| Subject: rants and promotions on el presidente |
Author:
xander
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 06:16:51 01/29/03 Wed
In reply to:
X
's message, "Rants for Mr. Presidente" on 18:39:58 01/28/03 Tue
how is it the same job to go kill the terrorists who did it? someone explain that.
We're doing the perfect job of a nation in an era in which the idea of nationalism is unstable. technology and communications infastructures have bound the world, unwillingly, together. Everyone is looking at the immediate problems: Iraq, N Korea, Terror. These are all problems, yes. And all of them have probably gone too far to solve without military conflict at this point. B4 you regurgitate what has been said a million times and i've heard a million times as an argument against, think of the real reasons we're attacking iraq. It is not to bring to justice a madman and restore peace to a nation which has defied the UN. Thats a bogus reason and up for attack. But the real reason is a pretty damned good rallying point against the USA, because it shows our achilles heel: oil. Iraq is developing a war machine, even if he doesn't yet have WMDs. If we show our weakness, the first move will be to take Saudi Arabia, and Qatar (this is approx. 80% of the arabian peninsula) on some bogus reason. And unfortunately the gov't of saudi arabia has little military power or support amongst their devout Wahhabist population (wahhabism is the Muslim equivalent of Puritanism) which will undoubtedly help the Iraqi invasion. Then oil prices raise to 50 bucks a gallon, and Saddam has nukes, and Saddam has chemical and biological warfare, and the funds to make long range ballistic conveyance missiles. And then if we don't like, we can kiss our asses, kids, because the only way to fight that war is to drop a fuckin' nuke on baghdad. And we need oil. perhaps people don't get this. Its like fighting for food. Its amazing how people can say that its unjust to fight for oil, then drive home. If fuel is taken away, industrial countries' entire economies will collapse and then we all go back to the fifteenth century with the third world. So yes, i think we must fight Iraq and Terrorism, and keep a watchful watchful eye on N. Korea (we can't really fight them anymore). But after these problems are addressed, more will appear. And then more. And then more. We must solve these immediate threats, but if America keeps on the same path of militaristic resource-imperialism, we will fall in EXACTLY the same way as Rome; over-stretching our capabilities. This is why i was giddy to hear one of the few really visionary and intelligent plans that Bush is instituting: the 1.5 billion dollars to energy research. If we no longer need oil, then the middle east has lost its fangs and becomes the equivalent of africa: a poor desperate place with no direct threat to the 1st world. and from this point, it is possible to start really helping these places. I mean really helping them, not just giving food to be stolen by the gov't and debase the agricultural economy by making their crops worthless like we (the EU, USA, Ozzie, and Canadu) have been doing. Once there is no longer a threat that they can pose, we can start negotiations with the people of these countries, not the governments. These are not bad people in the third world. these are desperate people driven to madness and violence out of jealousy and conviction that they're fighting a noble cause, instilled by their evil leaders. Once there is no hope of fighting, they will listen to us. Not by war, but by negotiation, must we bring the world to peace. But first we must solve the immediate dangers. Which is why I approve of action in Iraq, and the energy commitee.
I think Bush wants to keep on fighting wars though, and after iraq he'll pick the next fight. I don't have conviction that he shares my view for peace in the long run. So I hope he doesn't get re-elected.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 