IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Not surprising. [add BBC link]
On the (PBS) News Hour tonight there was a segment on an international survey of [link|http://www.pbs.org/newshour/newshour_index.html|America's image.] [link|http://audio.pbs.org:8080/ramgen/newshour/expansion/2002/12/05/opinion.rm?altplay=opinion.rm|Realaudio] IIRC only 10% of the Pakis have a positive view of the US. Only 18% of the Turks, our NATO ally, do. Much of the Muslim world resents the US role in subjugating Palestinians.

[link|http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2544599.stm|BBC story.]
Alex

"Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these."\t-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Expand Edited by a6l6e6x Dec. 5, 2002, 09:49:20 PM EST
New I hardly think so, tunnel vision a tad
We are linked by the "common" man as the folks that prop up their despotic regimes. Those who were not our allies during the cold war despise us for not helping them as we aided Saudi and the oil states. The Palestinian issue was/is a flashpoint but only since 9/11 in the Arab world they despise the Palestinians as much if not more than the Israelis.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]


Opera was the television of the nineteenth century:loud, vulgar and garish with plots that could only be called infantile. "Pendergast"
New Hmmmm.
I notice a chart they have "Is suicide bombing in defense of Islam justifiable".

Then I think back to Will Smith's movie "Independence Day".

The one where the crazy pilot flew his plane into the saucer's weapon and blew it up.

It's strange that the movie didn't seem to portray that act as "wrong". Rather the opposite.

There's a very troublesome attitude. We show very strong, high percentages in some country, a majority saying suicide bombing is justifiable in defense of Islam. Even in countries where it's not a majority or even a plurality, there's large percentages of the... of these populations which are sympathetic to this tactic -- a worrisome set of attitudes.
But it's okay when depicted as a sacrifice made to destroy evil invaders who want to destroy you and pillage your resources?

The Turks not only don't want to do this -- they think it might be bad for Turkey if Saddam goes. Many of them see this as a war against an unfriendly Muslim state, not an objective... having the objective of making this a more peaceful region.
Is this clear enough now?

We're going to make the region "peaceful" by bombing people who haven't attacked us.

No, I don't see any possible way that could be mis-understood by other inhabitants there.

Besides, we'll get the oil.

I agree with the other two columnists. We need to be helping the other nations in the mid-east rather than attacking the "bad" nations.

PS: [link|http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2544599.stm#graph|Uzbekistan]
New well we could help them out by wiping out Israel
go in, and disarm the Israelis detain any member current or formeer of the IDF and turn the place over to Arafat et all. You think it might help? Lets war game that for a while.
Leave ME
pull all troops back to europe or conus.
Ignore the bloodletting sure to be had in Israel
you think it will not result in invasion of eaurope?
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]


Opera was the television of the nineteenth century:loud, vulgar and garish with plots that could only be called infantile. "Pendergast"
New Nice.
Would you support a war to remove an evil despot Hussein, together with our esteemed International allies? Yes? I thought so. Let's go, Mr. Rumsfield!

Is suicide bombing justified? Sure. When you drive you plane into a shipful of soldiers. Preferably the ship that just destroyed a city. How about killing 23 guests at a restorant? Or students at univercity? The question you give is stated to kill any possibility of "incorrect" answer. Good job.
--

We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
New Let's go over "viewpoint" again.
Is suicide bombing justified? Sure.
Well, that's out of the way at least.

Now it's just a matter of finding out what YOUR criteria are for it.

When you drive you plane into a shipful of soldiers.
See? This is an example of what YOUR criteria are.

Preferably the ship that just destroyed a city.
Again, YOUR criteria.

How about killing 23 guests at a restorant? Or students at univercity?
Again, YOUR criteria.

The question you give is stated to kill any possibility of "incorrect" answer. Good job.
Because there IS NO "incorrect" answer.

Once you approve of the ACTION, it only comes down to values.

Now, YOUR values do NOT include "defending Islam".

But, from the survey, it seems that many other people do have that value.

THEREFORE, if we want to STOP the suicide attacks, we need to NOT be seen as attacking Islam. At least by the majority of the citizens.
New My point was not about right and wrong
but rather about the way they stated the question.

