|
|
 13 Apr 2003 @ 23:22, by quidnovi. Violence, War
Who are we fooling here?
Nuclear weapons have been scratched off the list a long time ago already.
Chemical weapons? Biological weapons? None, so far, have been used.
Have we found any, yet? Rumors abound. Chances are that we might still find some traces of them---though probably not in any significant amount if we do, and certainly not anything that would amount to the evidence of the "grave and gathering" threat of which it was question before the war started.
But what does it matter now, whether we find some or not?
We now all know that it was all false pretense. The cat is out of the bag. We are there for REGIME CHANGE (and darn proud of it, too.) That's what this has always been about. And Iraq is just the tip of the iceberg.
We have apparently become the self-appointed "liberators" of the Middle East. And while some have found this a cause for celebration and others see there cause to re-evaluate their positions on Iraq, there are those who are expressing some concern over what kind of signal we are sending to the world: More >
|
|
|
|
10 Apr 2003 @ 00:14, by mmmark. Violence, War
I imagine that there have been many postings about the war-mongering going on, some pro and some con, so I make this post to place my picture of center in the log annals of NCN.
I believe that the human race has to find a different way of living, where competition and squabbling over natural resources is handled in any way that is healthful, hopeful, non-aggressive, and of course non-violent. At the same time, citizens must not empower their governments to make war, in business, technology, or with political support, or we will remain buried in our destructive stupidity as a species. The wave of new consciousness has revealed once again the undeniable reasoning that Love is all you need, not to mention that you can't be here without it. Let us keep our hearts tuned to cocreating a society of peace, specially after the dust settles from this immediate skirmish.
My heart is particularly touched by those mislead and ungrounded family members who are willing to prepare for and die in a violent conflict. Most are impressionably young and ignorant of the consequences their actions will bring to generations that follow. I see no glory in wasting any life, nothing is won, yet much is lost.
I rest now in prayer of thanks for all those selfless warriors risking loss of life and to those relatives that no longer dwell in the body.
Namasté > > > Mark More >
|
|
|
|
 22 Mar 2003 @ 00:50, by rishi. Violence, War
Inside the Mind of War
Are the Thoughts of a Society
Gone Mad
By Matthew Webb
What endless unrest churns these human creatures to wreak havoc upon their fellows? An off-world visitor would surely ask themselves this question with intense interest. What they do to themselves is completely astonishing! Upon these humans aliens would likely look with some sense of uneasy fascination, wondering how a normally intelligent, progressive species with great evolutionary promise, residing on a pristine and bountiful planet, could ever make such an unnecessary mess of their world. What prompts them to make wars, to destroy in the name of petty and arbitrary nations, base material ambitions, and on behalf of petty and arbitrary gods? How bizarre it is to see them dash to and fro in their polluting machines with no particular purpose in mind, seeking happiness and finding none, when in fact there is none to be found within the goals they have set for themselves! They have forgotten the purpose of life…
These could well be the musings of an alien race, upon encountering the dilemma of modern Homo Sapiens.
Indeed, what does cause us to move into the next millennium with bombs falling, police batons clacking and people living in fear of each other? What are the motives behind such madness? Of course many will give the standard, often quoted political reasons, or speak of religious, ideological and national extremism, or talk about social and economic inequality. But as always, these answers don’t really satisfy the question, because “Why?” can again be asked. In realizing that humanity’s difficulties are WORLDWIDE, finding expression on every continent, every country, every cultural setting, every city and almost universally in EVERY SINGLE MIND, such political, social and economic explanations ring very hollow. The fact is, religious leaders. governments, professors, think tanks and the greatest authors and thinkers of our day, are for the most part at a loss to explain WHY the human race is in such trouble. Every “expert” has their own personal slant and offered short-term remedy, and they ALL fall far short of really addressing the human condition as it globally exists. Seemingly, no one is able to articulate why war after war occurs around the globe every decade, bringing our species ever closer to the brink of disaster.
Similarly, no one seems able to clearly explain WHY we wantonly destroy the environment for the sake of money, only to be forced to spend billions years later to deal with the effects of pollution, when prevention would have been much simpler. Instantaneous gratification of governments and citizens alike, each one accumulating as much debt as possible in the shortest period of time, is now the social norm. The attitude of our time is to live for today alone, for tomorrow is irrelevant. Realistic planning for a better future through logical, measured practices in the present, is viewed as politically dangerous and socially boring.
