hell bent on war

This is for your own works!!!
John the Shorts
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 4:22 pm
Location: Wales

Post by John the Shorts »

Byron

I think you may have summed up this war
Unfortunately, it's the dead and the wounded who they sent out there who are the ones that will have to lay in their bed. Hospital or otherwise....

.... the exploitation of the captured soldiers, and the deliberate choice of bringing war to his region, are exactly what Sadam was expected to do.

We are playing his game, in his back yard, and I fear there are far more terrible things to come.
I'm sad to say that you are correct - in any war the only winners are the arms manufacturers and a handful of politicians. Everyone else is a loser, albeit some lose far more than others, and that is the saddest fact of any war.

JTS
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

"....but I could be wrong....," Paula ~ however, my take on SL's parody was along the lines of his co-opting my words to either flatter me in hopes of gaining something he wants, as flattery is used to do; or to express contempt, disgust, disdain, or all of the above. I don't consider you naieve, however, on this one, you may want to hold onto the label you've offered. In any case, interesting that he found my words so adequate to express his position on anything, were it anything real. Baring his soul I don't see at all, or he'd have certainly bypassed the reference to picking up the hitchhiker from Florida and later dropping him like a bomb. The alignment of his details could not have been so transposable with what I wrote, either. Something genuinely spoken on his part would be prerequisite to believing this was anything other than what I've already stated.
User avatar
Paula
Posts: 3155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 1:20 am
Location: London

Post by Paula »

I am so gullable if it was a parady it went right over my head :oops:

A quick straw poll did the rest of the Brits fall in perhaps (and I am trying to redeem myself here) it was too america for me to realise the parody.
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

Linda ~

I stand by my "naieve American" comment. We have been inundated with propaganda, of which you are unaware. An apology so easily swayed could not have had much resolve to begin with. I don't expect and would question what to do with an apology from you, at this point, anyway ["only heartfelt need apply"]. Your additional comment [italics mine] reenforces my previous two sentences:
"Your motives on your little peace parade are all political." Were you envisioning a pre-school outing when you made that comment? My "little peace parade" is, of course, political. What do you think war and peace are all about, Linda? Do you think it's natural for young men and women to leave their homes, girlfriends/boyfriends and families and fly across large expanses of water, and trapse through miles of sand and sandstorm to put a gun to someone's head, or fly over them with "smart" bombs [just happening to miss the country] and killing/maiming innocent people on either side of the border? Is that what you think our nature is? Do you think that tears were shed upon multiple partings because they really didn't prefer to stay at home and make love with their husband or wife, or go out with their girlfriend or buddies, or just stay home and get lost in that hopeless little screen?

Whether you approach the issue of respect as something that must be earned, or something that must be given until reasons no longer exist to give it ~ Bush as a person and a "leader" has earned my disrespect. I cannot and I will not pretend otherwise. I know that it's the Christian thing to respect our leaders, no matter what. You could fall back on that stance, even if you didn't respect Bush on his or your own, but that's your choice, Linda, not mine.

Linda, you can question me till the end of time....which may or may not end up sooner than later for us all. We are so far at opposite ends of the spectrum that I've given up the notion of your understanding, much less agreeing with, anything I've said or will say.

I barely can respond to your final paragraph's questions. I have come to questioning all that the propaganda that has fed me, via the very thing that you are suggesting, i.e. not believing everything I see and hear. Linda, I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again for you now. I feel betrayed by my country. I grew up saying the Pledge of Allegiance, with my hand over my heart, and singing the Star Spangled Banner, and when "under G..d" was added I embraced it, and when it was deleted, I resented it and have long since, for a multitude of reasons [right or wrong, and some actually inexpressible, at least by me at this point], felt that this has impacted our country's path. I won't go into that, but I can tell you that I'm crying as I write these words. The pain comes from way down deep.

As a child and growing young person, I saw much of this country and loved everything I saw, and embraced the multitude of people and lifestyles within it. I continue to see it as there being many paths to the same destination, and one is legitimate as the next, they're only different. I want to be proud of our country. I want to be proud of where I live. I love the idea of going elsewhere and being received positively when I say, or they can tell by my accent, that I'm from the United States. The [international] politics of this country have rendered that impossible. If traveling abroad, I could only hope that they would give me the opportunity for them to get to know me as an individual person, who happens to be from the United States. Unfortunately, depending on the area, I could just as easily be shot/kidnapped/disdained, as not.

I know that it is your opinion that I am spreading propaganda on this board. However, in my opinion, I am spreading fact. So, do I cease based on your presumption? The answer to that is an unequivocal "no." I feel a personal, ethical responsibility to offer alternative views. Information is not dangerous.

