sue4u2
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Come on Deadsox, don't give up now! You are needed here. What you provide is invaluable.
Author unknown - letter to Bush
- Thread starter BrownEyedBoy
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
sue4u2 said:
I absolutley agree, we need more like you...
TylerDurden
War Child
Whatever you think about the source of the letter, how it's written, it's content etc, it is a reflection of how a large % of the world see the US. Particularly those who are from parts of the world that have been 'touched' by US military action in some form or other.
Every country f*cks up. The US probably f*cks up the same % as every other country, it's just that when it does it's usually on a larger scale and effects a much larger amount of people, often from countries other then the US.
The best comeback for the US against this letters line of argument is that for a country of it's size and power in the world, it could be marching all over people alot more then it does. Really, no-one can stop them. Not even combined. They are certainly more restrained and peaceful then any other 'empire' has ever been before.
And to bring it all back to Bush (it is FYM, it's part of the rules) that is why so many people are afraid of him, and the people around him. They don't seem to have the same restraint, and really don't seem to give a sh*t. If you read the documents from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) which are the Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld/Cheney papers that date back to over a decade ago, that's the plan. They have a website, check it out. Screw the UN. Screw coalitions. Energy is/will be a legitimate reason for war. No competitors will be tolerated, even 'nice' ones (they even list Western Europe/EU as someone that has to be kept in check). Pre-emptive strikes. Screw diplomacy. Start with Iraq. It was written in 1992.
So the letter is ignorant, it is a cheapshot, but its good in that it gives you an idea of what it is that alot of the world fears when it looks at the US, even if they are wrong.
And Dreadsox, hang around, even if it's only cos in 18months there'll be a democrat in the White House and you'll have all the fun of being able to release all your fury at him (or her?) then. And until then, you are the best of 'the other side' of the debates and arguments in here.
Every country f*cks up. The US probably f*cks up the same % as every other country, it's just that when it does it's usually on a larger scale and effects a much larger amount of people, often from countries other then the US.
The best comeback for the US against this letters line of argument is that for a country of it's size and power in the world, it could be marching all over people alot more then it does. Really, no-one can stop them. Not even combined. They are certainly more restrained and peaceful then any other 'empire' has ever been before.
And to bring it all back to Bush (it is FYM, it's part of the rules) that is why so many people are afraid of him, and the people around him. They don't seem to have the same restraint, and really don't seem to give a sh*t. If you read the documents from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) which are the Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld/Cheney papers that date back to over a decade ago, that's the plan. They have a website, check it out. Screw the UN. Screw coalitions. Energy is/will be a legitimate reason for war. No competitors will be tolerated, even 'nice' ones (they even list Western Europe/EU as someone that has to be kept in check). Pre-emptive strikes. Screw diplomacy. Start with Iraq. It was written in 1992.
So the letter is ignorant, it is a cheapshot, but its good in that it gives you an idea of what it is that alot of the world fears when it looks at the US, even if they are wrong.
And Dreadsox, hang around, even if it's only cos in 18months there'll be a democrat in the White House and you'll have all the fun of being able to release all your fury at him (or her?) then. And until then, you are the best of 'the other side' of the debates and arguments in here.
Klaus
Refugee
TylerDurden:
you're absolutely right, just a small variation:
Every country who is powerfull enough to f**k up does so
It's easy for countries who don't have the power to change anything in the world to call themself pacifistic
In history, the more power one country had (or thought they had).
As soon as you think you can modify the world the way you think it should be there is allways the danger to abuse that power - especially you think there is noone who can stop you.
I don't care if G.W.Bush is a Republican or a Democrat, as long as the presidents prefer to listen to their thinktanks and do what these people say it is even not important if they are smart or dumb (they are affraid of deciding on their own anyway)
Klaus
you're absolutely right, just a small variation:
Every country who is powerfull enough to f**k up does so
It's easy for countries who don't have the power to change anything in the world to call themself pacifistic
In history, the more power one country had (or thought they had).
As soon as you think you can modify the world the way you think it should be there is allways the danger to abuse that power - especially you think there is noone who can stop you.
I don't care if G.W.Bush is a Republican or a Democrat, as long as the presidents prefer to listen to their thinktanks and do what these people say it is even not important if they are smart or dumb (they are affraid of deciding on their own anyway)
Klaus
Scarletwine
New Yorker
Thank you Tyler for describing why I fear this admin more than any in my experience.
"And to bring it all back to Bush (it is FYM, it's part of the rules) that is why so many people are afraid of him, and the people around him. They don't seem to have the same restraint, and really don't seem to give a sh*t. If you read the documents from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) which are the Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld/Cheney papers that date back to over a decade ago, that's the plan. They have a website, check it out. Screw the UN. Screw coalitions. Energy is/will be a legitimate reason for war. No competitors will be tolerated, even 'nice' ones (they even list Western Europe/EU as someone that has to be kept in check). Pre-emptive strikes. Screw diplomacy. Start with Iraq. It was written in 1992. "
Ashcroft and Rumsfeld are superb examples.
Another thing that bothers me alot as a daughter of military parents, grandparents ect. is how Rummy (an out of touch old man)is allowed to override the military experts at the scene, much like McNamara did in Nam.