Neither does anyone seem able to explain why people are in such a stressed state of mind and body, What was rare 20 years ago, is now the common practice of taking mood altering drugs just to make it through another day. Oddly enough, we work more and enjoy far less, calling that, “success” and a “higher standard of living”. It’s “more convenient” to take a pill to reduce fat or gain sexual appetite, rather than working out or eating sensibly. It’s argued that “there’s just no time” for life on the 9 to 5. In the case of disease, why engage a change of lifestyle, when the family surgeon can just cut out the cancer or remove another organ? This is what many evidently think, as they go about sacrificing their lives for the sake of fulfilling the, “financial goals” of consumerism.
Shockingly, all of these questions have a common and final answer, a bottom line which underlies EVERY problem in the modern world. Whether we’re talking about the motives for war, disease and famine, neighborhood crime, social inequality, the corruption in government, or any other problem around the globe, this final “bottom line” explains it all.
Beware of thinking that what comes next is too simple to be useful….
The fundamental problem confronting human beings is;
THE HOLDING OF WRONG VALUES
By “values” I mean those guiding beliefs and cherished goals which shape our daily lives. By “wrong” I mean not in accord with reality, as in untruthful or false, and therefore personally and mutually destructive. “Wrong values” means holding life goals and a lifestyle based upon them, which are not evolutionary or life affirmative. As such, these values are incompatible with nature and the natural laws which govern everything in the universe, (including our own bodies and the principles which make technology possible).
As a species we are living in a fashion that is fully contrary to the designs of the Cosmos. To put that in more theological terms, we’re living in a way that is opposed to the intent of that which is called God. The primary wrong value which permeates society today, is the selfishness seen in the worship of the Dollar above all else. For the sake of monetary profit, human beings willingly and even contemptuously destroy nature, thereby undermining the very life blood of the planet upon which they depend for survival. Humans behave as though they think of themselves as machines, which are superior to nature and natural beings. Because they think of themselves and their society as indestructible machines, (whose worn out parts simply get replaced indefinitely) it is a common notion that we’re not vulnerable like other living creatures. It’s become easy to imagine that we’re somehow immune to our own pollution, environmental destruction, the contaminants of war, unnatural chemicals in food, agriculture and industry. We imagine that our technology and social structures will protect us from the natural reality, but this is simply not so. This is why it’s also easy for many to ignore the effects of war, so long as the bombs aren’t dropping in their own neighborhood.
Let us explore the “holding of wrong values” in relation to the current war on Iraq, and its‘ impact on the world. We’ve all heard the endless commentaries on why war is or is not desirable, as well as who is for or against it. Everyone agrees, at least in principle, that war is both tragic and wrong. Yet, here we have another war which threatens the very fabric of international relations and treaties, for all time. It’s not unlikely that the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, will cause such widespread social unrest and international enmity, that World War III is right around the corner in human history. No one can argue convincingly that this is not a strong possibility. Nor is it hard to predict that in a short time, the collapse of economies will continue to accelerate. Personal and national debts are at an all time high, and are only spiraling further out of control with each day that passes. Currencies will implode and become worthless, as entire banking institutions declare insolvency from all the failed loans they’ve accumulated. Unemployment is soaring and will continue to increase. And it is very likely that the U.S.-Iraq war will only speed these processes along, toward worldwide economic and political instability, to the point of mass panic. Why is all this happening?
Because of the holding of wrong values, on the part of governments, social institutions and the individual people which compose them.
Many millions of people around the world are rightfully upset about developments in the Middle East, and are showing their resolve to oppose wars of international barbarity and aggression. They are taking to the streets with their signs, practicing “civil disobedience” in many forms, and writing urgent letters of appeal to government leaders. Some advocate a working class uprising through self governance. Spiritual pundits abound with channeled messages or scriptural advice. Some propose the adopting of a peaceful state of mind, employing meditation in groups to ease social tensions. Some pray to God asking for a peaceful resolution to a war-torn world. Others work as volunteers, seeking to educate the public or by providing hands-on assistance to those in need. These are all noble sentiments and social attempts at world change, there can be no doubt. But equally doubtless is that absolutely NONE of these are going to really change anything in the long term. They all address the symptoms of an imbalanced world, but not the cause. None of these measures are going to save humanity, or fundamentally transform our human civilization. Why? Because society will still, in that long run, be based on wrong values. These will always seep back into noble endeavors, governments or philosophies, no matter how lofty such enterprises may initially set out to be. They will induce a rot, just as bad fruit will soon spoil by contact what was fresh and healthy. A fine example of this fact, is the current corruption and wholesale disregard for the intent of such documents as the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. Those who became noble by learning the lessons of oppression and ill-guided government, are now the oppressors themselves. The power of kings is once again in the hands of despots and tyrants, who kill in the name of preventing murder, legislate oppression in the name of freedom, and wage war in the name of peace.