Do I listen? You've determined my cutting and pasting as "false," without "surfing the Internet" yourself. I work as well, Linda. I have surfed nowhere, but [italics mine] my "false cutting and pasting" has come to me. People who have done the research have directly or indirectly sent them to me. In my opinion, and referencing Andrew McGeever's poem again, the United States underwent a "rite of passage" with September 11, and entered the "real world" at that point. Prior to that, we were living in a Utopia of sorts, with all the bombings, killings, and terrorism happening "over there." We now have at least a sense of how others have been living for many, many years. And look at us......now. Bombing everyone and their brother, just in case......................................................................

Your last line is perhaps the most condescending of all within your post, Linda. If anyone doesn't believe all they read or hear, it most certainly is me.

If a sincere apology should ever come my way from you, Linda, I will always prefer peace to dissension, much less war.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth
Last edited by lizzytysh on Mon Mar 24, 2003 4:52 am, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

Dear Byron ~ Just in case there was any confusion, my words that follow [here] were referring to Sore Losers', not yours [the bracketed names are added for clarification]: "I don't need to speak for him [Byron], but it seemed to me some valid frustration [of Byron] with pointless, immature comments [by Sore Loser], which attempt only to undermine, rather than add to anything intelligently."

How it is that the sharing of information is perceived as it is, is beyond me. After all, it is the "American way," "freedom of speech," "freedom of information," et al.

Why does Bob Dylan's song resonate in my mind with, "There must be some way outta here....."? I'm sure I'll get many suggestions [expressed or otherwise] to that, however, it makes the point I want to make.

~ Elizabeth
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

Dear Nan,

The upshot of it is not that I'm a member of the peace party. Many come to the peace party through a wide variety of other avenues. As I had to leave here by 7:00 AM this morning, and was in a rush when I wrote my response, as I was driving I was concerned that I had not taken what I'd said one step further, i.e. that mine was/is not the only path to learning the value of discussion. I related my personal history as an example of how valuing discussion, not affiliating myself with the peace party [or not], came to be. I spoke with a woman this evening, not of a similar background to mine, and we agreed with our questioning of where are all these statistics coming from, with the 70% in favour of this war? She said they use whatever numbers they want to make the point that they want. I agreed, in that as I talk more and more to people, I'm finding far fewer in favour and way more against.

I know that pro-war people are not all farmers, and whatever other implications were made by SL. It's very presumptuous to assume that the position outlined by SL is the peace party's presumption of what pro-war people are all about. Peaceful people come from all over the globe, please see Byron's posting on the people of Laos. These are not people from a "cultivated, liberal" background. How you deduced that "it follows that those who think the war is justified have to be dumb hicks. Uneducated, easily fooled, unintelligent, brutal and uncaring" is beyond me.

If all else fails, Nan, you have permission to consider my background-offering as free verse. My poem. One very personal and precious to me. Its implications do not go beyond that. I deeply appreciate my parents' imbuing me with holding dear the value of discussion.

I remain glad that you've begun to participate here, and I defend your right to discuss your own viewpoints. Personal attacks will continue to remain a problem.

~ Elizabeth
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

Dear Byron ~ Though no troops are spare-able in my opinion, it grieves me that the British have suffered more losses by comparison. This is clearly a U.S. fight. I want NONE to die is the bottom line.

It is very easy to sit back and strike out at what others say, without actually developing a position of your own, based on personally-expressed opinions, with or without substantiation from other sources. I sincerely hope that you don't cease expressing your own opinions, based on what others may do with your having done so. Express while we still have the right. My concern remains that others will come to know the correctness of our position, after it's too late and has been rendered a moot point. Freedom of speech remains just that. Please utilize and pleasure in it while you are still allowed to do so.

I agree that your assessment that "continual non-productive, ever-negative, constant carping of the non-creative quarter of the thread are poisoning open and free discussion.

"I am waiting to hear a coherent argument which will change my mind about this war, but all I get is moan, moan, moan" is what continues to prevail. However, that does not justify our ceasing on that basis.

You most certainly are your own man. Given all your prior postings, war-related or not, anyone questioning that is willfully skewing the perception of who you are and what you're all about. Carry on with what your heartheld beliefs are, as will I and, I know, others.

~ Elizabeth
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

Dear Paula ~

The verbatim use of my words...other than some theme-consistent substitutions...was still another clue. But that's alright, at least you got it.

~ Elizabeth
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25531
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh »

JTS ~

You are right.

~ Elizabeth
vern.silver
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:58 pm
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Canada

Post by vern.silver »

Back into the fray:

1. All information is propaganda. the need is to get it from as many varied sources as possible and try to distill it down to try to find some truth - if this is possible.

