.

A serious question on perspective

ElMuertoMonkeyElMuertoMonkey Member Posts: 12,898
edited June 2004 in General Discussion
Okay, not trying to insinuate anything or cause a stir, but a have a serious question here.

The Iraqis, well... the ones fighting us anyways, are described as "insurgents" or even "terrorists." To many they are criminals deserving of nothing more than eradication. If they are humiliated or killed out of hand, so much the better, right? After all, they're only criminals.

But let's take a look at things in the absence of any emotion - you have an ill-equipped mob of relatively poorly-armed irregulars whose training and discipline are questionable to say the least. They're taking on the world's strongest military backed by the world's largest economy.

So why is it when we speak of the American Revolution, our forefathers are described as heroic and forthright while Iraqis are described as anything from ignorant savages to criminal insurgents? Why was the last stand at the Alamo considered heroic while Uday and Qusay's lasts stand near Baghdad considered the cowardly last stand of a couple of criminals?

Please take note: I am not saying the Iraqis are right and we are wrong. That is NOT the point of this post.

I am more interested in what grants folks their perspective on current affairs when compared with historic events. After all, the Japanese see nothing wrong with their role in World War 2 while we (and in my opinion, rightfully so) cast them as the basest of villains.

I mean, we can't all be blind nationalistic cheerleaders, can we? What is it that makes what we're doing in Iraq right and what the Iraqis doing wrong? Is there even an answer to that? All I know is that, taking the Iraqi conflict by itself and irrespective of its broader implications, the actions undertaken by both sides have some weird parallels in history and some role reversals that need explaining or discussion lest they become oversimplified.
«1

Comments

  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,660 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Brown=Wrong


    White=Right


    Merc

    Insignia?

    Nos nullus habitum rancidum insignia!



    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt
  • HAIRYHAIRY Member Posts: 23,606
    edited November -1
    Institutional and societal racism is rampant here, IMO. We see glimmers of its ugly face with the use of "towel heads, sand....., etc." Look at the previous post for an example.

    I concur with your historical comparisons, but since the victor (?)writes the history, it will be interesting to see how each country portrays itself in the future.

    For my part, I'm still trying to understand why we went into Iraq anyway--there was no national interest--other than oil--no strategic concept--other than imperialistic aims in the Middle East--no threat to the US or Great Britain--the containment policy was effective and working--and the proclamations by the alleged conservatives--no nation building by Republicans--and yet, here we are. [?][?]

    There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
    Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
  • ndbillyndbilly Member Posts: 1,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    C'mon, fellas. The question's a tad naive don't you think? Menahem Begin and the boys blow up a bunch of Brits in the King David hotel and they're "Freedom Fighters". A 16 year old Palestinian kid straps some C-4 to his belly and wipes out a bus full of Israelis and he's a terrorist. Difference is obvious, no? Of course it's all in who writes the history. So far as those two pustules on the * of humanity that EMM mentioned, however, Qusay and Usay, I doubt that even the most sympathetic historian will uncover much of redeeming value in their lives.
  • BullzeyeBullzeye Member Posts: 3,560
    edited November -1
    "Menachem Begin and the boys" didn't make the annihilation of Western culture and the Christian religion their ultimate goal, you short-sighted fool.

    Most revolutionaries have a specific, limited, secular agenda. They also have a following limited to the issue at hand.

    The Palestinians are part of a far greater religious ideology that encompasses millions of zealots. Their beef with Israel is merely a by-product of their over-arching desire to wipe capitalist white Judeo-Christian culture from the face of the earth.

    "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate for an outright ban, picking up all of them, "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in," I would have." -Sen. Dianne Feinstein

    feinstein2.bmp
  • Chockfull O NutsChockfull O Nuts Member Posts: 646 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Of course everyone has a different perspective. The British officers, all members of the elite aristocracy, did describe the Colonists as country bumpkins and worse. It is only natural for soldiers to insult and demean their enemies. What's the difference between a terrorist and freedom fighter? I guess it depends on what side you're on. It's pretty obvious which side some of you are on. As for the poorly trained irregulars standing against the most powerful military in the world I think that most military leaders would agree that this is the hardest battle to fight. The enemy looks just like the civilians, they hide and hit and run, and the military has to obey rules like not bombing mosques and indiscriminant killing of civilians which the irregulars (or terrorists or freedom fighters as per your choice) don't feel obliged to observe. Add the fact that every action taken by the military is questioned by the press and the politicians and it becomes clear how hard it is to conduct war under these conditions. Bear in mind that many, maybe most of the fighters in Iraq are not Iraqis but are from other countries. Are they still patriotic freedom fighters? Your call. Tactics and motivation are in my mind important to consider. When an armed group advocates genocide and incites war on a global scale and uses murder and mayhem among civilians to pursue their goal then I am leaning towards the terrorist label more than that of freedom fighter. Again, depends on where you stand.