Is it a noble thing to give you life for your religion? Yes, for most people.
Now, when you ask if it's a noble thing to kill a bunch of women and children while giving your life for your religion, I expect the answers to vary a bit more. If they don't it tells me someting about the people who answered. However, the way question was asked, it's impossible to conclude anything at all.
--

We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
New No "right", no "wrong". Only viewpoints.
Is it a noble thing to give you life for your religion? Yes, for most people.
If you value your religion that much. Those that say "no" do not value their religion that much.

Now, when you ask if it's a noble thing to kill a bunch of women and children while giving your life for your religion, I expect the answers to vary a bit more.
Yes, because different people value women and children higher than their religion. Others do not.

If they don't it tells me someting about the people who answered.
Yes, that they value their religion above the lives of women and children.

However, the way question was asked, it's impossible to conclude anything at all.
I'll disagree on that. I don't think you'd get the same results if you asked it in the US.

Now, if you substituted "Christianity" for "Islam" and asked it in the US, you'd get different results.

What this is showing is that Islam is VERY IMPORTANT to LOTS of people over there.

And the mistake we keep making is assuming that it isn't.
New I think it's happening again.
We are in a violent agreement. Ask "Is it a noble thing to sacrifice your life for <insert your favorite religion here>?", and you get a universal yes. This is not a meaningful or useful question. Ask if it's ok to kill civilians while doing so, and the answer can be used to draw some conclusions. For example, a conclusion that innocent lives are more important than religion. Or less. I do not know how Arabs and/or Americans would have answered. The question was not asked.
--

We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
New Umm no universal 'yes' on that first one.
Unless you mean - the traditional 'yes' which keeps the religious wars in an endless loop? But that has never been universal, only Popular amongst the powerless masses.

It may be that the standard wars can end only when the in-power minority in the powerful States - who always rise to that power by manipulating mass sentiment - outgrow a POV which places the welfare of a planet beneath internal personal fantasies of the Unknowable. Could happen.

This might even be the century. Then again, we aren't growing noticeably more adult thus far - and with nukes all over the place, the Question may become moot before we ever took the chance to grow up.


Ashton
New Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide".
As always, there's the subtle shift of focus.

I can "give my life for Freedom" while trying to stay alive during the battle.

I can even go on "suicide missions" where there's a slim chance I can fight my way back to friendly lines.

But, "is it a good thing to strap dynamite to your body and blow up some enemies"...........

That was the nature of the question posed.

As always, people over here do not grasp the DIFFERENCE in the cultures.

It may be that the standard wars can end only when the in-power minority in the powerful States - who always rise to that power by manipulating mass sentiment - outgrow a POV which places the welfare of a planet beneath internal personal fantasies of the Unknowable.
It might. But I wouldn't bet on it. Not any time soon. I don't think the human race, as a whole, is yet capable of handling multiple viewpoints. Or even realizing that multiple viewpoints exist.

It all gets back to the basic incantation of "right / wrong" and "good / evil".

Once you can define the world in broad terms, you don't need to waste your time looking for any deeper.

So, we start the indoctrination early. Sunday School. The Pledge of Allegiance. Teaching our sanitized history (where we are always the good guys).

Most people stop thinking / learning in their teens.
New Re: Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide".
When you have no other weapon, your body becomes one. Just a matter of degree. For God's sake, this question could not reveal the difference between you and Marlowe - you're both likely to answer "Yes".
--

We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
     for every hightech success there is a lowtech workaround - (boxley) - (15)
         Not surprising. [add BBC link] - (a6l6e6x) - (11)
             I hardly think so, tunnel vision a tad - (boxley) - (10)
                 Hmmmm. - (Brandioch) - (9)
                     well we could help them out by wiping out Israel - (boxley)
                     Nice. - (Arkadiy) - (7)
                         Let's go over "viewpoint" again. - (Brandioch) - (6)
                             My point was not about right and wrong - (Arkadiy) - (5)
                                 No "right", no "wrong". Only viewpoints. - (Brandioch) - (4)
                                     I think it's happening again. - (Arkadiy) - (3)
                                         Umm no universal 'yes' on that first one. - (Ashton) - (2)
                                             Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide". - (Brandioch) - (1)
                                                 Re: Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide". - (Arkadiy)
         Soo-prize, Soo-prize, Soo-PRIZE!!! - (jb4)
         Duh - (wharris2)
         Robert Fisk again? - (marlowe)

Add a Klixon 'snap' relay for overtemp control.
133 ms