The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The Sydney (ap)Peace(ment) Prize > Comments

The Sydney (ap)Peace(ment) Prize : Comments

By Jonathan J. Ariel, published 28/11/2007

Hans Blix’s Peace Prize does not appropriately reflect his history of excusing Saddam Hussein’s tyranny for 12 long years.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Sour grapes all the way down.
Perhaps Jonathan is upset that the prize wasnt awarded to the great peace (piece)#1-makers George Bush or Cheney or Rumsfield?

Also where does terror really come from?
Does it only come from them?
Are we really the good guys?
How come the good guys account for over 50% of the worlds armaments trade? The USA being by far the biggest player and "peace"-loving Britain being one of the big players.

#1 piece-makers Shock and awe certainly made lots of bloodied PIECES or mince-meat out of thousands of human bodies.

If anyone still thinks (or ever did) that we invaded Iraq out of "humanitarian" concerns then they are seriously deluded.

Meanwhile this reference gives a very sobering assessment of the state of the world.

1. http://www.ispeace723.org/anthroposphere2.html

It is interesting that those on the "right", wherever they are culturally and geographically, are all actively promoting the various pathologies criticised in this essay.
Posted by Ho Hum, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 9:29:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
George Patton was definitely a hero of the moment in his time and place of Europe in World War 2

We now live in a totally different world.
A world where the multiple contexts of any and every particular crisis are completely different to anything that has occurred previously, including World War 2.

And lets not forget it was the collective psycho-pathology of European white man that gave us both of the world wars. It wasnt just the Germans who were insane.

A quantum world in which everything is interconnected via instantaneous communication and rapid mass world wide travel.

A world in which one false move could easily trigger off multiple escalations and cause world war three, which will be the last world war.

Indeed the author of the reference in my first post has pointed out that there have been numerous occasions in the past 15 years or so when WW3 almost started. The Kosovo crisis. Two or three times in Iraq. Two or three times in Israel/Palestine. And even that event a few years back when a USA spy plane crash landed in China.
Posted by Ho Hum, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 9:49:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wow, up to your usual standard Jonathon! Perhaps you'd better do us all a favour by deconstructing Bernie Banton and exposing his role in maligning the good corporate citizens at James Hardie. Should be a natural for an "economist and financial analyst" with a Masters in Bull.... and Acrimony.
Posted by mike-servethepeople, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 10:24:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Silly Hans was looking in the wrong place for WMD (or was he?):

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Israel/index.html

For in the entire middle east, there is only one facility which is entirely devoted to the perfection of nuclear weapons. Here the artisans of the apocalypse lovingly perfect their art - away from the prying eyes of snoopy old El Baradai - cosseted by averted eyes and political sleight of hand.

At Dimona, hypocrisy has no currency.

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/dimona.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3640613.stm

Here's another hitpiece on Blix, but a little less thinly disguised:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1839127/posts

In expert hands, hypocrisy is a weapon -

- because it is so injurious to the human soul and spirit.
Posted by Chris Shaw, Carisbrook 3464, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 10:33:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You're right. Great piece. Hans Blix reminds me of Neville Chamberlain too. He'd appease Hitler's Germany (if he hadn't been killed by those "wicked" American warmongers)
Posted by History Buff, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 3:51:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ho Hum,

Sour Grapes? There can be little doubt that Hans Blix was not very good at his job, which was to find and eradicate WMD. The sole reason for the soft-lefters support for Blix was that he stood up to the coalition which wanted to get on with the job of regime change in Iraq.

Your pathetic comments that the author would prefer to see Bush win a peace prize is infantile in the extreme. Perhaps you can try and address the concerns of the article.

You will notice that the world’s largest economies are also generally the largest suppliers of military hardware, excluding of course Germany and Japan for obvious reasons. The soft brained among us may imagine that the weapons manufacturing results in the large economies. Clearly it is the other way around. Advanced and highly technical economies are more likely to manufacture high tech weaponry.

No one thinks we invaded Iraq for purely humanitarian reasons. There were many influencing factors in the decision to invade Iraq. To narrow it down to any one thing is making a complex issue simple for a political purpose.

Ho Hum>> And lets not forget it was the collective psycho-pathology of European white man that gave us both of the world wars.

Are you joking or are you just insane? It is easy to argue that WW2 had its genesis in Versailles in 1919, however in both cases German expansionism was at the root of the problem. To suggest that all European white men were responsible for both wars is not only racist, it is FEEBLE in the extreme.

Chris,

Wrong again. The Iranians are attempting to produce nuclear weapons at this very moment. Israel’s nukes are, in any case, irrelevant to a discussion on Hans Blix.

The very real failure of the IAEA to detect Iraq’s nuclear weapons program makes their current assessment that Iran is still years away from making a bomb all the harder to take comfort in.

Whats even more astounding is the recent claims by some soft-lefters that Saddam NEVER had any WMD programs
Posted by Paul.L, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 4:32:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a Tangled WEB a tale of the modern Middle East can tell?

All about Hegemon and Contraband?

Who said imperialism was over when we just exposed our PM as acting like a typical colonial statesman paying obeyance to the American God-Man an inheritor of what is now - or was, we hope - what was Pax Britannica, and now Pax Americana, but in all truth Pax Anglicanana, Aussie-Land included, like the colonials we still must be.

If we could only hope with Rudd that it is all over, us gutless Aussies afraid to admit that much of the global intrusion into the Middle-East since WW1 is Anglicisal.

