At 05:41 PM 12/20/2003 -0800, "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:
-- On 19 Dec 2003 at 22:23, Anonymous wrote:
Re saddam et all... http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EL19Ak01.html
The war of words over Saddam & Bush is quite amusing. The blind faith in ones govt structure and the willingness to support force that is in such extreme measure overpowering and statist such as the dropping of tons of depleted uranium high explosives shows that some on this list have not broadened their news reading beyond fox news.
I am anti war. You lot are pro Saddam.
That is quite a presumption there. "If you're not with US, you're with the terrorists", eh? Same old sorry ass script, dug up but unoriginal dullards as the boilerplate world domination scam. You know, the Nazis were just make the world safe for freedom, fighting those pesky Commies, and oh yeah, those "terrorists" who burned down the Reichstag... WTC-Reichstag 2. Same old story. Yep, just no decent boogymen, since the commies gave up the good fight. They tried replacing them with "the drug menace", but that never quite took the same way. People were yet too skeptical because too many people like gettin' high themselves. Oh ok, here we go kiddies on our neverland joyride interminable "war on terror". Oh yeah, that's a REAL good one, that'll keep the proles cowering for the protection of the feudal state's protection. O. Protect Me, Thine Lord, and I shall prostrate my ass to your minions at the airports! Pucker up to prove you don't a bomb hidden up yo ass, boy.
Back in the sixties, there were lots of good reasons to oppose the Vietnam war, notably that it was fought by conscription, and that McNamara's search for measures of war fighting efficiency and to create incentives for efficient production of war effort were demoralizing the troops, and instead of creating incentives to fight effectively, created perverse incentives to commit mass murder in place of killing the enemy.
But instead the opponents wound up chanting 'ho, ho, ho Chi Minh" Ho Chi Minh was a senior KGB agent, who after spending ten years behind a desk in Moscow organizing the murder of Indochinese nationalists was sent from Moscow to rule what became North Vietnam. He purged 85% of the communist party, murdering a large but unknown proportion of them, and conducted a terror against the peasants of extraordinary savagery.
"Uncle Ho" was the leader of the Indochinese resistance, leader of a popular anti-colonial nationalist movement (remember, Indochina was a French colony, before the Japanese seized it from them). The original viet cong tunnel complexes, dated back to the nationalist resistance movement which was fighting the Imperial Japanese occupation of Indochina. Eisenhower actually considered Ho to be a great ally in the region at the time, for giving the Japs such hell. After the War, however, the Frenchys wanted their old colony back so they could rape it some more of it's cheap natural resources, and well, Ho having fought the dickens out of the Japs, wasn't having any of it. Eventually the French gave up (ever hear of dienbienphu?) Then WE got involved in that mess (under the pretext of "anticommunism proxy warism"), and rather than just let them have their own country, killed a lot of peasants and made big defense contractors some mega money, before the Amerikan youth finally rebelled at being sent off to be slaughtered for defense contractor profiteering. Ho had actually admitted to being an avid admirer of the founding fathers of the US, I seem to recall.
And now the guys on this list are weeping big salt tears about poor victimized Saddam.
Saddam is irrelevant, and the real joke on US will be when we come to understand it. OK, whoopy-dee-do, "We Got Him!" (nevermind that WE MADE HIM, nevermind that we built up his bio-chem WMD proggies, to counter the reaction in Iran after our tyrant Shah THERE got his ass kicked out by the people). A CIA puppet who got out of control. Don't want to believe it, look for how he was part of a CIA team recruited to assassinate Kassem. He was useful while he did US bidding. Once he outlived his usefulness, we set him up ("the greenlighting of kuwait invasion, ala April Gillespie and Poppy Bush), so we had a great excuse to dump our obsolete inventories of older military hardware, as well as battle-test our latest weapons technologies at the same time. Chickens always come home to roost. This is the case with Saddam, same as it was for Bin Laden as well (another CIA Frankenstein, run amok on Master). Do you not see a PATTERN here, of building up and tearing down, and making monster profits every step of the way, and the hell with those useless eater peasants by the millions? Look at all the Panamanians we slaughtered, so Poppy Bush could "take out" a noncompliant Noriega, who was threatening to spill the sloppy details or Poppy's CIA cocaine trafficking. Silenced him real good, didn't we. Now he can talk to the wall in a Fed prison if he wants to talk...
Anyone who opposed the war on Vietnam should have started off by asking "How shall we contain the Soviet Union and eventually defeat communism, and what is wrong with the way this administration is doing it.
