BACK TO HOME PAGE SITE NAVIGATION CONTACT POETRY FORUM STORY FORUM   Horoscope  Radio  Gallery  FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   PM's   
Log in 
 
General Forum Index -> Articles & Essays

Peace vs. Violence
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Ladies Lifestyle and Living Store
  Author    Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
chordphrute



Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 1412
Location: Nouvelle Orléans, Louisiane


Okay so I stepped away from this for a couple hours, meditated, marinated, and ate some supper - and now I think I want to come back to it.

I would like to debate with you a bit on this, Eire. So, ”if the United States pulled it's military out of every country we are in and brought them home and stopped supplying billions of dollars per year in aid to countries around the world and tells everyone, "if you have needs or are threatened militarily or otherwise, don't call us and we will not call you." … “

…The problem with that is that the U.S. has not been called in our modern day conflicts. I don’t keep up with things as well as I should, but I do work for a lawyer and these are my cents on what I’ve learned from him, my political science classes, and from bits of the news I do catch. Listen to President Bush's statements about Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. I remember that the Bush administration created something known as the "Bush doctrine" in order for the U.S. military power to support the members of his party's financial well being. That's it point blank. Members of this administration have ties with, investments in, interests in all of the companies that are immediately making a profit from this war. The most obvious is Haliburton and it's relationship with Dick Cheney. He used to be the CEO! and still has a VERY huge interest in this company's future.

This whole iraq war is a part of the Project for A New American Century – my roommate brought this to my attention a year ago or so. If you get your hands on a copy of the text(s), you will see that everything that this country has endured since this administration took office is a page by page reenactment of what is in this leaked document. This "project" started when Reagan was in office. It was during this time that the Neo-Conservative movement started. Rumsfield, Cheney, Bush Sr., Reagan, Rove, Ashcroft, and the others have been planning this project since the early 80's. They have been strategizing this "game" for decades and had all of their pawns ready to go when Al Gore's Presidency was stolen.

Listen to the citizens of the other countries... They don't want to be like America … like Tibetans do not want to BE like China. Yet, we're there to "spread democracy," but we're really there to help this administration spread the profits of this war among its very own members. So don't call us and we don't call you? Instead, America has taken the stance, you will be like us. You will do as we say. If you have resources that we use and it is possible that you can give us a really good fight (i.e. China), then we'll leave you alone. As long as you give us what we need voluntarily, we'll stay out of your business. Who cares if you if you murder babies, (not in the sense of abortion during the early stages of pregnancy, but after birth has been given to the baby and the mother has held it), or in some cases, treat your citizens worse than Saddam Hussein or the Taliban. Give us what we want and if you do, we'll talk every blue moon about improving your human rights standards.

Point is, America and a lot of Americans think that all countries should be like America. We don't respect their culture, we don't take the time to understand their culture. We don't educate our citizens about why things are the way the are in other cultures. Mb was just telling me all about how “Americanized” the UK has become over the recent past… and when I traveled to Australia recently, their culture is pseudo-American now. We don't tell them that the reason Bin Laden was so powerful is BECAUSE WE HELPED HIM! We don't talk about the why our enemies were not our enemies at one time, and how we betrayed them, thus the reason they are our enemies now, and that the way we try to cover this up is paint them as something much worse than what the truly are or as someone once said, 'supply them with billions of dollars per year in "aid".' A friend of mine in Greece said to me a while ago, "I wish America would invade us, because then we'll be rich."

The reason these people yell and scream about why the U.S. does what it does is because they know they truth about why the U.S. has to do it. I am still waiting to hear the Iraqis cry for help. All I really hear is “get the hell out of here – you're getting us killed”, but again... I don't pay such close attention to current events.

Ever pay attention to how the number of terrorist attacks around the globe has INCREASED since the Iraq war? You don't get reports of how many innocent people were killed because we invaded a sovereign country not because of faulty intelligence--that's b.s -it is because of greed, immaturity, personal vendettas, power hungry, and worst of all, LIES and manipulation of Americans' psychological state after September 11th with how our government brainwashed us.

Putting on the earmuffs and letting "China, North Korea, and all the rest of them have their way with the world," we've already done. Murdering Saddam Hussein and all of those responsible for the torture and murders of thousands of people? I can think of two more names to add to that list. A sweet little combination, although most lesbians would disagree: Dick and Bush.

I think that's all I want to say for the moment.. I may come back to this...and I think I've answered my own original question/statement.