Anything yuou read - no matter the source - is from the 'point of view' of the authour regardless of how objective/subjective he/she chooses to be. This is true whether discussing the current war, poetry. Leonard's music or the movie we saw last week.

As we grow from child to adult we are exposed to so much in our environment (family, friends, media, government, crime etc) and our opinions reflect this. There is no way to prevent this. As objective as we might believe we are, we are 'subject' to this.

The Important thing, I think, is to remember that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and everyone is entitled to disagree with the opinions of others. But we must respect those opinions and views and not consider trhe person who espouse them as somehow evil, supporting evil, stupid or whatever.

2. As to the treatment of the POW's by the Iraqi's - this is exactly what they did during the last Gulf war so no-one should be surprised by it. As far as showing the dead, I've seen Iraqi dead in newspapers and on TV. As far as how the Iraqi POW's are being treated by the coalition - we see the treatment of the one's who have surrendered willingly without fighting. How about the ones captured as a result of a firefight? we will likely never know.

One thinks of the 800+ prsioners from the Afghanistan war being held on the US base in Cuba who the US continue to deny the rights of the Geneva Convention because - in their view - they are terrorists and not combatants. I guess that one could say (and this is an opinion though I don't hold this view) that if the Iraqi's did not consider the US soldiers prisoners of war because in their view (and much of the rest of the world) the Coalition invasion is illegal they could thus consider them terrorists.

3. Consider that President Bush has labeled Iraq (and a few other countries) as part of an 'axis of evil' and that Saddam Hussein is evil - to much of the Arab/Islamic world the West, the US and bush is considered evil. Who is right. I guess we only truly will find out on Judgement DAy when God 'sorts' us out.

4. Peter, you are certainly right. People have been dying in Iraq because of Saddam Hussein - for more than 30 years the last 25 as president.

His worst atrocities occured in the late 80's during his war with Iran and the using of bio/chem weapons against the Kurds. During this time he was supported by the west (US/ Britain) as he was fighting a common enemy (Iran). 'They' turned a blind eye to Saddam's evil then.

That does not mean that I think this should be used as an excuse to continue to leave him in power. I think everyone here will agree that he is a Criminal - responsible for many 'crimes against humanity.' I do not think, however, that this fact justifies this ill conceived, unilateral rush to war.

I believe the UN, the Security Council and the International Criminal Court (ICC) should be the means to bring him ( and others) to justice. The UN and these bodies fail and are made irrellvant because of the actions of the powerful nations - The US, Russia, China, Britain, Germany, France - who if they would put aside their own self interests and put their will behind it could make it work.
"The US has opposed the establishment of the ICC because Washington says it fears its citizens will be unfairly targeted by the court."

"The US has not only renounced the Rome Treaty, it has secured bilateral agreements with more than 20 countires granting US citizens immunity from the courts authority." - source CBC News Online.
Makes one think doesn't it.

Vern
Last edited by vern.silver on Mon Mar 24, 2003 6:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Linda
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 9:10 pm
Location: USA

Post by Linda »

Her is some of what an Air Force veteran said in a letter to my local paper today. He is stationed at a local Air Force Base.

I am dismayed, disappointed, saddened and shamed at the ignorance and a lack of understanding of world events concerning Iraq.
First, the American public and media both speak of the “first Gulf War” and the current situation as separate events. Hello, John Q. public: These events are one and the same. For the past 12 years, my comrades and I have been deployed to Operation Northern and Operation Southern Watch, under the auspices of Operation Desert Storm (also known as the Gulf war)
Recently, I have seen many letters and media reports condemning the “pre-emptive” strike of war against Iraq. Get real! How could anyone perceive a military attack on Iraq to be pre-emptive? Iraq has ignored the 1991 cease-fire agreement and continually disobeyed the countless unanimous U.N. resolutions for it to account for and destroy its weapons of mass destruction. A pre-emptive strike would have been for us to shut down Saddam Hussein and his regime before his 1990 Kuwaiti invasion.
Frankly, I am getting tired of the indecisiveness of the world and American public. My comrades and I would like to come home to our families and friends after 12 years of enforcing the U.N. resolutions that had no teeth.
Come on, America, Lets finish what we set out to do. we needed no U.N. resolution to “ to go to war” we’ve been at war all along.
Linda
Linda
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 9:10 pm
Location: USA

Post by Linda »

God bless all the Soldiers fighting for our freedom, and a big debt of thanks to our allies who fighting beside us. I feel terrible that a UK plane was shot down by one of ours. I feel pain for all the families of loved ones lost, the innocent people suffering in Iraq. Especially the children. No one wants war, war is cruel, it kills innocent people. But so does the alternative of doing nothing and letting a sadistic dictator like Saddam Hussein continue with his games with the U.N. and the world.