Why talk about Blix as a two-timer when the de-colonial promise after WW2, was immediately broken by America knocking out Mossadeq of Iraq and installing the fake Shah - then us all trying to hide our happiness when the Shah was kicked out and Iran's home military took over, holding the US Embassy like criminals for more than a year.

Then as if that was not enough in the ME, Iraq backed by both America and the Soviets declared war on a purported evil Iran.

But the Iranians towards the end of eight years of murderous fighting, had the Iraqis fleeing back from wence they came, despite the use of the chemical weapons from Reagan.

Then came the US nuclear arming of tiny Israel which created the change far from the better, whether the armaments were gifted or not.

And so the Web spins on, America knocking out her former friend Saddam four years ago, still on track for contraband and hegemon, Condy Rice telling fibs all the time about the coming freedom, when she knows it's all about freedom for her US of A to carry on being the toppest top dog.

But after Iraq they still have to get Iran, and one does
dare hope surveying the above history, that Iran teaches America a lesson once again?

But now the web can spin a clear future - so scary it bares not thought......
Posted by bushbred, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 4:46:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think such articles as this drivel are properly described as "Tactical Perception Management"

Ho Hum has said it for me so I won't waste time commenting further
Posted by maracas, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 4:53:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
an unbelievably dishonest and obtuse article. i'm no fan of blix, but that doesn't mean i have time to read the pontifications of deceptive, ignorant, war-mongering fools.
Posted by bushbasher, Thursday, 29 November 2007 10:07:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bushbred,

More rabid nonsense. You might like to restrict yourself to the topic at hand rather than blather on about how EVIL the west is. Your history is all wrong anyway.The US may have helped Saddam prevent an Iranian victory during Iraq’s war with Iran but they never instigated that war, nor did they do what they could to help him win. But of course that kind of detail is far too complicated to fit into your ONE SIZE FITS ALL view of the world.

Mossadeq was the president of Iran, by the way, and he decided to nationalize (read steal) the oil companies (particularly Anglo Iranian Oil). But I suppose that kind of theft is OK with you.

Iran also developed chemical weapons but had blowback issues and discontinued the project. Iran used young boys in human wave attacks to clear minefields for the soldiers to follow through. That is, the boys cleared the mines by standing on them. Iran is no hero at all. In fact, if Khomeini had not called upon the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam he might never have attacked them in the first place. When Saddam withdrew from Iran and offered peace the Iranians declined, intent on

1) removing Saddams regime
2) replacing it with an Islamic republic – Shia no doubt
3) taking reparations of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Israel has had its nuclear weapons through at least one Arab invasion (1973) and declined to use them. So if you could possibly demonstrate why Israel having them is such a problem, perhaps you could share it with me. Iran on the other hand has institutionalized its hatred for Israel and the US and has actually threatened to wipe Israel of the face of the planet.

Your rabid anti-Americanism clearly causes you to abandon the complexities of the issues in favour of a good vs evil approach. George Bush would be so proud.

Bushbasher,

How about some supporting evidence for your claims. To suggest that the author is a warmonger is infantile. I dare you to attempt to refute his accusations regarding Blix.
Posted by Paul.L, Thursday, 29 November 2007 11:54:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
i have no interest in defending blix. but i also have no interest in engaging with ariel's straw men, nor with his slippery, revisionist nonsense regarding why bush and his fellow psychopaths started a bloody and unnecessary war. if ariel wants to start engaging with the distortions and outright lies before the iraq war, then there's something to discuss. but he shows none of that. ariel thinks the iraq was a good thing: he's a warmonger.
Posted by bushbasher, Thursday, 29 November 2007 4:38:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bushbasher,

The topic is Hans Blix and his peace prize farce, slagging off the author is infantile and pointless. Make an argument or produce some evidence for your point of view. Otherwise you’re just another whiner.
Posted by Paul.L, Friday, 30 November 2007 4:27:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
blix isn't the topic, even prima facie. the topic is "appeasement", and even that straw man is a proxy. ariel knows what the real topic is.
Posted by bushbasher, Friday, 30 November 2007 4:59:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bushbasher

How can you call the author's thesis a "straw man" when you yourself are unwilling to defend Blix, presuamably because you agree with the authors sentiments?

Keith tried the "I know what the author's saying, even though he isn't actually saying it" and that turned out poorly for him. If you think the argument is a straw man, show me where.
Posted by Paul.L, Friday, 30 November 2007 5:28:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No. Find another patsy.
Posted by bushbasher, Friday, 30 November 2007 9:18:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bushbasher and Bushbred, you have quite obviously lost this particular argument. Blix was an abject and complete failure, just like your arguments. Just like Neville Chamberlain. And just like the UN.
Posted by Froggie, Saturday, 1 December 2007 10:22:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Congratulations to Johnathan for writing this article, and to PaulL for following up his good work. It's gratifying to see him wupp the asses of the likes of Ho Hum, Chris Shaw and bushbred. I've tried arguing with these left wing whackos until I'm blue in the fingers, but they refuse to look at facts objectively.

Sadly the information war seems to be lost. Most people believe the headlines about David Kay, and have only seen the two second sound bite of him saying "there's nothing there." Most do not realise that he went to great lengths to detail Saddam's deliberate deception regarding his WMD program, as well as his underlying psychology, which meant that he would always pose a threat.

Nothing much changes in the left dominated media and education system. I only found out that Ronald Reagan actually envisioned the star wars program as a means of bringing about nuclear disarmament, when I did a thesis on missile defence and nuclear disarmament a couple of years ago. Until then, I had always been fed the perception of "Ronald Raygun" as a being a far-right warmonger.
Posted by dozer, Sunday, 2 December 2007 7:44:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy