It All Depends On Who Kills Who

[35Pete]

For many people at least.

Moral outrage is not the reason. It is 100% political. For a select few on this board it is all about hatred of the United States.

Something huge is going on in the world. Something causing a lot of death. And it's not the fault of the United States either.
And when I searched the PRS one man brought it up. One man expressed his outrage. I am not surprised. That person?

Nehemiah.

A few others followed. Guess who didn't?

Do you know what the subject is? Nehe keep your mouth shut.

[35Pete]

Where is the moral outrage?? Note that a lot of those heartless right-wing bastards weighed in on this thread. Didn't see too many Hezbollah cheerleaders there.

http://www.buffalorange.com/showthread.php?t=91510&highlight=darfur

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3496731.stm


Q&A: Sudan's Darfur conflict

Many thousands of displaced people are in need of relief supplies
The largest rebel group in Sudan's Darfur region has agreed a peace deal with the government but two smaller groups are demanding more concessions before laying down their arms.

More than three million people need food aid or have fled their homes, and some 200,000 are estimated by the United Nations to have died because of the violence.

Sudan's government and the pro-government Arab militias are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population, although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide.

[anEinherjer]

Hey come on now, I started a thread on Darfur a long while ago, maybe last summer!

[nehemiah]

Read&React started a bunch, too.

[JLB]

Hey come on now, I started a thread on Darfur a long while ago, maybe last summer!
I started a thread on everything a long while ago. teehee :guy:

[K-Gun]

blah blh blah, you hat american, bl;ah blah blah, can you pull my heD OUT OF MY ASS, BLAH BLAH

[JLB]

There is so much good in the worst of us, and so much bad in the best of us, that it behooves all of us not to talk about the rest of us.

R.L.S.

[SpikedLemonade]

Yeah, that situation pisses me off as well.

The issue is often brought up in the Canadian news.

Rarely do I see it on American news where they are too busy pushing the politics of fear.

[35Pete]

Yeah, that situation pisses me off as well.

The issue is often brought up in the Canadian news.

Rarely do I see it on American news where they are too busy pushing the politics of fear.


That's even more indicting. If you Canadians are such good humanitarians and you let this go untalked about in the US (because you can't link it to tryiing to embarrass the US) then you guys look awfully foolish. Awfully foolish.

In any event it is principle and not politics, right? :guy:

[35Pete]

Speaking of snake oil to peddle, where are those two?

[Green Lantern]

For many people at least.

Moral outrage is not the reason. It is 100% political. For a select few on this board it is all about hatred of the United States.

Something huge is going on in the world. Something causing a lot of death. And it's not the fault of the United States either.
And when I searched the PRS one man brought it up. One man expressed his outrage. I am not surprised. That person?

Nehemiah.

A few others followed. Guess who didn't?

Do you know what the subject is? Nehe keep your mouth shut.

Of course it is political. That is why we did not step in to help in the former Yugoslavia for years. The only time anyone cared was when the refugees began pouring in over the borders to Europe. Then we had to take action. Can't have more than a million refugees on the dole in Austria.

The question I have for you Pete is, if it is not moral outrage, if it is political, why do we play the moral outrage card on Israel's behalf?

[35Pete]

Of course it is political. That is why we did not step in to help in the former Yugoslavia for years. The only time anyone cared was when the refugees began pouring in over the borders to Europe. Then we had to take action. Can't have more than a million refugees on the dole in Austria.

The question I have for you Pete is, if it is not moral outrage, if it is political, why do we play the moral outrage card on Israel's behalf?

I have said numerous times that there is no virtuous side in this fight. But what I do see is a pile it on attitude among a lot of people that cannot see that Israel's enemy is quite evil. Israel is ALWAYS the aggressor. Do you beleive that? Do you think Isreal just loves stirring up shit outnumbered 100:1 in the region? She loves that, huh? How about this. Sometimes she really does stupid things, like the settlements. And sometimes she takes a beating just because she exists. Now the establishment of Israel is a contentious issue but she exists. We all need to deal with that because that nation will never be defeated without taking the entire middle east with her.

if you advocate that Israel live the next 100-200 years with terrorism at her feet and she is supposed to do nothing about it, I mean nothing, then I have to wonder.

What would you expect Israel to do? What would you?

[Green Lantern]

I have said numerous times that there is no virtuous side in this fight. But what I do see is a pile it on attitude among a lot of people that cannot see that Israel's enemy is quite evil. Israel is ALWAYS the aggressor. Do you beleive that? Do you think Isreal just loves stirring up shit outnumbered 100:1 in the region? She loves that, huh? How about this. Sometimes she really does stupid things, like the settlements. And sometimes she takes a beating just because she exists. Now the establishment of Israel is a contentious issue but she exists. We all need to deal with that because that nation will never be defeated without taking the entire middle east with her.

if you advocate that Israel live the next 100-200 years with terrorism at her feet and she is supposed to do nothing about it, I mean nothing, then I have to wonder.

What would you expect Israel to do? What would you?