    By the way, we always judge in retrospect but I think most civilized people would agree that the Japanese should been condemned for their actions in world war II. They were the aggressors, attacking China and the United States, invading the Philipines and I think Korea as well. They tortured prisoners and civilians, performed medical experiements on prisoners and civilians, froze people to death to measure how long it took to die that way, performed dissections on people who were not only still alive but awake so they could observe the organs functioning in the body and measure the reaction to pain, and forced thousands of women into prostitution to service occupying soldiers. Some things transcend ideology and just plain wrong no matter what justification is offered. But Japanese history books used in schools tell of how the war started because they were the victims of oppression by European and American business practices and dwell on the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with no mention of their own atrocities. Sometimes the losers get to write the history books too but only for their own children.
  • ndbillyndbilly Member Posts: 1,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'm sure that perspective was of great comfort to the families of those killed by Begin's blast, you arrogant prig.
  • Chockfull O NutsChockfull O Nuts Member Posts: 646 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Are you talking to me?
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    The current religious/oil war is just a continuation of World War II, Israel-religion and oil.

    If we didn't need oil, we wouldn't be sending people off to battle. Israel can handle every nation in the Middle East with their stock pile of over 100 nuclear weapons.



    awcountdown.gif
  • bigtirebigtire Member Posts: 24,800
    edited November -1
    horse.bmp

    MOLON LABE!
    allahSortbs.jpg
    An evil tree bears evil fruit. You can destroy as much fruit as you want, but it will always grow back, and it will always be evil.

    Tear the tree out of the ground by the roots and burn it. Burn it to ash and grind out the embers with your boot until there's nothing left. Not a single spark. Not a single seed.
  • Colt SuperColt Super Member Posts: 31,007
    edited November -1
    You guys overcomplicated EMM's question.

    The difference is easy...

    FREEDOM!

    God Bless America and...
    NEVER Forget WACO
    NEVER Forget RUBY RIDGE
    NEVER, EVER Forget 911
    Lock and load
  • muggstermuggster Member Posts: 428 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The root cause of ALL this mess is that we support Israel.Why do we support Israel?I'm not exactly sure but it seems that none of this would be happening right now if we didn't.
    All it creates is unstability and hatred.


    I think we should go back to being isolationist.It's hard to do that now that we are the worlds police force though.And why are we the worlds police force... refer to the root cause above.Unfortunatly we created this.How do we fix it is the question??
    My answer.....For starters,cut Israel loose and let them fend for themselves....next,find an alterenitive fuel like biomass fuels, such as Corn and hemp oil.It would jumpstart our economy our unemployment and our farmers.We could create a whole industry right here in the good ole US of A.That would get us out of the Middle east,out of site and out of mind.The ARABS could sell their oil to somebody else.

    Aw...I can dream can't I??
    I have no speacial place in my heart for Palistine or Israel or the middle east in general

    Muggster
  • Colt SuperColt Super Member Posts: 31,007
    edited November -1
    Well... we (the Allies) didn't hand Palestine to the Isralis. Great Britain got it, and the Isralis threw them out.

    God Bless America and...
    NEVER Forget WACO
    NEVER Forget RUBY RIDGE
    NEVER, EVER Forget 911
    Lock and load
  • Chockfull O NutsChockfull O Nuts Member Posts: 646 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Muggster, what would you have done? Finish the job Hitler started? The idea was to create a homeland for displaced Jews who have been fighting with Arabs over the same land for a couple thousand years and I guess they always will.
  • muggstermuggster Member Posts: 428 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Doug
    Apparently I was wrong with what I said in my post about the Allies.
    I just did a crash course in the history of Israel.It's a little hard to follow but it seems that a British mandate in the early 1920's played a large part in the formation of Israel.I didn't see anything about the Brits being thrown out but that doesn't mean that they weren't.I'm sure there are different histories depending on who's doing the talking.....
    But the fact remains that we give Israel billions of dollars a year and provide them with weapons.Just seems like a lost cause to me and a thorn in everybodies side.