Another example of the corrupting influence of wrong values, is how the message of Christ, (in living life lovingly and simply) has been largely ignored in the modern day. Rather than being used as a guideline for living, it has been transformed instead into a self serving, ritualized, church hierarchy, that is more concerned with acquiring tithe-paying devotees, than with carrying out the intent of Christ. Those who call themselves “Christians” today, are just as likely to advocate war as they are peace, while fully mindful that this is something Christ would have never done.
This is the story of history repeating itself yet again.
It is very curious if not ironic to understand that the vast majority of those who rightfully protest war today, are not advocating an alternative world, other than to say they want “peace”. But what is peace other than the opposite of war, and from whence does it come? The word “peace” has come to mean, “a state of being without war” rather than as a state of consciousness, or as a living, daily lifestyle. And this is where we come down to the bottom line once again, in that;
War is the result of holding wrong values.
Peace is the result of holding right values.
Both war and peace are the effects of a deeper cause, not an ultimate cause in themselves.
There will always be war so long as the people themselves, (collectively known as “society”) hold wrong values in their daily lives. So long as money, ego-driven fashion and notoriety, are the guiding forces of social interaction, our species is truly doomed to extinction. So long as we value things over people by disregarding the spiritual qualities of honesty, love and unity, there will be no peace, not now and not ever. So long as the cult of consumerism, credit card impulsiveness and thing-fetish mentality drives the world, humanity will never live to see the next century, let alone the next millennium.
After reading the above, most will protest, “although much of what you say is arguable, I’m different than all that. I do my part in my own way, and that’s all a person can do”. But I must beg to differ, so allow me to explain. To be very realistic, it’s necessary to point out that there is no real or fundamental difference between the values of government corruption through World War mongering, and those of the average person. Comparing these values will show this beyond a reasonable doubt, as follows;
Materialism and Greed
1) Wars happen largely because governments value things over people…through greed they seek to exploit other countries, while asking, “How can our ‘national interests‘ be served?“. This is also why, “economic interests” and commodities take precedence over all other considerations in foreign policy.
1) Social conflict happens largely because the average person values things over people….through greed they seek to exploit other individuals, while asking, “What can I ‘get’ from this person, and how will they serve my interests?”. This is also why, “financial goals” and careers take precedence over all other considerations in personal life.
*****
Security
2) Money interests are what usually drive government relations with other countries, (especially when it comes to acquiring natural resources of value). The main purpose of diplomacy is to make such resources available on a dependable basis.
2) Money interests are what usually drive personal relations with other people. The main purpose of marriage is that of a financial contract, to make such resources available on a dependable basis.
*****
Sacrificing the Truth
3) Government media tells lies or distorted facts, in an effort to influence public opinion. Truth is considered either irrelevant and inconvenient so long as it is inconsistent with current policies. Facts are rarely debated honestly with the intent of gaining greater collective wisdom, beyond the limits of political norms.
3) People tell lies or distorted facts, in an effort to influence the opinion of others. Truth is considered either irrelevant and inconvenient so long as it is inconsistent with current personal preferences. Facts are rarely debated honestly with the intent of gaining mutual understanding, beyond the limits of social norms.
*****
A Battle of Wills and Domination
4) Government policy is generally not for the benefit of all. It is instead the implementation of the will of a few, over the will of the majority.
4) Social interaction is generally not for the benefit of all people equally. It is instead the implementation of the will of one person or group, over the will of another, (or others).
*****
Projecting an Image
5) Government/corporate statements and appearances are designed to impress the world in a way that boosts their collective ego, in comparison to the rest of the world. The truth of such statements is not considered the main issue. The main issue is that image is considered more important than reality. This is the whole approach behind modern advertising…sell an image, (logo and emotional association) rather than a physical product.