"And to bring it all back to Bush (it is FYM, it's part of the rules) that is why so many people are afraid of him, and the people around him. They don't seem to have the same restraint, and really don't seem to give a sh*t. If you read the documents from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) which are the Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld/Cheney papers that date back to over a decade ago, that's the plan. They have a website, check it out. Screw the UN. Screw coalitions. Energy is/will be a legitimate reason for war. No competitors will be tolerated, even 'nice' ones (they even list Western Europe/EU as someone that has to be kept in check). Pre-emptive strikes. Screw diplomacy. Start with Iraq. It was written in 1992. "
Ashcroft and Rumsfeld are superb examples.
Another thing that bothers me alot as a daughter of military parents, grandparents ect. is how Rummy (an out of touch old man)is allowed to override the military experts at the scene, much like McNamara did in Nam.
What I find funny is that most people who feel the most passionately about Communism (or anti-Communism) either read about it in books or watched it on TV. I lived in a Communist country for about 10 years, I know what it was like. There was suppression of religion, and my mother was a professor of English at the time. This meant that she had a government job and so when I had my first communion (my family was staunchly Catholic), I had to go from the church in the back of the car and change out of my dress before going home so that nobody would see that we were practicing Catholics, or my mother faced interrogation and loss of her job. I know what it's like to live in Communism. It's terrible in one way, but people still love their children, still take care of them, the kids play in the streets, the doctors do their jobs as best as they can. They don't need another country going in and staging coups. That's not any better than the living conditions they're already in.
Sometimes it's hard to imagine yourself in other people's shoes unless you've lived their life. That's all I'm saying.
Sometimes it's hard to imagine yourself in other people's shoes unless you've lived their life. That's all I'm saying.
Klaus
Refugee
anitram: thanks for your posting
follower
Refugee
Dreadsox said:
I?m sorry, but this statement makes me feel sick, frankly. For those who don?t know, 30 years have passed since the assassination of president Allende and the beginning of the most brutal dictatorship in Latin America to date...another dark Sep 11th as well, 1973. Compared to what happened there, our own dictatorship here in Brazil was like a picnic.
And the name of the country is "Chile" not Chili, for Christ sake...
MT
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
follower said:
I?m sorry, but this statement makes me feel sick, frankly. For those who don?t know, 30 years have passed since the assassination of president Allende and the beginning of the most brutal dictatorship in Latin America to date...another dark Sep 11th as well, 1973. Compared to what happened there, our own dictatorship here in Brazil was like a picnic.
And the name of the country is "Chile" not Chili, for Christ sake...
MT
It was indeed a horrific time for the people of Chile. Like I've said before I do not approve of U.S. policy in Latin America.
follower said:
And the name of the country is "Chile" not Chili, for Christ sake...
MT
My sincere apologies for the TYPO. I am not a perfect person and meant no insult by it. Please though, since there are so many typos on this board, feel free to be the forum spell checker.
I stand by my statement. The historical context of the cold war made it justified. Knowing how it turned out, makes me sad and embarrased that we were a part of it. However, I still believe that context is important.
[Q]Our involvement in this unsavory affair is now widely recognized. As Secretary of State Colin Powell himself recently acknowledged, "It is not a part of our country's history that we are proud of." [/Q]
That pretty much sums it up.
That pretty much sums it up.
TylerDurden
War Child
Dreadsox said:
And it appears that with most of the stuff in that letter the complaints should be addressed "Dear Mr Kissinger,"
follower
Refugee
Dreadsox said:
My sincere apologies for the TYPO. I am not a perfect person and meant no insult by it. Please though, since there are so many typos on this board, feel free to be the forum spell checker.
I stand by my statement. The historical context of the cold war made it justified. Knowing how it turned out, makes me sad and embarrased that we were a part of it. However, I still believe that context is important.
As a foreigner I try to do my best with english language but I couldn?t aply for the job of forum spell checker for sure. Anyways thanks for thinking of me.
Again you try to justify the unjustifiable. In Sep 11th 2001 some thousand people were slaughtered in the U.S. soil and that was injustifiable. In Sep 11th 1973 an entire democracy was slaughtered and you say that it was justifiable. How come you still can think that way is beyond me. Your government to support that was wrong, shamefully wrong, no matter the context, it was still a democratic ellected government in a foreign country. Don?t expect another reaction coming from a latin american citizen like me.
MT
Last edited:
follower
Refugee
Sorry for taking so long to answer Dread, I?ve been busy.
There is at least one book I would recommend, I read a portuguese edition several years ago, the original title in spanish is Los Mil Dias de Allende, by Miguel Gonz?lez Pino, Arturo Fontaine Talavera, Claudia C?rdenas, and Carlos Kuncar.
Others I haven?t read yet but have good info about are:
Chile: La Memoria Prohibida, by Eugenio Ahumada, Rodrigo Atria, Augusto G?ngora, Carmen Quesney, Gustavo Saball, and Gustavo Villalobos.
El ?ltimo Dia de Salvador Allende, by ?scar Soto.
Maybe you can find english versions of some. Good luck.
MT
There is at least one book I would recommend, I read a portuguese edition several years ago, the original title in spanish is Los Mil Dias de Allende, by Miguel Gonz?lez Pino, Arturo Fontaine Talavera, Claudia C?rdenas, and Carlos Kuncar.
Others I haven?t read yet but have good info about are:
Chile: La Memoria Prohibida, by Eugenio Ahumada, Rodrigo Atria, Augusto G?ngora, Carmen Quesney, Gustavo Saball, and Gustavo Villalobos.
El ?ltimo Dia de Salvador Allende, by ?scar Soto.
Maybe you can find english versions of some. Good luck.
MT
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ongoing Mass Shooting Thread #3... that's right, a third thread. Because 'Murica.- Latest: MrsSpringsteen
-
-