war observations

[lizzytysh]

Recognizing that this hold the potential for a firestorm, I still just can't continue saying nothing on this. These are directed at no one in particular. Many things have been heard and logged somewhere in my memory [probably accessible only through hypnosis ~ however, their essence remains]. Before these also enter into that same fog, I feel compelled to say something. There are many more that begin to come to mind as I type this, but I'm restricting myself to three:

(1) There is much, growing discussion in the news regarding the lack of discovery of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I find it more than notable that as Hans Blixt [spelling???] is entering retirement, his quote is, "Weapons have not been found; however, we were unable to complete our inspections before the war began." It is more than notable that this message resounded strongly, worldwide, also before the war began.

(2) The Iraqi people are clamouring for news. The station that is up and broadcasting is U.S. run, though some Iraqis are working there. The report quoted that the "least" of the issues that have had to be dealt with in the programming aspect is that the U.S. refused to allow reading from the Koran to be done at the onset of the day's airing. It was strongly noted that this is tradition there, yet it is being disrespected and disallowed. Now, this is from the Bible-quoting, photo-opportunistic President of the United States, head bowed in every other photo, quoting God's will, etc. regarding our troops, their safety, our victory, etc.

Yet, the perception is being fought against of this being a religious war [as well as occupation], as much as any other kind?

(3) The report the other morning was in regard to remainder of the Baath party, having strongholds in two Iraqi towns, where U.S. soldiers [they didn't even say Allied] are still being shot at and killed. Hence, a deployment of major forces is being made to those towns, where "to defeat those against the U.S. occupation of Iraq." The inherent message in those words to me sounding the beginning of introducing into our vocabulary [and hence consciousness, for eventual acceptance], as is so often the media technique, the reality of the situation, by usage of the correct words.

That's it. These keep body-slamming around in my mind, and I feel/believe they remain worthy of comment.

~ Elizabeth

[Pete]

Elizabeth
if it is circulating the mind then, I agree, it is worthy of comment.

one comment I read yesterday which suddenly jolted me;
if there are amounts of anthrax somewhere in Iraq waiting to be discovered, it suddenly becomes very crucial on who finds it first...
it could be an unsuspecting looter
it could be a member of the old regime
it could be another terrorist organisation
it might not be someone who knows how to secure it.

I hope there's none to be found
Pete

[lizzytysh]

Yes, Pete, these are also valid concerns. My head doesn't do particularly well with all these ex-post-facto [predictable from where some sit] realities. Not being "properly prepared" for peace-keeping in Baghdad was another ironic twist. The fires of Detroit [race riots] in the mid-60s and any other mass-person situation where conflict is an issue [note police and military presence at any large demonstration] could have served as Primer 101 on that need. With continuing chagrin, I'll stop at this point, without further elaboration on what I've just added.

Thanks.

~ Elizabeth

[Dairy Farmer]

They havent even begun to discuss the effect on dairy farming, both here and in Iraq.

[lizzytysh]

They will......eventually.

[Linda]

And it will get reported here Dairy Farmer, you can bet on it. And lets hope it gets reported in full context.

[John the Shorts]

With the recent furore by Animal Rights activists in the UK I just hope DF does not send his claves to slaughter for Halal or Kosher products

JTS (Not militant, merely veganic)

[mdidier]

Lizzy:
Your concerns ref Irak are all too valid... however, (as long as this 'political' thread is allowed) bashing GWB is unfair, isn't it ? when you compare him to his predecessor who countless times promised action but did nothing... Bush is a man of his word, even if you dont agree with his 'word'.

a) bible-quoting Bush: this criticism was on top of the Europeans' list of tirades, yet THEY continue to tolerate "kill-every-infidel" extremists among them; so who made this a "religious" war? Thank God (oops) that Bush has the guts to stem the extremist tide..... not like France which is already cowering before its 10% Muslim population, the thanks for giving Khomeiney a place to organize the overthrow of the pro-US Shah.

b) photo-op President: all presidents since JFK (another beautiful failure) except Nixon have been like that

c) alas, the US was NOT prepared for the post-war nation-building; GWB is rightfully criticized for this

d) WMD: that mistery will be cleared up satisfactorily with time..... remember these are deserts where mirages misdirect outsiders;

e) liberation, occupation: the determination as to which of these proves reality will eventually be known, but still dependent on your point of view.

(Lizzy: I dont follow your point #3?)

[lizzytysh]

Dear Marcel ~

There have been many news reports I've listened to since I did my original post on this thread. There have been many comments I've considered adding here, but simply have not had the "energy" for it. I'm saddened and dismayed by almost everything that I continue to hear on the situation over there. I want to give due consideration of what you've taken the time to comment on, addressing things point by point. I disagree with most of your stances, but I can tell you that you are not alone in the Forum with them.