5) Personal statements and appearances are designed to impress the neighbors and co-workers in a way that boosts one’s ego, in comparison to them. The truth of such a projected self image is not considered the main issue. The main issue is that image is considered more important than reality. This is the whole approach behind modern relations…sell a self image, (fancy clothes and rehearsed replies) rather than reveal what the real person underneath is all about.
*****
Self Indulgence at the Cost of All Else
6) The national debt grows larger and larger as spending increases and social benefits diminish.
6) The average consumer debt grows larger and larger as spending increases and personal benefits diminish.
*****
If YOU held public office…
Who among you cannot be bribed at any price by the corporate world, such as are the presidents and senators of our time, because you hold so steadfastly to a higher spiritual calling? Who among your ranks can always resist the endless pressure or intimidation of powerful global interests, urging you to use the power of your office for ends which are not in the common good? Only those who hold radically different values than the current norm, could honesty say they could and would do so.
To conclude about these comparisons of personal to national values, one must realize that there is no essential difference between the two. Thus, when we speak of government corruption, we must also speak of the corruption of the people who compose it, and the social values which serve as their daily guide. Many complain that the mass media is not honest, yet where can consistent honesty be found in personal relations? Many shout, “no blood for oil!” and yet drive SUV’s or luxury cars to their 2000 to 6000 square foot house or apartment, whose daily utility costs alone, are greater than the monthly wages of half the world’s population.
We may rightfully criticize government greed, corruption and bad policy-making, but at the same time, it is necessary to take a step back to clearly see how our own life values and accompanying lifestyles, are alarmingly similar. The fact is that the current U.S. government policy is but a reflection of the same values which permeate our society at every level. They can be summed up by calling them the “me first” type of selfish disregard, for anything which does not immediately cater to personal or national interests. In selfishness we destroy the Earth and all of its creatures, for the sake of money and material possessions. We heap these things in great piles like monuments to our name, hoping perhaps to rival the heirlooms of ancient kings. We acquire these possessions as a demonstration of our supposed worth in the eyes of others, such as the fancy new car, expensive outfit or larger house. In both the national and personal sense, what we now do is not truly necessary for our survival or even our happiness. What we do rests instead with a socially approved and encouraged egotism, that has absolutely NO practical or spiritual reason for continuing on as it is. Yet magazine stands and commercials abound, in praise of such lavish waste. The Earth cannot sustain such a demand, nor are our lives truly benefited by the goals of consumerism, such as those seen hourly on television.
In speaking of war or any other social disease, let us look to its’ underlying cause, rather than just futilely addressing its various effects. The effects of wide-spread planetary calamity are upon us all, whether or not we yet feel them. The cause of all such effects is the holding of wrong social values. Until such values are willingly changed in each of us, there will be no peace, nor world for future generations to enjoy. As a species we will have failed to evolve and pass the test of fitness to survive, which in this case is being honest about the facts of modern life, and making the appropriate daily changes which embrace life, rather than self indulgent death.
Although it may be readily argued that protests and letter writing have their place for social change, it is a better strategy to advocate a change of basic values and lifestyles, to our fellow human beings. It is better that we actually LIVE OUT a better way, rather than begging, pleading or demanding change from unresponsive government “leaders”. The time for begging and demanding are over. It’s time that the people changed their own ways and learned to govern their own lives, outside the small, paltry box of consumerism and mass media hype. To do this we absolutely MUST reject the current values of society, and in fact, society in general. By “reject” I mean thoroughly question and then discard those social beliefs and norms, as can be seen on any street corner and magazine stand, in any town or city anywhere in the world. We must reject the false idea, (beyond simple practicality) that things equal fulfillment, and that money equals happiness. They do not.
There will be no end to wars in this world through protest. You can attempt to change presidents, legislation or governmental forms, and in the off chance that such efforts are fully successful, there will only in time come yet another tyrant to take the place of the impeached, so long as the same social values remain in place. War will be replaced by peace ONLY at such a time when those wrong values, or motives for its’ very existence, are replaced in the public mind by spiritual and natural ways. Any debate regarding this simple fact of war, beyond the primary cause of VALUES, will remain both superficial and entirely beside the point, for the sake of world peace and human evolution.
