you're assuming *way* too much

Post #89,106 by rcareaga 3/18/03 1:25:40 PM Reply	you're assuming way too much You want this president out of office in the myopic fantasy that the US would be "loved" if it weren't for the "cowboy"...Your wishing for a utopian world does not jibe with history...okay, I guess, if that's the kind of denial you'd wish to live in Pardon me, but have I anywhere expressed the wish for a utopian world? And where, please, have I suggested that I want the country to be "loved" or even that this is possible (If we learned nothing else from the Carter Administration's experience in Iran, for example, it should be remembered that when we raise our boot from the neck of a satrap the populace is not then likely to kiss our hand)? I don't mind in the least your disagreeing with me, and your posts can be as "rough" as suits you, but be good enough not to attribute to me opinons I have never expressed. Hell, I know the war's coming--I just object to a mugging being packaged as a humanitarian mission. As to What makes you think that the United States wouldn't attack a country that has a few puny nukes, especially on neutral soil, if provoked?... It's fascinating to speculate what might constitute "provocation" in this gang's worldview given another couple of years. Recall that Germany went into Poland in 1939 after a series of "intolerable provocations," as their justice minister was tasteless enough to remind us last fall. It may be that the mere possession of "weapons of mass destruction" on Iran's part would constitute a provocation, but if, as you believe, it's a foregone conclusion that Bush will take down the other nodes on the A of E unless they save us the trouble by surrendering before we send in the troops, then it would be irresponsible for Iran not to take steps to make itself as unappetizing a target as possible for this predatory empire. As to North Korea, I'm not really worried about Seattle or, for that matter, Oakland, but you might consider that their "puny little nuclear threat" looms a bit larger from Tokyo or Seoul. cordially, "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
Post #89,182 by screamer 3/18/03 3:57:36 PM Reply	Very fair assessment... and perhaps some of the vitriol of the last post was directed elsewhere. ;-) I also do not wish to put words in your mouth so I retract much of the last attributed to you. I assumed from your post (where I joined this thread), that you may be a part of the "Democrat" crowd and were implying that Bush's hidden agenda was to wag the dog indefinately (or at least until the next election cycle). Although this argument is not without precedence, I firmly do not believe that this is the case in this instance (although it is impossible to objectively determine Bush's "motives"). I really think that Bush and the current government are reeling from 9-11 and "winging it" as far as the implications for the security of our country in the new world order. They are completely changing the intelligence community and security of the country. They're also lashing out. They were pissed that Sadam was paying suicide bomber's families in Israel... Let's face it, he is a poster child terrorist - a convenient (and probably justifiable) target. For much of this past few months, I've been allowing myself to ask, "what if the US is really wrong on this whole thing?". Recently, I had arthroscopic surgery which allowed me the luxury of time off to recoup and watch the UN hearings. My impression - I've allowed myself to ask "who gives a fuck what France thinks?"... The only real governmental archetype for response to terrorism is Israel. I've noticed that they have tried appeasement at various times with varying degrees of success. FWIW, they tend to respond to terrorism with escalated terrorism nowadays as it seems to be more effective in reducing their body count. I think that the reason I have been so much on the fence and not "flying my flag" so high is that I have been getting caught up in the "justice" argument. If we (the US) attack in a terrorist fashion, are we any better than any other terrorists? This has deeply bothered me. I have come to the conclusion that this question in and of itself is condescending to the people of the Middle East and those organizations lashing out against the West... Of course