| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/07/2005 06:15:58 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Flash:
One can choose to sit on the sidelines and wait for a victor to emerge.... |
I trust that we'll agree to disagree then. I respect your opinion, and that's what the civilized world is all about. I will try to summarize now what I believe the difference is in the premises we made/chose for this argument.
You believe that there will be a victor in this war [on terror]. Therefore, it is necessary to pick a side right now and fight to the extinction of the other side. There are only two types of people in the world - those for it and those against it. (Sorry if I oversimplified or misinterpreted - feel free to correct me.)
I believe on the other hand, that there will be no victor in this war. What started as a relatively minor group of opressed people fighting for their right to live on their land escalated into a major world conflict in the past 50 years or so. Each act of terror, e.g. like the one today, increases the number of people, otherwise indifferent, that choose sides and pledge their whole support to the west side. At the same time, every act of violence and suppression - no matter how valid in the western eyes - creates another set of converts from a midstream peaceful people into desperate people ready to kill themselves for merely putting a bump in front of the wheel of history.
The number of people full of hatred today is way past the critical mass. That is why we have the war. Neither side can be annihilated, and therefore I do not believe that choosing a side is a solution. The solution on this planet must be in reconciliation of views and behavior.
I hope that you understand where I'm coming from, and that there is a slight difference between a pacifist waving peace sign flags at the streets, and a fellow photog that lived through an armed conflict in person.
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 06:24:53 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by Makka:
Let's waste $330 million dollars by flying a piece of metal into a comet! WTF is that all about? What a waste! |
One of the purposes of Deep Impact was to evaluate the structure and density of comets so that we might plan for the possibility of deflecting one that could impact earth. Given that a single impact could potentially wipe out billions of people, I wouldn't exactly call that a waste. As with terrorism, ignoring the threat until it's too late will inevitably lead to an unacceptable result.
Thank you rscorp and colyla for your insights (maybe others, too... I haven't read the whole thread). For anyone who believes the Iraqis don't want us there, consider the thousands of volunteers signing up for security and political positions despite the risks, while the insurgents must force their "suicide" bombers into their roles or blow up unwitting drivers remotely. Many of the insurgents aren't even from Iraq, and their message certainly isn't about making that country a better place.
Message edited by author 2005-07-07 18:25:47. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 07:27:47 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
Therefore, it is necessary to pick a side right now and fight to the extinction of the other side. There are only two types of people in the world - those for it and those against it. (Sorry if I oversimplified or misinterpreted - feel free to correct me.)
|
It is never so easy I am afraid. I am appalled at the war in Iraq, on fabricated and illegal grounds. I do not propose that we withdraw because we have suffered a terrorist attack - keep the troops there, as the damage has already been done, and we cannot bend to terrorist influence. I do think we need to learn our lessons in future and ameliorate our attitude to the developing world. I don't think that we should invade any more countries, unless there is a real reason. I despise the terrorist methods. But I can understand why they feel so strongly (not that I do - but I can see why they do). I want to resolve the causes of their motivation to attack, not merely strive to prevent them from being successful.
So am I with you or against you?
Edit: Note - I am agreeing with RSCorp's position with this
Message edited by author 2005-07-07 19:49:32. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 07:39:00 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by rscorp:
In the case of the Jews ( and I am not Jewish so I don't even have a personal stake in this) the "Palestinians" ( a name coined by the British which was violently REJECTED by said "Palestinians") do not seek to share land, they seek to stamp out the Jews altogether. The land does not belong to "Palestine", yet they falsely claim it's really ALL theirs and that this holy war will not end until the Jews leave. Not going to happen, so find a way to compromise.
|
People of Jewish faith occupied an area much larger than Israel. Demographic shifts occurred in many ways throughout history. However, military expansion to "recover" land left or lost thousands of years ago is not proportionate when those evicted militarily have occupied it for the last few hundred. Otherwise most of the Western world would be in chaos!
It is hard to defend the way in which the people now called Palestinians were treated, and continue to be treated, I feel. I do not find it strange that an oppressed group of people accept a common label if it assists their struggle. I do deplore their methods, but again, I understand (but do not agree with) the Palestinian expression of their frustration given the lack of respect given to them. The respective death tolls from the societies in the struggles show this all to well (Israeli "revenge" attacks always kill more than have been killed).
Before characterising the whole war as a purely religious one, remember that the Palestinian people are a Christian/Muslim split. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 07:47:45 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by bcoble:
We cannot let Iraq go back to the extremist! Stability in that part of the world should be top priority. |
Throughout history imposed leadership has often been replaced by extremist leadership when the imposing force leaves: Iran and Zimbabwe/Rhodesia being recent examples.