Many reading this will want to know far more specifics than what has been offered here, with regard to real life changes. Know that this work has already been accomplished and carefully explained in my “Survivalists’ Guide for the New Millennium” book, posted on the World Mind Society website at [link] In this free book, the detailed reasoning behind the need to reject modern society can be found, along with recommended, practical measures for creating a far more sane way of life.
In love and clarity,
Matthew Webb visionquest@eoni.com
Founder of the World Mind Society [link]
Note;
I may not have the opportunity to answer replies at this time. Please read The Guide on-line before making serious inquiries. You have my permission, (and gratitude) to reprint this article.
More >
|
|
|
|
 17 Mar 2003 @ 23:59, by ming. Violence, War
Seems reasonable today to hear what Salam, the lone local blogger in Baghdad, has to say. He seems like a normal, intelligent guy, who says what he thinks, but he has been very courageous in sticking his neck out so publically. He supports a regime change, but he doesn't support war, and he thinks the human shields should go home."No one inside Iraq is for war (note I said war not a change of regime), no human being in his right mind will ask you to give him the beating of his life, unless you are a member of fight club that is, and if you do hear Iraqi (in Iraq, not expat) saying 'come on bomb us' it is the exasperation and 10 years of sanctions and hardship talking. There is no person inside Iraq (and this is a bold, blinking and underlined inside) who will be jumping up and down asking for the bombs to drop. We are not suicidal you know, not all of us in any case.
I think that the coming war is not justified (and it is very near now, we hear the war drums loud and clear if you don’t then take those earplugs off!). The excuses for it have been stretched to their limits they will almost snap. A decision has been made sometime ago that 'regime change' in Baghdad is needed and excuses for the forceful change have to be made. I do think war could have been avoided, not by running back and forth the last two months, that’s silly. But the whole issue of Iraq should have been dealt with differently since the first day after GW I.
The entities that call themselves 'the international community' should have assumed their responsibilities a long time ago, should have thought about what the sanctions they have imposed really meant, should have looked at reports about weapons and human rights abuses a long time before having them thrown in their faces as excuses for war five minutes before midnight.
What is bringing on this rant is the question that has been bugging for days now: how could 'support democracy in Iraq' become to mean 'bomb the hell out of Iraq'? why did it end up that democracy won’t happen unless we go thru war? Nobody minded an un-democratic Iraq for a very long time, now people have decided to bomb us to democracy? Well, thank you! how thoughtful." More >
|
|
|
|
15 Mar 2003 @ 14:40, by sharie. Violence, War
Smoke from the Gulf War oil well fires created an environmental catastrophe. Dick Cheney's company got the contract to put out the oil well fires, and he reportedly pocketed over $30 million. He was the U.S. Secretary of Defense during the Gulf War.
Years ago, I came across a report that contradicted our media reports on who actually started the oil well fires. Our newspapers and television reporters told us it was the Iraqi's who started the fires. Where did these journalists get their facts? Were they there? No. They weren't there, or else they would have stopped the arsonists, or notified the military to stop arsonists. Who witnessed the arsonists in action? Our military reported that the Iraqi's started the fires? Our military saw the tired, hungry and thirsty Iraqi's start the fires? I heard the following report years ago. It's online for anyone who wants to look beyond the corporate headlines:
The following is a transcript taken from a conversation with a Gulf War veteran who claims to have taken part in such a mission.
JR: What was the branch of service that you served in.
GV: For different reasons, I’d rather not state that.
JR: Fair enough. There are a lot of people afraid of retaliation from the Gulf War. Do you understand why they feel that way.
GV: Yes I do. I learned do to what I did in the service, to live in a different world that most people have been lead to believe exists only in their worst nightmares.
JR: Now you were involved in an operation in Kuwait that really no one has heard about until this point in time. We’ve had five, four other reports of people similar to yourself that have brought this to our attention. You were chosen for a mission; and why do you think you were chosen for this mission?
GV: We’re all a product of our environment, as a young man I watched different movies and television shows, and I remember thinking how incredibly cool Rambo was and… things of that nature. There was so many media in the form of movies, and commercials television that primed me to except the idea that to win was everything.
JR: And so the military sort of capitalizes on that feeling?
GV: Oh very much so. They, they find… a lot of times before they even get you into boot camp where they can use your personality and…. your morals and… they capitalize on these things and, and steer you as it were into the training avenues where you will be most beneficial to them.