    Nuts
    I say let them fight but may I ask "why must we be in the middle of it"?

    Muggster
  • ZERODINZERODIN Member Posts: 6,338
    edited November -1
    As to what makes our forefathers heroes and the Iraqis still fighting villains, in the absence of any emotion or morality, is simple: our forefathers won.

    When you throw morality into play, it helps that our forefathers were fighting off oppression, taxation without representation, and so forth. The Iraqi insurgents are fighting for oppression, more or less, and the last time I checked, we weren't taxing them.
  • dheffleydheffley Member Posts: 25,000
    edited November -1
    I don't think the people at the Alamo were rapist and murderers, And most of the insurgents in Iraq are not Iraqi's.

    How you doin'!wolf_evil_smile_md_wht.gif
    bumpersticker.gif
  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,660 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Uhhhhh........Hairy......that was Sarcasm. [:D]

    I'm not racist, I only hate stupid people. [:p]


    Merc

    Insignia?

    Nos nullus habitum rancidum insignia!



    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt
  • the loveable rat...the loveable rat... Member Posts: 969 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    imo, the truth is, societies, cultures, and nations were always founded on racism, brutality, and conduct unnacceptable by today's standard. and they will continue to be. people will die for long standing hatreds and ideals. many may think that is wrong- indeed the only thing that makes it "wrong" is when a majority believe it to be so- even transgressions against god. the Ute tribe would certainly think my presence here is wrong, maybe even the Spanish, and the British. my crocodile tears fill a flower vase for them...
  • ArmaliteA4ArmaliteA4 Member Posts: 489 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Jesus christ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    What is so difficult in picking a side????????????[B)]

    Either you are on THEIR side and THEY are right....[:(!]

    Or you are on OUR side and WE are right........[:D]

    Why it takes soo much dribble to explain this, is unexplainable.[V]

    I call a spade a spade,, keeps the grey out of my sight picture.[^]

    So, IMHO...pick a side so we can cut down on the friendly fire.[:D]

    You may take the most gallant sailor,the most intrepid airman,or the most audacious soldier,put them together at a table.
    What do you get?
    The sum of their fears
    -Winston Churchhill
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    Jesus Christ, a perfect analogy.


    Did he commit suicide by allowing the Jews to kill the son of God? God's chosen people? Isn't that against the rules and therefor bad?

    I think Jesus Christ was a bad person and never made it to heaven.[:o)]

    He's came back as Osama.[:D][:D]
    J/k.

    awcountdown.gif
  • ZERODINZERODIN Member Posts: 6,338
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Red223
    Jesus Christ, a perfect analogy.

    Did he commit suicide by allowing the Jews to kill the son of God? God's chosen people? Isn't that against the rules and therefor bad?


    I don't know if you're being sardonic or not, and I really don't want to get into a fight about this tangential topic, but the rule was that Jesus was begotten specifically to die for our sins. He followed the rule, so it's all good.

    EDIT: Just noticed your "j/k". But the point stands for anyone who wants to take the analogy seriously. [:)]
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 13,043
    edited November -1
    The answer is 2500 years old:

    Right is nothing but the interest of the stronger.
    -Thrasymachus
  • ArmaliteA4ArmaliteA4 Member Posts: 489 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think,,,even though I made my point a clearly as possible,,,,

    It was STILL missed and turned into something wholly different.

    Maybe that is why this board never gets very far in a discussion.

    For the most part it just picks apart items, never solving anything.

    There are several people I read that seem to have a grasp on the world, but then there are quite a few who just waste their time and the time of others by trying to look intellegent. Never looking at the whole problem, or even answering the question that was posted. Instead, just complainig and blaming..Sounds like Kerry HUH??[:o)]

    You may take the most gallant sailor,the most intrepid airman,or the most audacious soldier,put them together at a table.
    What do you get?
    The sum of their fears
    -Winston Churchhill
  • pickenuppickenup Member, Moderator Posts: 22,392 ******
    edited November -1
    Imagine for a moment, that the shoe was on the other foot. Suppose THEY were over here, with the superior military, and WE were fighting for OUR homeland. An invading army from a foreign land. Is there any reason good enough for them to invade OUR country? Would YOU take up arms against them? I know I would.