we are no better than them, nor worse. We are all human beings, first and foremost. We're all capable of extreme compassion and extreme cruelty. In the grand scheme of things, I believe that Bush et al. are setting the stage for a world government. One that has an "or else" clause attached to it's proclamations (laws). From watching the UN hearings, it was hard to escape the Dilbertesque PHB simile. "Dear Mr. Chairman, I most gratiously congratulate you on your totally meaningless temporary appointment to grand poobah of this superfluous hearing... Ladies and germs, Iraq blah, blah, blah." It was a mockery. A travesty. A mockery of a travesty of a sham... I am not willing to place my security in the hands of these dickheads... sorry. Not the way the UN stands now. No way. My hope is that we do stay and rebuild what we destroy and offer the people of Iraq hope for a better future and ultimately - independence. It is also my hope that this might send a clear signal to the other dicktators/tyrants that there is no longer any place in the world to hideout and set up shop and there will be a strong "or else" attached to non compliance of terms of surrender (notice that it is not "just" that they have weapons of mass destruction - as do many nations - but they were required by the terms of their surrender in '91 and numerous UN proclamations/ultimatums to disarm). If the UN is meaningless, it is meaningless. Maybe we should form a "League of Nations" instead? Sorry for the purge, but I've been thinking a bunch and not posting much at all. Quite a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #89,257 by Ashton 3/18/03 6:49:18 PM Reply	Eschewing obfuscation, then_____ 'Democrats' indeed! C'mon Dan - you haven't got the usual excuse (of not having bothered to read much history), tui grosnya Kapitalistichiskaya Svinya.. What's with this 'Democrats' label - as if one would want to associate oneself with such a gutless and opportunistic small branch of the One Party With Two Right Wings: the Republicrats ?? Utterly mind-numbingly silent during the pupa stage of this cabal's grubby mindfuck-theories of domination. [while we are manufacturing straw polarities here] I infer from your ~ defense of the imminent rush towards a 50-mile-diameter Tar Baby, that even you [!] have just elided the Fact of what Iraq is: a Western cobbled-together Yugoslavia, containing irreconcilably-hostile groups of True Believers. Whatever variety of asshole Saddam surely is: It is you and here demonstrating your naivete re the possibility of a mindless-fuck like Dubya ever grokking the hornet's nest / Tar Baby he's rushing for, full speed. (Never mind for the moment - the pseudo-'morality' whereby we blackmail the world with our own massive WMDs while piously preaching 'disarmament' to our "partners" [1]) as we coldly proceed with - >> "A first-strike on an entity which has not threatened us but might someday be able to and then You Know It Will because ... CHA CHA CHA" << I'm afraid that Network theory is dulling your reason, dumbing-ya down to simple logic - the kind whispered into Dubya's shell-likes. Why.. you even forget this cabal's irreversible opposition to even the idea of a World Court! - unless the US is perpetually exempt and absolved in advance of any charges of War Crimes etc. [cha cha cha]. (Of course, when it's convenient for propaganda purposes, we're All [theoretically] For ~~Something sorta-like~~ It.) And without a fully-supported World Court -?- ONLY the Nuke-backed-up U.S. shall henceforth decide When, Where and How to attack.. whatever next.. we think might someday* oppose us.* Are you really an Apologist for this regime and its aims? or just a dupe of the same class as you tar us TroubleMakers ?? If you cannot see how much the actions of next few days shall exponentially expand the ranks of wannabe US-killers, thus measure the danger this fuckwit is throwing us into precipitately -- I doubt I can explain it at this late date. I expected better from thee, Dan. Get thee to a Nunnery. Ashton [1] As with the Gold Standard for anti-social vulture capitalism, Microsoft: a partner is simply a victim we haven't gotten around to assimilating yet. Our God is the $$ and Ashcroft is Our Pope. These folks are all a-Theists: they worship only their combined-Egos and the aforementioned $$.
