Last Cereal: Message Board: re: it was a perfect morning (zoom)

[ back | refresh | last 25 | post new ]

bad taste (in my mouth)
[5837] by "eurora" (193.83.24.100..)   on Mon 17 Sep 2001 13:19:38     [ reply ] [ up ]
my flatmate has been really annoyed at the reaction of civilians in palaestina: the - "volksfest" - fair atmosphere, the singing and dancing and laughing in the streets.

her particular complaint was that it proved bad taste.

this is - i believe - ridiculous. you cannot literally stop a peace process and then expect condolences when you suffer a loss which in palaestina belongs to the category "daily news". (this does not mean that i think this terroist act was in anyway justified. as a rule i do not think that killing loads of people is an acceptable political or other statement.)

the bad taste here i can detect in my mouth if i think of what might come.

even a rather conservative and usually politically balanced austrian newspaper has declared in barbaric dictum that it is time to stop those bastards (refering to palaestinensian civilians which as far as i know are not the chief suspects anyway) from whatever they think they are doing.

this was in the heat the moment and the newspaper were a bit more balanced in the following days. but it was also a conservative balanced austrian newspaper which went nuts.
proof that the whole world has lost their head. and what is it what any professional bank robber tells the people involved?
if nobody loses their head - nobody will lose their head.

hmm.
re: it was a perfect morning
[5845] by "Rob Pfeifer" (83.234.35.212.in-addr.arpa.ip-po)   on Mon 17 Sep 2001 16:10:07     [ reply ] [ up ]
I suspect even America in a rage would find it hard to strike against a country that was providing at least verbal support. Interestingly, even Iran has spoken out in support of America (though practical aid offered is unsurprisingly nil).

But any country that can be shown to be harbouring proven, known or very strongly suspected terrorists is asking for trouble in this climate.

"War on terrorists" to me is a statement of agression, an expression warning that the US might declare war against any country that harbours terrorists. It is also an expression of intent to carry out surgical strikes, perhaps, against identified terrorist bases. Regardless, probably, of country.

But massing the troops, sending in the ground forces against another nation, this is not a factor in "war against terrorism". It is a factor in "war against <nation>", though this may easily come from "war against terrorism"... or Bush might just be firing up the popular support before he /does/ declare war.

Maybe I'm just splitting hairs. But one cannot declare a conventional war against a not-nation, a not-coalesced entity, in the same way as one can against a nation. For a start, no-one stands up to say "OK, come on then. We'll conquer _you_ instead, you assholes."

But then again, these days there are many kinds of war.

Rob
re: it was a perfect morning
[5872] by "DangerousType" (dnvrapanas85poola152.dnvr.uswest)   on Tue 18 Sep 2001 10:29:59     [ reply ] [ up ]
A Quote from Dr. Martin Luther King

"Why should we love our enemies? The first reason is fairly obvious. Returning hate for hate multiples hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."