I am not sure that by imposing a new regime that stability will have been achieved. The previous regime was unpalatable, but stable. The debate causing greatest instability in the region pre-Iraq was the Israeli military expansion and occupation of Palestine, and the unswerving US support (or at least, in the face of damning UN criticism, the lack of any criticism from the US). Resolution of that issue would have defused tensions and improved stability, whereas invasion of Iraq is likely to have inflamed them. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 08:04:14 PM · #56 |
They might blame the US for many of their woes but I believe they (the extremist) are their own worst enemy. Outside of Israel there isn't one other Democracy in the region. That's not good especially in the oil rich nations.
Allow me to generalize (please) but they aren't the most progressive thinkers on the planet. Their religious views inhibit so much of their potential. The Taliban, for example treat(ed) their women like third class citizens. The female viewpoint alone is such a great natural resource and offers a far different perspective, than if we were to operate in a Mens Only Club. Music was outlawed. What? I'm sure we could all come up with a pretty long list of a$$ backward views that are held in the ashrams and throughout the region without much debate between us.
I need to get my hands on this fact (Google ain't helping) but I believe there are around 8-15 English language books, translated into Arabic each year as opposed to thousands translated into both German and Greek. There's no market to share ideas. I see that as a root cause on the other side of this horror show. If my information is incorrect please inform me but I've read this in a number of different places over the years.
....just my 2 pence.
Message edited by author 2005-07-07 20:06:26.
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 08:28:54 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
They might blame the US for many of their woes but I believe they (the extremist) are their own worst enemy. Outside of Israel there isn't one other Democracy in the region. That's not good especially in the oil rich nations.
Allow me to generalize (please) but they aren't the most progressive thinkers on the planet. Their religious views inhibit so much of their potential. The Taliban, for example treat(ed) their women like third class citizens. The female viewpoint alone is such a great natural resource and offers a far different perspective, than if we were to operate in a Mens Only Club. Music was outlawed. What? I'm sure we could all come up with a pretty long list of a$$ backward views that are held in the ashrams and throughout the region without much debate between us.
I need to get my hands on this fact (Google ain't helping) but I believe there are around 8-15 English language books, translated into Arabic each year as opposed to thousands translated into both German and Greek. There's no market to share ideas. I see that as a root cause on the other side of this horror show. If my information is incorrect please inform me but I've read this in a number of different places over the years.
....just my 2 pence. |
Equating lack of democracy with extremism is very dangerous (too many counter example to mention - democracy or any version of it is not fundamentally right or wrong, nor are other forms of government). Equating the Taliban rule with Islam's teachings demonstrates a lack of understanding of Islam.
Poor treatment of women is a world problem, not limited to certain countries that practise Islam. Look at the US and the UK: no right to vote until the 20s, not often in work or higher education until the 50s and 60s. Still no equal pay and regular discrimination.
Look at poorer or "less developed" countries, whether Christian, Islamic or Hindu: the concept of equal rights is less well developed along with everything else. Islam is not the factor: though it gets singled out because of the practice in certain Middle Eastern states of women covering up. Though that itself is not fundamentally a degradation: culturally alien to us, but not necessarily "wrong". It is viewed by many women as giving them greater privacy and freedom, allowed to see without being seen, to pass through society without men's stares and interference.
As for translations, how many Arabic books get translated into English? There are a few (read Naguib Mahfouz's Cairo Trilogy, and anything by Amin Maalouf - amazing authors and stories). The cultural gap is great, and wonderful to learn about. By contrast, Harry Potter (and many more) are our return compliment... plus do not forget pretty much every movie that comes out of Hollywood. The advantage of Arabic is that it is so widely spoken in so many nations, so a lot is translated compared to, say, Finnish.
I believe that cultural misunderstanding is a very great problem in resolving the problem. Ironically, many residents of the Middle East speak English or another Western language and can access our culture. I have discussed English literature in Syria with men better read in the classics than me. There are very few Westerners by comparison who can speak Arabic and/or seek out the Middle Eastern culture. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 08:35:07 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Their religious views inhibit so much of their potential. |
Agree with that personally: separation of church and state is very desirable. Separation (as in Turkey) would, in my view, assist rational policy making in many states.
I also think that the US is teetering on the edge of breaching the separation of state and religion: GWB's election on a fundamental Christian vote is not healthy. His policies, pandering to religious views, is problematic. I foresee myself getting very cross with the upcoming Supreme Court nominations...!
