The Forum > Article Comments > The question is the same as it always was: why are we in Iraq? > Comments
The question is the same as it always was: why are we in Iraq? : Comments
By Lindsay Tanner, published 23/1/2007If we want to actively promote democracy and freedom in the Middle East, we have to come to the table with clean hands.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Page 10
-
- All
Posted by aqvarivs, Tuesday, 30 January 2007 1:47:19 AM
| |
What is terrorism? Is it an explosion in a subway? Is it people being minced in their homes by rockets or children being shredded by cluster bombs? Is it knowing that your children will be dead next week for the want of food? Personaly I include all those with atomic bombs as terrorists as I see atomic holicaust as the ultimate terror. To a thoughtful person the subject of terrorism is complex and should not be decided by jingoistic politians looking for distractions or the Murdoch press.
Of course to have complete equanimity to all persons is a worthwhile ideal, but one that is rarely met. To be anti something does not infer hate, just opposition to. Should I not been anti Pol Pot or Saddam Hussain? I think that one should oppose what one deems anti social behaviour. I also make a distinction between individuals and collective political behaviour. Democracy arose with the industrial era. It has been useful but in need of change. What will be? We will have to wait but I think it wil arise in the EU.I think you have a rosy view of democracy. A view not shared by those who do not vote when given a chance. This a large % in both USA and UK. It is well accepted that "peak oil approaches. It will be too valuable to burn. To say it is just laying around is somewhat whimsical Posted by Whispering Ted, Tuesday, 30 January 2007 2:15:05 PM
| |
A Tad Off Topic....
Peak oil has arrived. It has arrived in the form of peak petrol and diesel. Forget the price of a barrel of oil for now. Look instead to the bowser. Remember that oil companies can dispose their profits as they please. The whole oil argument revolves around the quantity of distributable energy (petrol, diesel, kero etc) that is LEFT OVER after exploration, development, infrastructure, transportation and refining have taken their toll. FACT 1. We exploited those oils with the highest energy content first. FACT 2. We exploited the largest and most easily (cheaply) accessible oil wells first. FACT 3. Oil wells naturally yield their lighter, most energetic fractions first, leaving the heavier, energy-lean residues to be scavenged later. FACT 4. From now on, to simply maintain a constant supply of liquid fuel, ever more poorer (heavier, sour) oil must be pumped and transported further to ever larger refineries, all of which takes an ever larger bite out of the energy cake. How much is left over for us? FACT 5. The end of the oil age will arrive with a rush that will make our heads spin. Try telling that to the captains of industry, or even an economist. The price of oil won't make a blind bit of difference to consumption, because oil energy dictates the value of money, not the other way 'round. Here's a simple parable - http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php/weblog/comments/george-the-axe-and-the-cherry-tree/ - the math would be beautiful if it wasn't so poignant. Posted by Chris Shaw, Carisbrook 3464, Tuesday, 30 January 2007 11:25:27 PM
| |
Although I have posted this elsewhere on OLO today, I think I might do it again here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1263677258215075609&hl=en-AU Don't be put off by the title, pay close attention to the content. Cheers all... Posted by Chris Shaw, Carisbrook 3464, Wednesday, 31 January 2007 2:57:42 PM
| |
Chris Shaw, Carisbrook 3464,
I have this little cottage industry where I sell kits for $100.00 to assist people like that. If you would like a kit let me know. Each kit contains one sheet of tinfoil and diagrammed instructions on how to create a three dimensional triangular hat. Wearing this hat should deflect most of the messages. :-) Ah, sometimes I make myself laugh. Posted by aqvarivs, Thursday, 1 February 2007 6:41:10 AM
| |
Why are we in Iraq? Because George Bush and John Howard refeuse to learn the lessons from Vietnam. It's the people who will decide the government they want, not the Lesder of a Nation that is in decline as a world power and some lap dog who believes that war is the only solution.
Posted by painted_red, Tuesday, 20 March 2007 9:40:37 AM
|
What's wrong with being anti-American. It's wrong in the same light as it is to be anti-Australian. Or anti any other nation.
An opinion isn't a right. To speak it is. Just because I have the right to voice my opinion does not mean it isn't refutable. Or that wide sweeping utterances of hatred mingled with tinfoil conspiracies are truthful or accurate assessments of a given subject.
It's a mis-characterization to say democracy is to give the people what they ask. We elect representatives, who in turn represent political parties. Each political party represents a particular strata of that society. ie: Labour, Greens, liberals, Conservatives.
In our society if a party wants to win the election they had best give the nod to the Industry/Corporate types.
In other societies the military, or the socialist, or the religious take command. And in those societies the people are fortunate indeed if they have any say what so ever. Ever indeed.
Democracy isn't an Americanism. It isn't a Britishism. It isn't any fashion of colonialism. Democracy isn't taking anything from the Middle East. It is a gift to the common man. The everyday citizen.
And for citizens of a democracy to want to with hold that opportunity from a people who have been oppressed by their own. Well in my opinion that is beyond selfish. It's criminal.
And please lets not go on about the oil. There is all kinds of untapped oil around the world. The only reference Iraqi oil has in this situation is where that revenue goes. To a better Iraq and living standard for the citizenship or to the coffers of the al-Qeada types. And more terror and unrest around the world.