the world as a whole. Cases like operation enduring freedom where GB helped us out or the Vietnamese war where S. Korean soldiers fought alongside US troops obviously mean nothing to you.

This broad generalization you drew: "other countries don't do anything," is proven false with just those two cases I mentioned.

As for not being un-patriotic, I think think its obvious that you are. Despite whatever careful wording you use, you're themes are quite evident. You call a potential Iraq war "unjust", but why is that? Here's the facts:

First, I never called a potential war on Iraq unjust. can you point this out in my previous post?

second, if being patriotic means not criticizing your own country even in the face of injustice, I am definitely unpatriotic. But that's not my conception of patriotism. Love for my country would have to entail that I try to point out what we have done wrong to improve it, should we do something wrong.

My question to you is this: What will it take for this war to be just? To find a smoking gun, it needs to be fired. What if that smoke takes the form of a mushroom cloud? And don't say it couldn't happen. We didn't think they could find a way to take out the world trade center either. Terrorists are resourceful and intelligent, even if deluded. So whats it going to take? Evidently common sense isn't enough to sway you.

I don't know exactly. Neither am I saying that this war on Iraq is inherently unjust. To tell you the truth, I haven't made a value judgement on it. But all things considered, a war on Iraq would not be an unjust act in my conclusions thus far. I never said it would be.

You are still missing my point. Not one thing in your post was a reponse to my idea: that the article takes a callused attitude towards harboring injustices like the pow detained without a trial in the name of facing a bigger injustice. And this, to me, isn't a right way to commend something. Just like how I pointed out in my introduction to your reply:

The original intention of my post was to point out that America is a country far too great to be praised by such a blatanly sycophantic and useless literature. I_never_mentioned that America is somehow inherently evil due to the mistakes it makes or due to the selfishness with which it operates in international affairs.

You obviously are ultranationalistic. With what little "facts" you have, you have drwan conclusions like "other countries don't do anything" or "criticizing your own nation is unpatriotic." I can't think of a more textbook example of the phenomenon. It's people like you who give true patriots of the country a bad name.

[TheGame]

Good playa_playa... waste all your energy on him, please don't look in any other forums

as for Strangler, good luck cracking him.

[playa_playa]

Originally posted by TheGame
Good playa_playa... waste all your energy on him, please don't look in any other forums

as for Strangler, good luck cracking him.

Nah, I'll be fine. It's amazing what frappucino w/ 50 lbs. of sugar can do.

Plus, I'm a little apprehensive after dealing with the massive amounts of idiocy that is the Super Bowl afterparty.