What is everyone going to say when the we start finding factories that manufacture chemical weapon, such as they are reporting on the news tonight that the soldiers have found in Najaf. When they start finding more biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. I wonder what the world will be saying. How will they justify not doing anything, giving him more time, playing Saddam’s games. Do they and the rest that protest this war believe he is telling the truth that he has no weapons? Or that he does but wouldn’t use them? Or that if he does he could be stopped peacefully? I sincerely hope there is an investigation when this is all over and everyone is held accountable. The inspectors, the U.N. France, Germany, and above all the U.S. There is enough underhanded dealing, blindness, ignorance, going on all around to make us all ashamed that innocent people are dying. Where have we all been for twelve years? This war could have been prevented if only Saddam had been held accountable a long time ago. Saddam was actually mislead by the U.N., the inspectors, and the nations that would not even back setting a date for taking action. What thoughts must have been going through Saddam’s mind watching the pro peace marchers carrying signs not saying he had to do anything, but that the US and its president were the ones that were evil and he should be allowed to carry on. He must have laughed. Thank God our President did what he felt was the right thing.
Linda
User avatar
tom.d.stiller
Posts: 1213
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 8:18 am
Location: ... between the lines ...
Contact:

Post by tom.d.stiller »

I am dismayed, disappointed, saddened and shamed at the ignorance and a lack of understanding of world events concerning Iraq.
So am I, but the letter you quoted, Linda, rather is part of the ignorance it pretends to be "dismayed, disappointed, saddened and shamed at".
The US hasn't been part of any war before last week. And that the US are involved now is a clear breech of International Law.
And when this war is over, I think, I hope, the delusions will slowly start to fall away. And when the media will start to give a true picture of the world, and of the War, I trust that you, Linda, and eeey, and many many others will realize that "Crusades" are a medieval evil.
I do not attack you. I attack some positions you've ventured. And I attack them for reasons you might not see, partly because they are deliberately kept out of the US News Networks presently. (Censorship in the home country of free speech, what dreadful and sad times are we living in?) But still they are accessible, so you might start looking at sources of information representing a broader perspective than your "local paper".
Tom
Nan
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 7:20 am

Post by Nan »

I am bewildered. How was my post a personal attack? You say you would defend my right to "discuss your own viewpoints". My post about Sore Loser WAS my own viewpoint. I thought it was funny. I said so.

It does seem that if one varies in the slightest from the approved party line and however mildly, it is going to be misunderstood completely. No wonder there are so many members who never post. The very first time I post a message I receive a lecture. I'm told "How you deduced that.....is beyond me" You impugn my ability to reason with such words as those. I don't mind being told that you disagree with me but I do mind being dismissed as though I were a child not able to learn the lesson set for her by the teacher.
vern.silver
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:58 pm
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Canada

Post by vern.silver »

In addition to the comments by Tom, I offer the following:
On 2 March the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution establishing the terms of the ceasefire.

These required Iraq to end all military action, to rescind its annexation of Kuwait, to disclose information about any stored chemical and biological weapons, to release all international prisoners and accept responsibility for the casualties and damage done during its occupation of Kuwait.

The next day, Iraqi commanders accepted the ceasefire terms formally at a meeting with US military leaders in a tent at the captured Iraqi military base of Safwan. BBC NEWS Online
Since the war 'ended' in 1991, Iraq has been attacked by US and British warplanes on an almost weekly basis so it is not surprising that a US serviceman will not have considered the war as being over. However, as stated in the above quote, The UN security council established the terms of the ceasefire ending that war. It seems to follow then that if the terms have been violated to the extant that a return to hostilities was required, then it is the UN security council who should make that decision not the US. The UN Security Council and the Weapons inspectors believed that this could be resolved through diplomatic means and that progress was being made.

As I see it, the US and Britain did not want this to happen because if the Security Council and the Inspecotrs were succesful over time in this disarimg of Iraq, there would be no excuse for the war for a regime change in Iraq.

Attacking another Nation for the purposes of changing its leadership is illegal under international Law.

As far as the Chemical weapons factory found as mention in Lindas post I offer this quote from a newsstory as well:
Reports of Iraq chemical cache 'premature': Pentagon
Last Updated Sun, 23 Mar 2003 22:22:09

WASHINGTON - Stories by some media outlets that U.S. forces have uncovered a suspected chemical weapons factory in Iraq may be wrong, the Pentagon cautioned late Sunday. - Source CBC News Online
Vern
Post Reply

Return to “Writing, Music and Art by the Forum members”