JR: Lets go to the time of this mission in Kuwait. You were, where were you when you learned about this mission?
GV: We had just gotten back into camp the day before, on a different mission, and we were actually in our quarters resting when we were told to muster out into the briefing tent, at which point a gentlemen who I originally, who I had first assumed to be American but I was concerned because he was wearing a U.N. uniform and insignias. He began to brief us on the operation. He pointed out the strategic points. And we were briefed as a group. There were probably 30 to 40 in the group. And then… we were asked to leave, and our individual commanders were given the objectives for their group. At which point our individual commanders briefed us on our individual objectives, and then we went and… we drew our gear. We were transported via armor personal carrier close to the front at which point we set out on foot, I acted alone.
JR: Why were you told that you were going to be doing this mission? What were you told was the purpose of this?
GV: There was concern that America, the American public, might see this conflict as an unnecessary thing, and we were asked to do this… or we were ordered to do this in order to remove any… to sway any public opinion… American public opinion to remove any doubts whatsoever that Saddam Hussein and his regime were a terrible evil that had to be dealt with.
JR: And what branches of the service were represented in this briefing tent?
GV: I recognized faces from the Navy Seals, Marine Force Recon, and Delta Force.
JR: Ok, now you’re on your way on your mission. You’ve been taken by armored personnel carrier, you’re dropped off to your area and what do you do then?
GV: Well then we moved through gaps in our lines to where we’re actually forward of the front… As the popular expression says “behind enemy lines”. We traveled up, well I say we, well I, I was acting alone. My mission objective was assigned to me personally. I did not have a, an operative with me. I moved forward and I… I carried out my mission parameters, and then I moved, and then I withdrew and concealed myself until such a time as the front moved past me.
JR: Ok let me back up a second. You carried out your mission, lets talk about that mission.
GV: Yes
JR: What was your mission? What were you told that you were supposed to do?
GV: To damage… I was given (number deleted) Kuwaiti oil wells to damage and to start a fire.
JR: And how did you do this?
GV: With the use of explosives and incendiaries.
JR: And how did you utilize these explosives? What were these explosives?
GV: The explosive I used was C4. It’s light weight, its easy to use, its very safe to transport. You take it and… a wellhead is nothing more than a pipe sticking out of the ground with… with valves, and it’s not like a water well where it, where you have a top that you can take off. It is completely sealed due to the environmental concerns involved with crude oil. The… depending on the sight of the well… the, the valve is any where from three to six feet off of the ground. I placed the explosive on the wellhead and the incendiaries near by so that after the… after the wellhead was damaged, that the incendiary could light the crude oil to fire.
JR: And did you light it yourself?
GV: No I actually transmitted a signal via a transmitter to a central location.
JR: Which basically told them the well had been set?
GV: The well had been set and they could detonate it at their leisure.
JR: And what did you do then?
GV: Then I removed myself from the area… I egressed from the area and concealed myself until our units had advanced forward of me.
JR: And, I don’t understand. Help me understand what you mean by that.
GV: The whole idea behind the operation was to make it as if look as if the Republican Guard, while they were retreating, had set the oil wells a fire in a panic to keep us from getting them… and to villainize them. This mission would not have been achieved if our forces saw those involved were not Republican Guard.
JR: In other words you were in fear of your own men seeing you basically?
GV: That is correct.
JR: Did you see any body else in the oil well field at the time that you were there?
GV: No I did not.
JR: So you then egressed from the area, made sure that your own men did not see you, and then the oil well fires were started?
GV: Yes
JR: Did you see them start?
GV: I actually, due to where I was concealed I could not see them, but due to the nature of … the operation you could feel the explosions and you could hear the fire.
JR: So the story that we are told, that the Republican Guard in their retreating, they started them very hastily, is not accurate?
GV: That is correct.
JR: Did you see any Republican Guard?
GV: In the entire (deleted) months that I spent in that theater of operations I did not see one individual that wore a Republican Guard uniform.
JR: Did you see any Iraqi troops that wore uniforms?
GV: I saw quite a few Iraqis troops that wore uniforms.
JR: But you saw no Republican Guards?
GV: I saw no Republican Guard Uniforms.