Gassho

Post Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:27 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Hawaiian



Joined: 01 Dec 2005
Posts: 816
Location: Transplanted to Africa


Aloha Chordy,

Wow, excellent response for someone who "don't pay close attention to current events." Smile PNAC and Neocons are destroying whatever was good about America for their own greed, and it's a shame. To paraphrase a speech writer of JF Kennedy, the United States should lead by force of example, not by force of weaponry.

~Hawn
_________________
'A'a i ka hula, e waiho i ka hilahila i ka hale.
Dare to dance, leave your shyness at home.

Post Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:17 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Hawaiian



Joined: 01 Dec 2005
Posts: 816
Location: Transplanted to Africa


Aloha DP,

quote:
Originally posted by Dark prism:
Hypothetical question.

If a bunch of people who don't know each other very well are standing in a room, and each person has something that someone else wants, and each also has a gun, who is the first to lay down their gun?

And then what happens?



I spent the day thinking about your excellent hypothetical question. And, I originally concluded much like the rest...greed would lead to bloodshed.

Recently , I had read something about propaganda techniques, where it suggested that to avoid getting trapped in the rhetoric to ask questions about one's own assumptions. And, I realized, that I originally had imagined a group of men, with guns.

For me, the scenario changed dramatically if I imagined a group of women. And, I changed the gun to each holding a stick. Even if each woman wanted what another had, I still imagined it to be a more peaceful scene than men. We would make fire and share over food.

Now, this is not to say that women cannot be warmongers (Thatcher) or even empire builders, but those were women playing men's games. This is not to say that women don't kill each other, they do. But I do think that if each nation sent their best women to a table with all others to make treaties, a peace formerly unknown would happen on Earth.

~Hawn
_________________
'A'a i ka hula, e waiho i ka hilahila i ka hale.
Dare to dance, leave your shyness at home.

Post Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:35 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


Chord,

I agree with some of what you said in your last three replies. I also disagree with some or perhaps I do not disagree but see some possible consequences to the actions if they were to take place.

For instance lets say that the United States were to try and forcibly protect Tibet. I do not think the United States or any other country wants to start an all out war with over a billion Chinese. Could you imagine the loss of life a war with China could produce? That is the only way I believe China will ever leave Tibet.

In 1949 China invaded Tibet and two years later a seventeen point agreement was reached which incorporated Tibet into China. In the agreement China guaranteed no alteration of Tibetan political, cultural, and religious systems and institutions. China broke that agreement and this led to a rebellion in 1959 that cost nearly 100,000 Tibetans their lives and since then and estimated 1,250,000 have died at the hands of China through 1976. The loss of life to Chinese troops is unknown if any occurred.

An international commission of jurists examined Chinese policy in Tibet, violations of human rights in Tibet, and the position of Tibet in international law. On at least four occasions an international commission of jurists found that China had committed acts of genocide in Tibet and that Tibet was at least a de facto state prior to 1951.

What about the rest of the world and the United States? What do they all think?
They all condemn China and the UN has issued at least a half dozen resolutions calling on China to ensure respect for fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people. Most all nations take the stance that Tibet is part of China and prior to 1980 the Presidents of the United States agreed with this stance…at least publicly. On June 27 1998 President Clinton stated “I agree that Tibet is a part of China, an autonomous region of China”. The European Union also states that Tibet is a autonomous part of China. In a declassified document from the state department the United States had operations in Tibet from at least 1959 to 1968 (the last known declassified document). Many countries including the United States have and continue financial support for Tibetans in exile as well as the Dalia Lama. In 1994 the United States Congress called Tibet "an occupied sovereign country under international law".

Debate has been made that America only involves itself in places where it has something to gain such as natural resources. That is somewhat true because America does involve itself where it has interests…for example Iraq…yes I have said screw the oil because that is the way I feel about it but I am not naïve or stupid and I know the government did not say “screw the oil” because that was one of the major reasons I feel the United States government involved itself in a war with Iraq. So yes I know the government will involve itself more deeply in such places but it is not accurate and absolutely not fair to say that America only involves itself where it has money to gain.

“I could not agree more. They are more examples of “Tibet” like I named above…there are peaceful nations in this world being destroyed by dictatorships and off-the-wall governments that could use our help far more than Iraq…”

Peaceful nations being destroyed by dictatorships and off the wall governments…that does not sound very peaceful to me.

I have to say that I wish America could wave a magic wand and create peace throughout the world but that will never happen. I wish America was not involved in Iraq but I am glad they got rid of that dictator and his government.