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 08:40:16 PM · #59 |
Found this on numbers, (Google is my friend) - though I would tend to think that education linked to wealth is an issue here.
q from 2003 Arab Human Development Report (AHDR).
o Arabs constitute five per cent of the world̢۪s population yet they produce only one per cent of the world̢۪s books; 17% of these are clerical or religious in nature compared to 5% in other countries.
o In 1996, 22 Arab countries with a total population of 280 million produced no more than 1945 literary and artistic books.
o No more than 10,000 books have been translated into Arabic over the past millennium, a number equal to what Spain translates annually.
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 08:58:34 PM · #60 |
The point of translation, fact that I am dying to track down is that there are far, far many more books translated into Finnish then there are into Arabic. There was a display chart coordinated by the sales departments of major publishers in the US, UK, Aus. etc. thaqt illustrated the numbers. I was stunned by the poor showing in arabic translations and found it to be a very pertinent little know bit of information.
The exceptions to the rules don't interest me as much as the rules do. Short people can't dunk basketballs but I'm sure there are a few who can. Mentioning that women couldn't vote years ago is fine and note we've made progress and now they can. How many nations in the middle east can boast the same type of progress on any social front?
We are not The United States of Perfection (....and I know what you are thinking) though some Americans may feel that we are. There's only one perfect country and that's France. My point is that it's time they woke up and smelled their own feet. Look inward and deal with some of their own insufficiencies instead of blaming others.
We all share some of the blame here and nobody seems to be owning up to their chunk.
In short, I believe we agree on many points more so than we don't.
Back to Photography for me. Cheers!
How's about those Macro scores? Hmmmm?
Message edited by author 2005-07-07 21:00:57.
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 09:11:58 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Found this on numbers, (Google is my friend) - though I would tend to think that education linked to wealth is an issue here.
q from 2003 Arab Human Development Report (AHDR).
o Arabs constitute five per cent of the world̢۪s population yet they produce only one per cent of the world̢۪s books; 17% of these are clerical or religious in nature compared to 5% in other countries.
o In 1996, 22 Arab countries with a total population of 280 million produced no more than 1945 literary and artistic books.
o No more than 10,000 books have been translated into Arabic over the past millennium, a number equal to what Spain translates annually. |
That data speaks volumes.
Maybe the US can, instead of buying their oil and simply continuing to fund their terrible leaders, we can trade books, documentaries and other educational material for the oil.
Since we are fully addicted to the stuff anyway, we might as well try and give the people we are taking resources from something valuable that they need in return.
Our being the richest nation in the world and using the most oil (their oil) to help get so rich while they suffer in poverty is one of the main spawns of terrorism anyway.
Message edited by author 2005-07-07 21:13:23. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 10:14:18 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Our being the richest nation in the world and using the most oil (their oil) to help get so rich while they suffer in poverty is one of the main spawns of terrorism anyway. |
Per capita, Saudi Arabia is the richest nation in the world. |
|
|
|
07/07/2005 10:15:35 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Originally posted by bcoble:
We cannot let Iraq go back to the extremist! Stability in that part of the world should be top priority. |
Throughout history imposed leadership has often been replaced by extremist leadership when the imposing force leaves: Iran and Zimbabwe/Rhodesia being recent examples.
I am not sure that by imposing a new regime that stability will have been achieved. The previous regime was unpalatable, but stable. The debate causing greatest instability in the region pre-Iraq was the Israeli military expansion and occupation of Palestine, and the unswerving US support (or at least, in the face of damning UN criticism, the lack of any criticism from the US). Resolution of that issue would have defused tensions and improved stability, whereas invasion of Iraq is likely to have inflamed them. |
The way I see Iraq, with so many different ethnic groups squabbling amongst one another maybe the way Saddam ran the country is the only way to keep it together? Without some sort of iron fist it will tear itself apart in civil war, which is where it's heading now!
And if the US use the excuse of WMD, why, against international criticism and condemnation, are they going to push ahead with the development of a nuclear bunker busting missile? Why don't they live by their own rules and stop DICTATING to the world what they can and can't do! I totally agree that these radical countries should not have these weapons, but what sort of example does the US set by wanting to develop these weapons and then letting other countries (Israel, Pakistan, India etc) possess them? With Israel against so many other countries and other countries against them is it really a good idea to let them sit there (supposedly) with nuclear weapons when they have the notion of 'pre-emptive' strikes in their policies! That to me would be more of a primary concern!
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 10:55:52 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Originally posted by Makka:
And hey! Let's waste $330 million dollars by flying a piece of metal into a comet! WTF is that all about? What a waste! Maybe another form of Star Wars defence? Sheesh! Why not invest it in a way to help these countries in some form or another? Doesn't Bush have to approve these missions? |
While we're at it, let's blame Bush for the common cold, venereal disease, acne, and unwanted body hair. 