    If this were to happen, they would be calling US the "terrorists. insurgents, and criminals." Why? Because we are the "opposition" and did not cower down before them. It only matters which side is writing the script, telling the tale, as to who is the good/bad, or was right/wrong.

    P.S.
    Just curious, do you think "any" people from Canada or Mexico would come and fight side by side with us, under the above mentioned scenario?


    The gene pool needs chlorine.
  • ZERODINZERODIN Member Posts: 6,338
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by pickenup
    Imagine for a moment, that the shoe was on the other foot. Suppose THEY were over here, with the superior military, and WE were fighting for OUR homeland. An invading army from a foreign land. Is there any reason good enough for them to invade OUR country? Would YOU take up arms against them? I know I would.


    If Bush had used mustard gas against American citizens on American soil, he would've most likely been impeached successfully and removed from office without a foreign military helping out. If you are in favor of a government that does that kind of thing, you'd be among the minority who'd take up arms against such an invader. This is the case in Iraq: those taking up arms are the minority.

    quote:
    If this were to happen, they would be calling US the "terrorists. insurgents, and criminals." Why? Because we are the "opposition" and did not cower down before them. It only matters which side is writing the script, telling the tale, as to who is the good/bad, or was right/wrong.


    More matters than that, although those certainly are important factors.

    quote:
    P.S.
    Just curious, do you think "any" people from Canada or Mexico would come and fight side by side with us, under the above mentioned scenario?


    What would they fight with, sticks? Neither country respects its citizens enough to trust them with guns. That said, more Canadian troops are fighting the poorly-named "war on terror" than fought for Canadian independence from Great Britain, so I'd say it's really hard to predict whether any would come to our aid on our own soil.
  • Colt SuperColt Super Member Posts: 31,007
    edited November -1
    The Israelis did, in fact, "throw the British out".

    The entire epic of the foundation of Israel is worth studying.

    There are lessons to be learned from them.

    Oh, yeah... also lessons to be re-learned from ourselves.

    God Bless America and...
    NEVER Forget WACO
    NEVER Forget RUBY RIDGE
    NEVER, EVER Forget 911
    Lock and load
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    An American president DID INDEED USE GAS on American Women and CHILDREN..how short are some people's memory...

    A gas FORBIDDEN to be used in war...

    And many on this board CHEERED that action....[xx(]

    That action was open to Presidental investigation by the PRESENT HERO WAR PRESIDENT..and he said.." That is in the past..let it rest.."...

    The day this president stops lying about why we are in Iraq..is the day I start supporting him.
  • muggstermuggster Member Posts: 428 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Highball,

    Which incident are you referring to...about the gas?

    ....and...have you read much about depleted uranium?

    Muggster
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    Uhhhh he pulled the depleted uranium card....this'll be good.

    awcountdown.gif
  • The DunedanThe Dunedan Member Posts: 632 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I believe he's referring to Waco.

    As for DU, this is some truly hideous stuff. The majority of evidence now points to it being at -least- a major causitive factor in the series of ailments known as "Gulf War Syndrome." While DU in it's normal state is not hazardously radioactive, less than 1.10th normal background RaD, when it is burned and atomized ( as when a DU projectile strikes it's target ) the dust is/can be inhaled and bonds to the interior surface of the lungs, much like Asbestos. In this case, it releases a steady stream of radiation directly into the bloodstream at it's most sensitive point; the point of oxegenation. Thussly, it's effects are amplified over a relatively short period of time.

    Then, of course, there are the various vaccine experiments carried out on our soldiers, under the "Military Informed Consent" doctrine...brass informes, you consent. Don't even get me started on these puppies.

    Stand up and fight, or lie down and die; for it is better to burn than to ever fade away.
  • dheffleydheffley Member Posts: 25,000
    edited November -1
    You're partially right Highball, but it was the acting Attorney General, and she got off scott free. That was the crime of the sitting administration. Also, just remember this, they had cut off the electricity to the compound and the occupants were using candles. The weather conditions were windy, and in windy conditions, you use kerocine to weight the gas. What happens when you mix oxygen in wind gusts, atomized kerocine, and an open flame?

    [:(!][:(!][:(!]FIRE![:(!][:(!][:(!]