I have to ask…do you wish America had enough troops to send into every country in the world where people are fighting…or send them into every country where there is a dictator or off all the wall government?

People say we should never have gone to Bosnia, Iraq or any other country the United States has gone to since WWII. No matter what the United States does…good or bad there will be somebody saying we should not be there and should get the hell out.

It can’t be had both ways and there are not enough people in the military to send to every country with a two bit dictator.

Chord you mentioned 5 billion dollars spent in Iraq…well it is much much more than that and it would be nice if all that money was being spent at home…just as it would be nice if America was able to spend the billions of dollars spent on illegal immigrants. Think of all that money being spent improving America or perhaps that money could be spent getting rid of some off the wall dictator or suppying food and medicine to people around the world who need it.

“Ever pay attention to how the number of terrorist attacks around the globe has INCREASED since the Iraq war?”

Yes and I have traced them all the way back to WWI and the fact that nobody listened when a man named Thomas Edward Lawrence said…and I paraphrase…he basically said, “Leave these people alone and let them rule themselves”.

“I would like to debate with you a bit on this, Eire. So, "Lets say the United states pulled it’s military out of every country are in and brought them home and stopped supplying billions of dollars per year in aid to countries around the world and tells everyone…“If you have needs or are threatened militarily or otherwise. Don’t call us and we will not call you.”

Would you prefer that?"

Chord...I think you may have missed the entire point of that statement and question. By the way...nobody has yet answered the question just as nobody has taken advantage of a point that was made about the key to change a violent nature and move it toward a more peaceful nature. I must take the blame for it because I was the one who mentioned Iraq and since then 90% of what I have seen in this discussion has been about nothing but America and its foreign policy.

I know that America is not perfect and that the American way of life is not suited to a lot of other countries and in fact it is very detrimental to most other countries and should never be forced upon anyone but they all look at “America” and say, “we want to be just like them and we want it overnight” and it is all down hill after that. What they should be doing is looking at their own country and asking themselves what can be done to improve it without destroying their own culture. Change can be a good thing but when you have to much to fast it can destroy but if you do it slowly over time it will be almost unnoticeable and in the long run that can be almost as bad as trying to do it overnight if you end up destroying the very things you cherish. It is all a catch 22 unless people are diligent and pay attention to what is going on. There are many things that could be done to promote peaceful change without destroying a peoples culture and way of life and there are many ways to lead nations to destruction. This leads back to something I mentioned in my first reply that I was hoping someone would pick up on and make a run for it…

Here is another chance.

But what is the key to change? Children. They are the key to any long lasting change.

How?
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:38 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
Start Over



Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 222
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos


Ladies,

I'm not sure if this has been said before or not, but one of the reasons I would not agree with the UN banning all nuclear weapons (not only because I hate the UN), is do you honestly believe that regimes such as North Korea would abide by that? So if only countries such as the US, Britain, and others did it, we would be sitting ducks and probably would be blown to bits the next day. I happen to like my bits.


Start

Post Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:49 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


quote:
Originally posted by Start Over:
Ladies,

I'm not sure if this has been said before or not, but one of the reasons I would not agree with the UN banning all nuclear weapons (not only because I hate the UN), is do you honestly believe that regimes such as North Korea would abide by that? So if only countries such as the US, Britain, and others did it, we would be sitting ducks and probably would be blown to bits the next day. I happen to like my bits.


Start


nice bits Smile
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Thu Aug 23, 2007 3:58 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
trusting fool



Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 91
Location: um illinois but longing for new york


eire, leave it to you to find the ultimate humor in such a sour topic Wink however i agree "nice bits" lol
_________________
pouring over photographs, i'm living in your letters, breathing deeply from this envelope it smells like you, and i can't live without that scent.-Dashboard Confessional

Post Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:38 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


quote:
Originally posted by trusting fool:
eire, leave it to you to find the ultimate humor in such a sour topic Wink however i agree "nice bits" lol


Trusting,

Very Happy just enjoying life sweetie.
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:19 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
awnidea



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 40
Location: 3rd planet from our Sun
"... Imagine ..." - John Lennon

Exclamation Idea
_________________
" ... 'what distinguishes the men from the boys, is the size of their toys' ... what distinguishes women from girls, is the size of their decisions ... " - Noetis

Post Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:15 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
  Display posts from previous:      
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2

Last Thread | Next Thread  >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 


Search For Posters!


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

In Association with Amazon.com
     
Terms & Conditions Privacy Statement Acknowledgements