Post #89,292 by screamer 3/18/03 9:18:05 PM Reply	Mou droog, I respectfully disagree... With a number of your stated positions. Primarily the assumption that we will be hated more or less no matter what happens with Iraq. I was in Germany in the early 80's (France too) for just shy of 3 years, with many German friends and acquaintances. They "hated" our government then (probably rightfully so). What is happening now is a shameless exhibition of we aren't joining this bandwagon 'cause we can't afford the reconstruction. We don't want you there because of the oil. Mind numbing hypocrisy on all sides. As far as the Democrat thing, it was alluding to his original premise of wagging the dog, a purely political innuendo. Opportunistic too! I truly have grepped many of the headlines, parsed them and piped them to my own conclusions, and, unfortunately for our current discourse, humbly agree with the US position. If that makes me an apologist for the current crop, so be it. I highly respect you and many of the others who post on this board, but wonder if maybe you aren't being a tad reactionary and joining the counter-cabal yourselves. A possibillity? Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #89,339 by Ashton 3/18/03 11:57:16 PM Reply	In simplest terms then - bringing this 'off' would require a degree of genuine ability + wisdom.. of the calibre of a Gandhi or at least a Disraeli; it would require going to the root of the Problem, simultaneously with fdisking Iraq and installing mental s/ware from scratch: Giving sufficient teeth to the World Court to intercede, create a territory for the Palestinians and discipline both sides while they get used to the fact that Neither shall force the other into the sea. Yes, this last would require more than just 'US Will' - but it would require that First and backed by serious and competent intent.. and then the suasion which diplomacy means: that for which we have substituted harangues and naked threat to 'allies'. Absent both the will and the intellect to accomplish the latter (Isr/Pal), the former (Iraq) shall IMhO next.. remind a whole new US generation of The Uncle Remus Stories, in partiicular The Tar Baby. May your faith not be misplaced; we witness a Dubya never before seen or deemed possible + beneficent Wonderfulness transforming people who have never seen 'democratic representation' -- mostly converting to Charismatic Christianity and building Corporations. Well franchises, maybe. and shopping. shopping A Lot. It Could Happen. Ashton
Post #89,201 by dmarker 3/18/03 4:42:03 PM 3/18/03 4:43:23 PM Reply	Been down this slippery track with this person before Just accept that there are people here who can clearly read what you are saying/stating and can clearly see what Screamer is adding/introducing. This slope (screamer debates) gets very slippery and will become very convoluted as more unrelated topics get introduced as if you had initiated them and you find yourself debating a growing front of previously unintended topics and dimensions. So far you are handling it well - now I will continue to read & see the outcome <very big grin> Doug Spectres from our past: Beware the future when your children & theirs come after you for what you may have been willing to condone today - dsm 2003 Motivational: When performing activities, ask yourself if the person you most want to be would do, or say, it - dsm 2003 Edited by dmarker March 18, 2003, 04:43:23 PM EST Expand All History
Post #89,225 by screamer 3/18/03 5:33:28 PM Reply	Add one more thing, Dougie... There are people who can clearly read between the lines of what people are "stating" and understand bullshit, propaganda, and loaded statements when they read them... Just 'cause I don't follow your particular brand of bullshit makes me a bit of a pain, I understand. Wonderful debate technique. If you can't debate the argument, smear the poster. Just exactly what did I need to add to the statement: "My point was, they're being saved for the next election cycle. I hope for their sake they can get their tactical nukes into production by then." I wrote initially, that it is very telling (the loaded statement) of what his "agenda" is. Motive, I'm unsure of. Self-hatred, etc...? Contextually, the assumption is that Iran had better get their tactical nukes into production by then (next presidential election) or ??? What fucking conclusion is obvious? "I hope". I asked him point blank why he "hoped" Iran would possess nuclear weapons before 2004. It's a decent question, I think. We cleared up that I knew he clearly didn't "hope" Iran had tactical nukes, so what is to be made of such a loaded sentence? A political agenda perhaps? Let's assume for the sake of argument that he really is a man of "peace" and is against all war. Why would a man of peace want a foreign country that has been hostile to ours in the past wish that they possessed nuclear weapons (tactical nukes at that)? As a deterrent against us? That's the only reasonable conclusion I can come to. Okay, then I guess this is reasonable - but only if you assume we would be deterred, which is highly speculative at best... Either I don't understand your position or I do and simply disagree. What is your position? Do we appease tyrants and terrorist as policy or do we depose them? It's really quite simple... Intelligent people can disagree... Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #89,229 by CRConrad 3/18/03 5:43:10 PM Reply	He HAD answered that, even BEFORE you asked! Some rabid Marlowe-type Screams: Contextually, the assumption is that Iran had better get their tactical nukes into production by then (next presidential election) or ??? What fucking conclusion is obvious? "I hope". I asked him point blank why he "hoped" Iran would possess nuclear weapons before 2004. It's a decent question, I think. He HAD ALREADY SAID, he hoped it for their sake. The Iranians, that is. Because otherwise they'd be attacked by rabid American morons, that is the fucking conclusion that is obvious. Fuck, some of you people are just totally out of your fucking minds, nowadays... I thought it was only Marlowe, of the ones I've seen here; thanks for correcting that misapprehension on my part. Too bad the rabies seems to go directly to your brains, as evidenced by your inability to see that the answer you were looking for was already there -- otherwise, maybe some of you could have been cured, somehow. [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575\|Ashton Brown]
Post #89,295 by screamer 3/18/03 9:26:54 PM Reply	Avoiding the flames forum... and trying to take the high ground, your point about my non-complete context is well taken. As for the rest, I would like to cut out the usual flame road and ask you, a German native, why you find this Iraq conflict offensive, if you do. This is not a bait either. I'm genuinely interested in what the German/Scandinavian perspective is on this. I think, all insults aside (put a target on my id), we have a lot of common ground. There just seems to be this notion that current American foreign policy is somehow "worse" than it was 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years ago? I actually think that this administration is doing the right thing and believe their stated reasons. Does that make me "not smart"? Fucking enlighten me, then insult me. Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #89,251 by rcareaga 3/18/03 6:31:31 PM 3/18/03 8:26:03 PM Reply	Re: Add one more thing, Dougie... OK, let's try again. There are people who can clearly read between the lines of what people are "stating" and understand bullshit, propaganda, and loaded statements when they read them... I take this to be a modest self-portrait. It is also a very convenient stance, is it not, to adopt in these discussions--a sort of dimestore deconstructionism--since it allows you to tease out the "real" meaning (vouchsafed you, I presume, by sheer intellect) and address the "bullshit, propaganda, and loaded statements" buried within your interlocutors' posts (or perhaps I should say "texts") whether or not these meanings are explicitly borne by the sentences you parse. Lesser men might be tempted to ascribe to posts just such hidden meanings as might lend themselves to crushing ripostes. I see that we're still mining my earlier statement "My point was, they're being saved for the next election cycle. I hope for their sake [emphasis added--again] [Iran] can get their tactical nukes into production by then." The sentences seemed straightforward enough to me when I wrote them, but now I learn that they signal an "agenda" and a "motive," coyly suggested to be "self hatred." Wheels within wheels, forsooth! Since you mentioned debate techniques, let me congratulate you on yours, which appears to be to define the other party's terms on his behalf. Let's assume for the sake of argument that he really is a man of "peace" and is against all war I don't know why you should. Again, I've made no blanket statements about war or peace. I happen to think that the war we're about to launch is a piece of unmitigated thuggery, not significantly ameliorated by the fact that it's directed against the land of a smaller thug. Why would a man of peace want a foreign country that has been hostile to ours in the past wish that they possessed nuclear weapons? I take it you would prefer that the United Kingdom surrendered its atomic arsenal then? (The blue light indicates that a jest is intended and response is not expected--although come to think of it, Iran never burnt the White House.) As a deterrent against us? That's the only reasonable conclusion I can come to. Okay, then I guess this is reasonable - but only if you assume we would be deterred, which is highly speculative at best If Iran believes that this country has hostile designs on