For a man to be a man of his word and for that to be an accolade, I feel it's crucial that his "word" first be [an] honourable one[s]. I don't feel that to be the case here. However, revisiting all of my reasons for saying that would virtually mean copy-and-pasting the "hell bent for war" thread here.

The point of #3 is layered. It speaks to the process of concensus building, with the media playing a pivotal role. Listeners tend not to hear the "slips" of key words being spoken by the powers-that-be. However, with time, those key words become normalized as they begin to appear more and eventually get used all the time. In this particular case, it was that we were not going to occupy Iraq.....we were going to free the people there. Then, the word occupation began to emerge in various ways more often, to the extent that now the commentary is, "to defeat those against the U.S. occupation of Iraq." It's an insidious process that the government uses the media to implement. Now not only are we occupying Iraq, we're "defeating" those against it! I won't even go into all the innocents who are still being killed in that process.

The same technique was used with regard to the Iraq war to begin with, when after September 11 the stance was that we were not going to war [yet we sure were hearing that word, even in that statement, weren't we?]. Then, the application of the term started getting jockeyed around, oh like maybe, "We don't plan to go to war;" "We'll go to war only if.....;" etc. until our subconscious had fully accepted the concept, the idea of w-a-r. Concurrent with that [it's relevent here how few are the number of "corporations" that own the networks ~ i.e. who makes these upper-level, programming decisions[?] ~ I heard 6 "corporations," but haven't been able to locate in which magazine here I read it], the networks start broadcasting all kinds of old war films, current movies, TV segments, regular programs, that somehow relate to war.....we begin to see heroic acts; we begin to see perpetrators in the form of foreigners to our land; the "us and them" mentality is maximized. This gets people psychologically prepared and gung-ho to rally with each other, against another, an outsider, the "enemy." It's a slow, insidious, but well-calibrated process, and it works ~ every time, for the majority.

There is simply no way that you can conjure any degree of respect, whatsoever, in me for George Bush, Marcel. I can understand that as an American, your wanting to try. There are many objective factors that I could point to for how I feel, but deeper, much deeper still is an instinctual loathing. We would talk forever, and I would still feel the same.

~ Elizabeth

[mdidier]

I need some time to read that thread.... 48 pages, WOW, must be a record in these forums?

It seems you "feel" about Bush what I feel about his predecessor and the latter's worse half! "instinctual loathing.!.......You would love the website of the French, virulently anti-Bush think tank Reseau Voltaire... who came up with a deck of cards "The 52 most dangerous Americans".... Bush was not even the top bad guy..... Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Victoria Clark rated higher than W. So, you can relax, Bush is not the most dangerous man in America. (In testimony to French "efficiency", the deck of cards is not available until late July, 6 weeks after promised date. Bravo pour les clowns!)

I bet your "objective" facts/factors are similar to mine regarding the trailer trash man from Arkansas...... although I am not sure that I don't loathe James Carville even more, if that's possible.

[Linda]

Lizzytysh you are intitled to your opinion, and that is all it is. I don't agree with you I think you are ill informed and you don't really have a clue as to what is going on in Iraq or anywhere for that matter. Will I argue with you, no, I am tempted but it is useless to try to argue with people that narrow minded.

[lizzytysh]

Linda ~



~ Lizzytysh

[Byron]

Hello to all who are reading this thread. I will not rehearse the discussion which preceded the second Gulf War. There were enough open wounds on this board without the all too real wounds on the battlefields.
May I, in as polite a way as possible draw your personal attention to a forthcoming programme on BBC Radio 4. There is a website which can be found for the BBC and follow the links to Radio 4. http://www.bbc.co.uk
The programme is to be broadcast on Thursday 3rd July at 8:00 pm in the evening.
Look for 'Club Class'.
It is an objective investigation into the exclusive Bilderberg Group.
The programme will take 30 minutes and therefore will not be too much of a bite out of our mundane, daily existence.
If the BBC are up to their usual helpful standard, they will be providing a tape of the broadcast for you to listen to at your leisure, through your computer, as well as a written and printable version for you to peruse.
I am not banging any drum here.
I do believe though, that a little extra education might help our understanding of the workings and real politic, of the world in which we all live. Thank you.
Byron 'sends his regards'.

[lizzytysh]

Thanks, Byron, for that information. I may need to wait for the transcript, but will try for the sound! Is British grey, salt-and-pepper? A finer shade of pale? Akin to a tweed suit? I never realized there might be a distinction . Please clarify. Thanks. Oh, never mind.....as soon as I submitted, I noted the spelling. I've always preferred it with an "e".....must be the English portion of my heritage coming through.

~ Elizabeth

[Heretic]

Conspiracy Theory or Cock-up Theory.
When the history comes to be written it is usually the latter which predominates.
Events.
They can never factor in events.