    How you doin'!wolf_evil_smile_md_wht.gif
    bumpersticker.gif
  • whiteclouderwhiteclouder Member Posts: 10,797
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by The Dunedan
    As for DU, this is some truly hideous stuff. ...While DU in it's normal state is not hazardously radioactive, less than 1.10th normal background RaD, when it is burned and atomized ( as when a DU projectile strikes it's target ) the dust is/can be inhaled and bonds to the interior surface of the lungs, much like Asbestos. In this case, it releases a steady stream of radiation directly into the bloodstream at it's most sensitive point; the point of oxegenation. Thussly, it's effects are amplified over a relatively short period of time.


    That's got to be the dumbest thing I've read on here this year. Where in hell did you get this stuff? Absolutely and completely so far out in right field as to be comical.it releases a steady stream of radiation directly into the bloodstream at it's most sensitive point; the point of oxegenation. SAY WhAT!!

    Clouder..
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Waco...a day of infamy in America.

    There MAY be plausible deniability..but I do not believe that Reno made the decision in a vaccuum...and the Buck stops on the Presidents desk.

    DU ? Me,I don't know..but I am interested in the Dunedans response to the typically arrogance spouting from the resident "Elder Stateman"...
  • pickenuppickenup Member, Moderator Posts: 22,392 ******
    edited November -1
    ZERODIN,
    ZZZZZZZZZZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

    The gene pool needs chlorine.
  • muggstermuggster Member Posts: 428 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'll post some links to some DU related sites and you all can come to your own conclusions.[url][/url]http://www.metacrawler.com/info.metac/search/web/Deleted+Uranium+Ammunition

    Muggster
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    I know the military has some trouble with previous training grounds in the U.S. where they have live fired DU. Seems it is getting into the water tables around the country and in the least most likely spots....California.

    awcountdown.gif
  • ZERODINZERODIN Member Posts: 6,338
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by pickenup
    ZERODIN,
    ZZZZZZZZZZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

    The gene pool needs chlorine.


    Are you saying that Bush is primarily to blame for any repressive attack on American citizens on American soil? I don't know a lot about Waco, in part because I wasn't all that old when it happened, and would love to hear any proof that Bush is akin to Saddam in this way.

    It certainly hasn't proven to be his modus operandi of controlling the populace, though, as it was for Saddam.
  • Gibbs505Gibbs505 Member Posts: 3,175
    edited November -1
    quote:
    quote:
    Just curious, do you think "any" people from Canada or Mexico would come and fight side by side with us, under the above mentioned scenario?


    What would they fight with, sticks? Neither country respects its citizens enough to trust them with guns. That said, more Canadian troops are fighting the poorly-named "war on terror" than fought for Canadian independence from Great Britain, so I'd say it's really hard to predict whether any would come to our aid on our own soil.



    AH they haven't got rid of all the guns just yet and Canadians didn't have to fight for freedom; Great Britian gave it to us. We are independent you know?[?]

    Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
  • ZERODINZERODIN Member Posts: 6,338
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Gibbs505
    quote:
    quote:
    Just curious, do you think "any" people from Canada or Mexico would come and fight side by side with us, under the above mentioned scenario?


    What would they fight with, sticks? Neither country respects its citizens enough to trust them with guns. That said, more Canadian troops are fighting the poorly-named "war on terror" than fought for Canadian independence from Great Britain, so I'd say it's really hard to predict whether any would come to our aid on our own soil.



    AH they haven't got rid of all the guns just yet and Canadians didn't have to fight for freedom; Great Britian gave it to us. We are independent you know?[?]


    I do know, indeed. I contend that the reason Canada is any different from the US is for that very reason. We had to fight for our independence, whereas England got bored with y'all and dumped your country on its own. (Yes, I know it's more complicated than that, but what I know of Canada from living within 2 hours of the border and having many Canadian friends for the first 21 years of my life supports my assertion.)

    "...just yet" is the bad part of your comment - they will get them all, sooner rather than later.
  • mussmuss Member Posts: 1,311 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    ELmonkey,

    The diffrence between the heroic patriots of the usa and the insurgents of Iraq is the fact that the USA won their war. Remember history is written and taught by the victors. I would be certain that the prevailing thought of the day in England was that the "americans" were a bunch of insurgents and terrorists. I just thank god that the USA insurgents won........[:D][:D][:D]

    There is a very thin line between a tyrant/traitor and a patriot. The only diffrence is who wins.....

    muss
Sign In or Register to comment.