The Forum > Article Comments > Iraq result a win-win for the US > Comments
Iraq result a win-win for the US : Comments
By Josh Ushay, published 28/2/2005Josh Ushay argues that a Shi'ite-Kurd victory avoids a strategic debacle for the US.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
-
- All
Posted by Sinni Kal, Monday, 28 February 2005 4:33:09 PM
| |
Oh NOT AGAIN.....Please tell us which countries DO NOT ACT OUT OF SELF INTEREST.
This is a vacuos slogan SINNI KAL (You must have stayed up all night working on the one), which when examined in depth pulls the rug from any arguement you may make. "America only acts out of self interest" is your quote. Americas 'self interest' includes not being dragged back to the dark ages by theocratic mad mullas. It includes creating a world were you & I can have this debate. It includes maintaining a stable global economy so you, Sinni, can maintain your 'western lifesyle' by remnaining employed Sinni, if the US only acts out of self interest, What is driving Iran? How are they acting in the "worlds Interest" by insisting on producing Nuclear Fuel when they have the worlds largest oil reserves. Oh dear, didn;t think it through did you Sinni. Posted by Sayeret, Thursday, 3 March 2005 7:45:57 AM
| |
Dear Sayeret,
could I suggest, with respect, that you look up the meaning of the word 'debate'. Posted by Sinni Kal, Thursday, 3 March 2005 10:34:43 AM
| |
Sinni
your bed time reading must be John Pilger ? The main problem of what u said, was that it seems to be assuming a world which does not exist outside the various coffee shops inhabited by pot smoking leftists ? I have to support what sayaret said.. 'which' country does not act out of self interest ? EVER ? Having said that, the best we can expect is that the self interest which all countries base their actions on, will be as inclusive and ultimately beneficial for the countries they are influencing as well. I DO take your point about some of the things u said "conspire with despots" etc..that has been the case in the past, but I also feel we are 'past' that now. See Peter Sellicks article about God and Politics. Kings always need their prophets, to call them back to 'The Way'. and corporate USA is VERY needy in this regard. Let me direct you to just such an example of how the prophetic call CAN make a difference to a large multi-national which had been expoiting a 3rd world country. http://www.tonycampolo.org/messages.shtml See the message on 'Staying balanced in an unbalanced world'.. I think that's the one I'm referring to. To me, the idea of a free and prosperous Iraq which is friendly to the West is quite a nice idea. I'm genuinely interested in your WORKABLE and REAL WORLD alternative to this ? You appear to have canonized some version of law, "illegal" which just does not have any validity anywhere there is a bigger 'force' which can say "no, sorry, we have no interest in that" Even such an idea as 'international law' is without validity apart from force and potential devastating violence backing it up, because sadly this world is populated not just by well meaning conformist nice people, but it also has its share of morons and megalomaniacs who just plain 'want power for power's sake' err.. Kim Jong Ill for example. Posted by BOAZ_David, Thursday, 3 March 2005 11:57:54 AM
| |
Dear David,
thanks for your thoughtful, courteous response. You mention megalomaniacs...George Bush, a fundamentalist, believes that his God, his Judeo-Christian Capitalism-Loving God, has chosen him for a mission to change our world using military force if necessary. The world he wants to create just happens to suit the insatiable greed of big corporations and the already rich (shame about the rest of us). Given that messianic George has a huge armoury of weapons of mass destruction, and given that he is not the world's brightest person, doesn't that worry you just a bit? Kind regards, Posted by Sinni Kal, Friday, 4 March 2005 11:03:20 AM
| |
Sinni
kind and thoughtful ? :) ur stealing my lines. Yes, as a matter of fact, it does. But it is not as troubling as the thought of an Islamic theocracy, or a Communist dictatorship of the proletariat. Now, lets see, the alternatives are .......... *thinking*..... still scratching the old (literally) head.... aah.. a secular humanist model, where morality is 'make it up as we go' alah Peter Singer ? (cull the weaklings, the deformed and the non intelligent) or.. 'SinniKalism' :) now.. what is your solution ? Just remember one thing, whatever the solution, in this day and age, it MUST be backed up with "Power" (= weapons bigger than those likely to be used by would be Stalins etc) The reason being, is that whatever your solution, it will without doubt NOT be shared by many segments of the world population for either cultural, religious or both, reasons. So, back to Bush, I'm concerned, but remember Vietnam ? why did they lose ?.. clearly they were WRONG, and the people knew it. If big business were to embark on a path of 'evil' there is the prophetic voice, remember Enron etc ? it all comes out in the end, BECAUSE of the freedom and decocracy that Bush is "messianically" trying to spread. (as u put it) I don't live in a cocoon though, I know that US democracy is also a 'back door' for US corporations to try to manipulate other countries, (as with the Pharmeceuticals to our PBS) but I think u have by now noted, we won that battle thus far. Your comments (re alternative/solution) are most welcome. Posted by BOAZ_David, Friday, 4 March 2005 12:47:44 PM
|
The fact that the Shi'ites voted is understandable because, knowing the Sunnis were boycotting the election, they sought to gain majority political power. The Kurds voted because they are seeking an independent State. American guns provided the backdrop to this bizarre senario.
What Mr Ushay leaves out of his analysis is that America acts out of self-interest. Hiding behind the 'we're spreading democracy mantra' America seeks to bring capitalism and promote greed to every corner of the world (whilest further strengthening and broadening its already overly large political, military and economic influence). To do this America connives happily with despots and terrorists (like Saddam and Osama), bribes, threatens, arranges coups, and, if all else fails, invades and occupies.
Be wary of Americans waving flags and talking about freedom, I say!