it--a perception this administration has been at some pains to convey--it is the only conceivable practical deterrent (unless you count submitting to American fiat as a palatable alternative for them), and Iran's leadership would be criminally negligent not to pursue it. Do we appease tyrants and terrorist as policy or do we depose them? It's really quite simple 1) It really isn't. 2) (if I may be permitted my own little bit of deconstruction) Note how we (here rather loosely defined as the Bush junta) get to define these terms. Return with us to the sunny days of the Reagan administration, when political philosopher Jeanne Kirkpatrick was on hand to help us out here: a regime that tortured its subject populace was "authoritarian" if we liked the generals, "totalitarian" if we didn't; insurgents who blew up school buses were "terrorists" if they read from "Das Kapital" and "freedom fighters" if they had the CIA playbook tucked into their fatigues. On second thought, we're already there. Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see Apparently. cordially, PS--Why, thank you, CRC. It can be useful now and again in these dust-ups to have a seasoned brawler at one's elbow. "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist." Edited by rcareaga March 18, 2003, 08:26:03 PM EST Expand All History
Post #89,278 by boxley 3/18/03 8:37:21 PM Reply	he's not a "seasoned brawler" Thor God of Flaming thunder! will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]</br> To a lot of people in California hunting anything but the wild tofualope was equivelent to sacarificing babies to satan. S.M. Stirling
Post #89,296 by screamer 3/18/03 9:31:31 PM Reply	Let's start again then. Where do you stand? The war... are you for it or against it and why? Are you a pacifist? Are you a Democrat? Do you think Bush has the mental capacity for the job of President? Do you think that 12 years is ample time for a country to comply with terms of surrender? Let's just start there and see how many blanks I've already filled in for you... Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #89,300 by screamer 3/18/03 9:46:04 PM Reply	P.S. Dimestore words like interlocutors... that are even correctly spelled may impress some people... :-) Here. Not me. I don't feel a twinge of guilt because I state my positions, especially unpopular ones, in my own style. I look for function not form. Aristotellian (sp?) logic (logos) is great for deconstructing a debate, but rarely an effective way to pursuade. The ethos, bathos, mythos, et al. tend to get in the way of logos. I couldn't care less about "style points". The really fucking hilarious part of it all is that we are quite illogical characters anyway. It's in the DNA. Even the erect ones who "try". The concept of an intellectual factual debate is hubrus anyway. Long live the hubrus. Long live IWETHEY! Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #89,703 by Ashton 3/20/03 6:55:30 AM Reply	Well, when correctly spelled, then - Hubris works better. But then, real hubris doesn't care if it spells itself correctly because - it just Feels Right-ist (or is that Rightest?) As to the matter of your take on the authenticity of this Admin and its [Real !?] motives du jour: maybe in 3? 5 years enough material will have been leaked about the Rove-Wolfowitz-Dubya Axis of Goodness, about Armageddon and Rapturin Out (ie the role of Fundamentalist Charismatic dogma and doggerel amidst the balance of this little Cabal of ideologues) -- To have some idea of the private mindsets VS the execrably simplistic public slogans we've heard since 9/11. Maybe by then: we all will find out who was snookered and who wasn't.. There may be other clues sooner though: Watch for Dominoes.. (remember those?) Can Iran be far behind? Is there any limit to how many of these little wars For Just Plain Goodness.. we shall be able to sustain unilaterally? How many before a formal coalition begins to spend Big Bucks/Euros/Rubles to counter the New Empire? (Not to mention the h\ufffdmorrhage of deficit spending, now looking exponential - PLUS that give-back to the top 3% in Gift/Rebate! still a mighty gleam in the Repo eye) No $$ left for the next wars? Take it outta Soc Sec, Pension funds yada yada. Let the great-grandkids pay Tomorrow for the delusionals running the asylum Today. That's why Econ is called the Dismal Science; neither science nor art.. it's about obfuscation of the transfer of wealth to the very-few. And ours is an Innumerate society, along with the general dumbth. Do you happen to recall that, in total numbers of Wonderfully Destructive Objects: The USSR arsenal was the Largest. Pu, U have loooong half-lives and there have been >1000 TONS of higrade collected. Hubris . . . >>Don't Fuck Up Your Home Planet Without It<< Just a few Motes in God's Eye \ufffd You don't need a Weatherman To tell which way the wind blows

Welcome to IWETHEY!