Similarly anyone who opposes the war in Iraq should start by visualizing himself as the heir of King John Sobieski, not the heir of Saladin. Anyone opposing the war in Iraq needs oppose it from the point of view that Americans and their way of life should win, deserve to win, and the raghead fanatics should lose, and their way of life perish.
Why the insecure need to dominate others? You think "American culture" has no flaws? You think Islam has nothing of value? Do you not see the logic of actions and reactions (and chain reactions ad infinitum)? Why should one have to dominate/annihilate the other? How about symbiosis? Coexistence? How about finding a balance where we become more self-sufficient, so that we do not need their oil, and therefore do not get "in their faces". You know, picking sides, like the Israeli-Palestinian mess. Oh yeah, I guess you just swallowed the Bush lie hook line and sinker about how they "did it because they hate our freedom". Oh yeah, well, Bush and Nazi Asscroft have taken the most important freedoms, and undermine daily anything left, so they shouldn't have any reason to hate us anymore. I'm surprised Bush didn't claim Osama got a bad burger once at the Riyadh McDonald's, and just then and there decided that we've just simply "got to be destroyed". Gotta stop watching so much TV, it's rotting your brain. You think the USA can do NO wrong, we ALWAYS have only the truly noblest intents, eh? Look at history, look at how we have related and treated others. Oh, sometimes we have done the right things, but at least as often if not more we have done the wrong things, to the tune of millions of dead foreign peasants usually. Look at all the genocidal CIA installed dictators... Suharto in Indonesia, Saddam... etc etc etc WHY THEY HATE US--DUH! http://www.ddh.nl/pipermail/wereldcrisis/2002-October/003148.html in particular: In the quotations collected below, the name of the leader who was assassinated is spelled variously as Qasim, Qassim and Kassem. But, however you spell his name, when he took power in a popularly-backed coup in 1958, he certainly got recognized in Washington. He carried out such anti-American and anti-corporatist policies as starting the process of nationalizing foreign oil companies in Iraq, withdrawing Iraq from the US-initiated right-wing Baghdad Pact (which included another military-run, US-puppet state, i.e., Pakistan) and decriminalizing the Iraqi Communist Party. Despite these actions, and more likely because of them, he was Iraq's most popular leader. He had to go! In 1959, there was a failed assassination attempt on Qasim. The failed assassin was none other than a young Saddam Hussein. In 1963, a CIA-organized coup did successfully assassinate Qasim and Saddam's Ba'ath Party came to power for the first time. Saddam returned from exile in Egypt and took up the key post as head of Iraq's secret service. The CIA then provided the new pliant, Iraqi regime with the names of thousands of communists, and other leftist activists and organizers. Thousands of these supporters of Qasim and his policies were soon dead in a rampage of mass murder carried out by the CIA's close friends in Iraq.
Anyone who wants to argue that the guys in the two towers had it coming, and poor Saddam is a victim, puts himself in the corner with the people who are stupid, evil, and losers.
The people in the Towers were innocent victims, like most palestinians in the occupied territories, like oppressed peasants everywhere, and any and all "collateral casualties" to our militarist ventures and CIA-coup-installed-corporate friendly dictators. And if the "people" in the US will not face the reality of what our "illustrious" leaders in Washington inflict upon others around the world, then we will unfortunately become "collateral casualties" ourselves in such reprisal attacks. Is it right, is it good? Of course not, but at the same time, will it stop if "we the people" can not learn our "lesson" and correct the inhuman policies our leaders pursue in our names? You are not facing logical reality if you fail to account for these facts. In fact, your position, as you state it, is vacuous, and devoid of logic. The usual "treat the symptoms but never acknowledge or deal with the underlying cause" mentality, which is so prevalently marketed to the Amerikan consumer by the corporate "bread and circuses" media controllers who profit most from failed militaristic policies. The only way to "win" will be in respect, in humility, in dignity. That "all life has value, even the lives of non-Americans. That all people want the same things, family, happiness, love. And that an American life has no greater or lesser value than that of any other". But instead, we spiral into accellerating degeneracy, destroying ourselves and taking the whole world along for the ride to the bottom. Another historic failure of culture and civilization, a needless waste of physical resources and human life. But how could it be otherwise, when most can not conceive it's true nature? -Max
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG XwnNnDWaFm4T8flPHGpKzyaV4jg8/RzK3pUzhOzQ 4+xdZmD79Z+1bt+2a7gG1vL9K6V53m4xxeoRxCt4p
------------------------------------------------ A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government. --George Washington ------------------------------------------------- Smash The State! mailing list home http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/smashthestate ---