Those kinds of space missions have been planned and executed long before Bush, and will continue to be planned and executed after he leaves office. Space missions only comprise a small percentage of the total budget, comparatively speaking. Let's find something else to argue about, OK? ;) |
Touche'! :)
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 11:12:27 PM · #65 |
read this particular blog entry... it has also puzzled others in the past
//www.ebloggy.com/michhy/78
|
|
|
|
07/07/2005 11:36:23 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
I hope that you understand where I'm coming from, and that there is a slight difference between a pacifist waving peace sign flags at the streets, and a fellow photog that lived through an armed conflict in person. |
I do understand your point of view, appreciate your time taken to explain it, and pray that your hope of an enlightened world emerges to prevent further bloodshed.
But just in case the radicals/terrorists/jihadists decide not to give up their "mission".............I choose to support those who are on the front lines (Diplomats, law enforcement, military, spiritual intercessors) against those who would blow up a commuter train/bus or execute an envoy because of his affiliation with a government who has business relations with the infidel west.
I grant you the distinction between pacifist and one who has lived war personally and seen its horrors and strives to use this personal history to get others to see the error of their passions.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2005 12:21:33 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by RonBeam:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Our being the richest nation in the world and using the most oil (their oil) to help get so rich while they suffer in poverty is one of the main spawns of terrorism anyway. |
Per capita, Saudi Arabia is the richest nation in the world. |
Actually I stand corrected, though it is not Saudi Arabia (they aren̢۪t even in the top 10 , #73 in fact). It is Luxembourg Rank Order - GDP - per capita, with the United States in 2nd.
Although we do still suck up the most oil Rank Order - Oil - consumption. In fact, the United States consumes more oil than the entire European Union combined.
And we wonder why poor, yet oil rich, Middle Eastern nations don't like us... |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 01:00:50 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Originally posted by RonBeam:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Our being the richest nation in the world and using the most oil (their oil) to help get so rich while they suffer in poverty is one of the main spawns of terrorism anyway. |
Per capita, Saudi Arabia is the richest nation in the world. |
Actually I stand corrected, though it is not Saudi Arabia (they aren̢۪t even in the top 10 , #73 in fact). It is Luxembourg Rank Order - GDP - per capita, with the United States in 2nd.
Although we do still suck up the most oil Rank Order - Oil - consumption. In fact, the United States consumes more oil than the entire European Union combined.
And we wonder why poor, yet oil rich, Middle Eastern nations don't like us... |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I feel I am in a different world. Read your post and reflect what you are saying:
We consume the most: we pay the most and why are these monies not getting to these people? If you had such an abundance would you not like a customer like us? Like Africa, it is the dictatorships in these nations that rule. Interesting, while kids play in this country, theirs are being prepared to strap a bomb across their chest to wipe out the wicked West. These countries have no reason to remain so backward as they go about attacking innocent people.
America is dumb because it has allowed the left to dictate whether we drill or not. |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 01:27:55 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
These countries have no reason to remain so backward as they go about attacking innocent people.
|
I think an answer to that is the post by legalbeagle above:
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Found this on numbers, (Google is my friend) - though I would tend to think that education linked to wealth is an issue here.
q from 2003 Arab Human Development Report (AHDR).
o Arabs constitute five per cent of the world̢۪s population yet they produce only one per cent of the world̢۪s books; 17% of these are clerical or religious in nature compared to 5% in other countries.
o In 1996, 22 Arab countries with a total population of 280 million produced no more than 1945 literary and artistic books.
o No more than 10,000 books have been translated into Arabic over the past millennium, a number equal to what Spain translates annually. |
They remain ignorant of ways other than the highly religious ways they were raised. And the wealth of their oil lands does not reach the people. The dictators and tyrants of those lands horde that wealth and we as Americans who give them their wealth allow it to continue because of our oil addiction.
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
America is dumb because it has allowed the left to dictate whether we drill or not. |
More drilling is not the answer. Oil is a finite resource; sooner or later the world will have to wean itself from the cheap and easy energy we take for granted that took millions of years for the Earth to create.
If we do not wean ourselves, the Earth will do it for us.