JR: After this period of time when you started the oil well fires, did you have any concerns that you had started these fires, or did you think it was for the best thing for this country?
GV: At the time, like I say due to the nature of my mind set, it did not bother me.
JR: That was your job and your mission and you carried it out.
GV: That is correct.
JR: Well I appreciate very much your being frank with us and open about this because there are many people that are now coming forward and saying the same thing. That there were no Republican Guard anywhere around, and that it was the American troops that actually started the oil well fires. I want to thank you very much, is there any thing you want to say in closing?
GV: I believe it’s a shame that our government is getting ready to repeat mistakes… I believe. I went over to fight what I thought was a common enemy of the world, and I watched my friends bleed and die for this cause, only for us to be stopped short of our objective, our final objective. I have no reason to believe that it will be any different this time. And I understand the necessity for the loss of life to protect our country. But loss and waste are two very different things.
JR: And why are you coming forward, right now in saying this?
GV: I feel that for us to return over there with this current administrations mind set that it would, that history would only repeat itself.
JR: Thank you very much, I do thank you, I salute you for what you are doing.
From:
[link]
|
|
|
|
 13 Mar 2003 @ 00:51, by quidnovi. Violence, War
"Justice is about Truth, and truth has many sides. Justice and Truth have shapes that change among nations and throughout the seasons of history. Mercy is Love, and that has the same strength and beauty for all people, for all time. I serve Mercy, not Justice."
---A. A. Attanasio, The Wolf and the Crown
Operation Desert Storm was about the "good guys" liberating one Arab state, Kuwait, from occupation by another Arab state, Iraq. But the roles are not so clearly defined in the current conflict and while I'd love to have the same kind of self assurance as G. W. Bush has been displaying that we are doing the right thing and that God is on our side, this new situation with Iraq looks to me (and to others) uncomfortably too much like an effort to install a client regime in Baghdad.
Worse, while some have been denouncing oil as the motivating factors of our current administration for its military presence in the Gulf region, there have been some troubling and alarming signs from the administration that Iraq is only the tip of the iceberg: More >
|
|
|
|
5 Mar 2003 @ 13:51, by ming. Violence, War
Britt Blaser posts some well-balanced thoughts about empowered dialogue in regards to war or no war."In the fall of 1967, I was flying C-130s in Viet Nam and my fiancée was marching for peace in Washington. We didn't see that as a conflict—more like covering both sides of the story. Nor did we feel any tension around this. I was there because I was expected to be there, and, having been born in 1942, I had grown up with the expectation of military service. She marched because our generation was working out a new voice and that view had to be sent to the politicians." Indeed, it is not as simple as a for or against, and that everybody is just one or the other. It is vital to examine all sides. Preferably to step into the shoes of all sides. Personally I'm not even particularly a pacifist, in the sense of refusing all uses of violence. Sometimes it is the best solution to kill people. If you threaten me and my family enough with physical harm, and I don't see any other solution, I'd kill you too. But violence and death is a very real and serious matter. The people you kill will be dead. The people you didn't quite succeed in killing, or that were just accidentally standing too close to the action, they will be messed up. They'll have missing body parts, and they'll have lost people they loved. Their husbands and wives and children and parents. It is very ugly. It isn't just something you can decide remotely, to make a political statement. Anyway, Britt is somebody who's experienced war first hand, who's been shot at, shot down in a plane, who's pals have been killed, so I certainly pay attention to his angles on this. Anyway, one of the main points Britt is making here, which could lead to uncomfortable conclusions is along the lines of:"If we don't occupy Iraq now, the body count goes up—not because that's where the terrorists are, but because we will not have been forceful enough to do so and silence the Arab machismo affect." The idea being that there are terrorists out there. They'll kill people if they can get away with it. But it is more like a street fight than a war. But that it is necessary to send a signal of strength, or the other parties will exploit our weakness. Hm, I can see that, but at the same time I don't agree. I think that the people we're dealing with, in the Middle East, and the groups we're concerned with as sources of terrorism, I think they certainly respect strength. They might be likely to respect displays of power more than they respect talk. But at the same time they feel morally obliged to revenge and pay back injustices believed to be carried out against their people, whatever definition they have of what 'their' people are, or of what injustices are. I think that's the motivation. It isn't just because they can, and nobody's stopping them. Violence that in any way can be regarded as unjust will tend to foster more payback violence, in the form of terrorism. But strength itself doesn't necessarily create that backlash. I think the Arab machismo is a big factor, but I think the worst you can do about it is to humble it. The trick is to display unarguable strength, but not to force your opponents to lose face. If you do, they will be morally obliged to use their very last breath to try to regain their pride.
The whole thing has been handled badly in terms of diplomacy from the U.S. side. It is set up so that Bush, and his pal Blair, would lose face if they don't get their war. Because they've spent a lot of energy on talking about how they're going to bomb Iraq no matter what. So, of course, if they're forced to back down, it looks a bit stupid, and they look weak. They've played their cards very badly diplomatically. It could very well have been a useful thing to send all those soldiers and all that hardware down there to stand and look very threatening. It could have been done in a way where it would have been a victory if war didn't become necessary. Right now it would look like a loss of face, even if Hussein spontaneously disappeared altogether.
I don't think the lack of a war now would in any way increase the likelyhood of something worse happening later. On the contrary. What makes this war almost inavoidable is only the unwillingness of the side of the current U.S. administration to look weak, or to be caught being wrong. It is about proving that one is right by proceeding with the original plan, even though it was greatly bungled. More >
|
|
|
|
13 Feb 2003 @ 23:59, by ming. Violence, War
Question: "What proof do you have that Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction?"
Colin Powell: "We kept the receipts." That is a joke. But not all that much of a joke once you consider that the United States and Great Britain sold lots and lots of atomic, chemical and biological weapons material to Iraq, including rockets to deliver it with. See a list here of the companies involved. More >
|
|
|
|
7 Dec 2002 @ 08:22, by spiritseek. Violence, War
This is very exciting. In only 36 hours, over 85,000 of us have
called on President Bush to let the inspections work. This'll be
one of our most successful petitions ever, and it underscores the
wide support for this message.
The other piece of great news is that, thanks to a tremendous and
speedy outpouring of contributions, we'll be able to run the New
York Times ad. (Many thanks to all of you who chipped in.) We'll
let you know how you can increase the ad's visibility when it runs,
which we hope will happen this coming Monday.
There's one more piece we need your help with. We're going to
publish the number of signers on the petition in the ad. The more
signers, the more impact the ad will have. The number we're
shooting for is 100,000 -- if we can hit that number, our statement
will have a lot more punch.
We need to get the final draft of the ad to the Times by the end
of the day TODAY. Let's tip it over the top. If you haven't
already signed the "Let the Inspections Work" petition, please take
a moment to do so right now at:
[link] More >
|
|
|
|
 23 Nov 2002 @ 20:21, by ming. Violence, War
Part of what keeps us all from living in an entirely peaceful world is that, if we're honest about it, most of us find guns and violence and war very entertaining. War makes for great programs on the History Channel. Violence makes for great action movies, and most of us cheer when the good guy kills the bad guy at the end. Guns are kind of cool and sexy. It is a powerful feeling to shoot a gun. Part of what motivates people to be police officers or soldiers is that you drive fast, or fly expensive toys, and you chase bad guys and you blow things up.
But what we like is exactly the game aspect of it. The thrill and risk, the power, the rush, the gadgetry, the stimulating special effects. But if we are really exposed to the effects of violence and war, very, very few of us would think that it is cool. Just one bullet, or the tiniest of bombs, do horrible things to human bodies. Just one life lost, or one life lived as an invalid, can be a huge tragedy for the people involved. The only way we accept it as a society is to be detached from it, by just watching it on TV and thinking about it abstractly. Yeah, let's go whip Saddam's ass real good. Looks good on TV. But we aren't able to fathom the scope of what several hundred thousand dead Iraqi children means. It is just numbers. And most Americans have never even heard about those numbers.
We'll have to embrace our desire for action and violence, and provide for it, without leaving all those innocent victims behind. I hear people giving visions of the future where there is no violence. "In the New Civilization there must be no violence!" Aha, ok, then what are you going to do with the people who want it? Outlaw boxing and wrestling? Action movies? Body piercing? Jackass stunts? That's all violent stuff, but it is violence that people volunteer for. And it is entertaining. Hoping that nobody will be interested in watching it just isn't going to work. Finding a harmonious relation between all sides of ourselves is more likely to take us somewhere. More >
|
|
<< Newer entries Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Older entries >> |
|