Message edited by author 2005-07-08 01:29:42. |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 02:17:59 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by Makka:
And American policy with Israel has gone on long before 9-11! A lot of extremist talk is regarding this! As you say, this hatred has been round longer than we can imagine! You poke a cat in the eye for long enough eventually it will take a swipe at you.... |
Mind you, we hear all about the displaced Palestinians and those killed by Israeli soldiers. However, let's not forget a few facts:
a) many of the displaced Palestinians were displaced by neighboring countries like Jordan who siezed much land.
b) sure, there are 600,000 displaced Palestinians. However, how often do you hear about the 500,000 Jews who were displaced from the surrounding Arab countries. These are Jews who's families lived in the middle-east since before the Romans, Greeks and Persians.
c) there is a big difference between killing people while they're shooting you, or even innocents dying in the cross fire (because if the terrorists were not firing there would be no crossfire for their children to die in)....as opposed to attacking civilians and children on buses
d) I know the Israelis love their children....I really have to question much of the Palestinian society as being diseased for sending their children out as bombs. Now, I will iterate I have several friends who are Palestinians. And I will attest that most Palestinians simply want peaceful existance and the right to prosper their families. But sadly, it is very hard to differentiate between a such a Palestinian and a violent Palestinian.
e) and yes, it was easier for America to support a democratic european influenced state then tyrannical dictator and/or petty prince ruled regimes.
- The Saj
Message edited by author 2005-07-08 02:19:36. |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 02:26:18 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by Makka:
And hey! Let's waste $330 million dollars by flying a piece of metal into a comet! WTF is that all about? What a waste! Maybe another form of Star Wars defence? Sheesh! Why not invest it in a way to help these countries in some form or another? Doesn't Bush have to approve these missions? |
Sure it's a waste to you but only an uneducated individual would look to the space program as waste. Do you realize how much benefit we have received from it. Do you realize that nearly EVERY piece of modern technology can trace itself back to either a NASA, DARPA or Department of Defense project?
Furthermore, the information learned is extremely important. Space technology must be extremely efficient (compact for it's power generation or work done). The advances made may take 20 yrs but they allow us to make better more efficent vehicles. It's called space-age aluminum for a reason. The alloys were designed for NASA and the air force but the result is light more fuel efficient cars - which equal better emissions.
And if we ever find ourselves at the point where we are endangered by an asteroid or rogue comet, these missions will be far from wasted and we'll be crying why didn't we spend $10 billion to learn how to protect the earth!!! |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 02:28:44 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I'm german...so do I get half of Europe now? |
didn't you guys try that - twice ??? |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 02:44:11 AM · #73 |
"or wherever you've got your views on islam as a religion"
Might it be from viewing the actions of Islam itself?
Please tell me of a single place where an Islamic populace/nation borders a non-islamic nation and there is not conflict. In fact, the vast majority of conflicts in the world are with Islam
1. USA
2. Israel
3. Yugoslavia
4. Spain
5. Russia
6. India
7. Indonesia
8. Philipines
Nearly every place this religion borders on - there is conflict by the extremists.
And yes, sure witches or women thought to be were killed. We're talking a small handful compared to the number of women Islam kills. In fact, I'll wager that Islam kills more women in a day than the American Colonial Colonies did in their entire existance.
Furthermore, most of the nation looked upon that shortly there after as "wrong" and ensured it would not happen again. That is not the case with Islam, as most muslims defend the actions of such terrorists or try to conditionalize it instead of callingh it wrong. Islam is in desperate need of a renaissance.
"possibly improsoned and deported to Guantanamo where proper interrogation techniques can be applied without regard to western values and basic human rights"
There is very little evidence of severe abuse in Gitmo. And I am sorry, when i hear that they're forced into hot rooms or air conditioned rooms - that's NOT torture. You should see what they do - namely cut off heads.
"Similarly, I am against any form of terror, and against any form of weapons when applied to people of any color/race/creed. What side does that put me on?"
The side that dies....and in the process enables many more to be killed.
Originally posted by pawdrix:
They might blame the US for many of their woes but I believe they (the extremist) are their own worst enemy. Outside of Israel there isn't one other Democracy in the region. |
Well, now there are two more budding (Iraq and Afghanistan) and many feel Iran will be within the decade. Jordan, Saudi Arabia and several other nations in the region have implemented low-level "local" democratic elections. Many believe it will only be about 50 years or so until those levels rise and make those nations democratic institutions. In truth, currently policy has affected MUCH change in the region. Change for better....yes...at a, sadly, high cost...
Message edited by author 2005-07-08 02:44:32. |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 04:29:15 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
And if we ever find ourselves at the point where we are endangered by an asteroid or rogue comet, these missions will be far from wasted and we'll be crying why didn't we spend $10 billion to learn how to protect the earth!!! |
I think you'll find the comet actually released the same emmissions several hours before the probe hit! But, hey....we could always send up Bruce to save the day if that's the case!
Uneducated my arse! |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 04:49:15 AM · #75 |
|