I did not advocate or disagree with anything pete, I asked you why, in your opinion, would we be playing the Moral Outrage if this is just politics? A "Realist" in the proper, international relations, sense of the word sees the world as power relations and blah, blah, blah (machiavelli). They, by definition, do not adhere to patriotism, morality, sympathy, etc. So what is with the moral indignation unless it is just a tool in their bag. And if that is so, why should we buy it given that they are just manipulating us?

Answer my question and I will answer yours.

[twosheds]

What happens in Sudan is very sad and it's a thing that has happened for years and will continue to do so. The East of Kongo is a war zone, too, where the population suffers heavily from militias. And probably a lot of other places in the world. Who sells those militias these weapons? I bet you it's the usual suspects, USA, Canada, Germany, France, Britain, Russia. All these countries are top when it comes to exporting weapons, and they'll sell to everyone who has money, unless there's a boycott. None of us has a particular reason to be proud of his home country.

[Green Lantern]

What happens in Sudan is very sad and it's a thing that has happened for years and will continue to do so. The East of Kongo is a war zone, too, where the population suffers heavily from militias. And probably a lot of other places in the world. Who sells those militias these weapons? I bet you it's the usual suspects, USA, Canada, Germany, France, Britain, Russia. All these countries are top when it comes to exporting weapons, and they'll sell to everyone who has money, unless there's a boycott. None of us has a particular reason to be proud of his home country.

Maybe we should not be so enamored with the idea of the nation-state either. Why can't these areas just break up into their own little fiefdoms? Hell, Italy wasn't a country even into the beginning of the 20th century.

[35Pete]

I did not advocate or disagree with anything pete, I asked you why, in your opinion, would we be playing the Moral Outrage if this is just politics? A "Realist" in the proper, international relations, sense of the word sees the world as power relations and blah, blah, blah (machiavelli). They, by definition, do not adhere to patriotism, morality, sympathy, etc. So what is with the moral indignation unless it is just a tool in their bag. And if that is so, why should we buy it given that they are just manipulating us?

Answer my question and I will answer yours.

I am playing the moral outrage card to demonstrate politics. This does not have to do with the Israelis as much as the United States. If these people were truly humanitarians then they would be decrying Darfur with just as high pitched a scream. The only one that did was nehemiah. And I have newfound respect for him for that. At least he demonstrates some consistent principle here. The point is to show the hypocricy aqua. The principles in question as openly hostile to the US. So to me these are just crocodile tears and nothing else.

I also mentioned several times that the US has a humanitarian role to step into situations, just like Dafur, and obliterate those perpetrating genocide, regardless of whether we benefit strategically from it. From the holy ones? *crickets*.

I honestly don't know what Israel is supposed to do if she were to follow their (the crazy left's) demands. Leave Israel? And go where? History for 2,000 years has clearly shown that anti-semetism has been such a scourge on these people that the only government that the jews can be completely confident will try to defend them is Tel Aviv. I ask myself what I would do if I were an Israeli leader. Sit tight and take a daily beating via shootings, bombings, and kidnappings. Or go after the bastards? Sorry. But I would use a ruthless iron fist on coward engaging in this kind of activity. Ruthless. Now Hezbollah hiding among the population is not Israel's fault. What to do? Retreat and give them a permanent sanctuary to rest before regrouping and restarting the violence.

I laugh, and I know other words stronger, UTTER CONTEMPT at Shiva and Chimp for suggesting that Hezbollah is acting in self-defense. Laughable aqua, just laughable.

What would you do if you were Israel? I tried getting into that in another thread about the jews and Europe. I'll see if I can rekindle that. Europe has nothing to be proud of in this matter. Given their history and if I were a jew I would not want to go their.

[35Pete]

BTW aqua. Good, intellectual posting, as usual.

Still owe you a beer.

[twosheds]

Maybe we should not be so enamored with the idea of the nation-state either. Why can't these areas just break up into their own little fiefdoms? Hell, Italy wasn't a country even into the beginning of the 20th century.

That won't help the people who live there, though. Eastern Kongo has rich ressources, diamonds - in an area like that, that spells trouble. If it were only about separatism.

[35Pete]

Beer sent to aqua.

Aqua. If someone here is espousing completely illogical nonsense then you have as much an obligation to expose it as I do.

[Green Lantern]

I am playing the moral outrage card to demonstrate politics. This does not have to do with the Israelis as much as the United States. If these people were truly humanitarians then they would be decrying Darfur with just as high pitched a scream. The only one that did was nehemiah. And I have newfound respect for him for that. At least he demonstrates some consistent principle here. The point is to show the hypocricy aqua. The principles in question as openly hostile to the US. So to me these are just crocodile tears and nothing else.

I also mentioned several times that the US has a humanitarian role to step into situations, just like Dafur, and obliterate those perpetrating genocide, regardless of whether we benefit strategically from it. From the holy ones? *crickets*.

I honestly don't know what Israel is supposed to do if she were to follow their (the crazy left's) demands. Leave Israel? And go where? History for 2,000 years has clearly shown that anti-semetism has been such a scourge on these people that the only government that the jews can be completely confident will try to defend them is Tel Aviv. I ask myself what I would do if I were an Israeli leader. Sit tight and take a daily beating via shootings, bombings, and kidnappings. Or go after the bastards? Sorry. But I would use a ruthless iron fist on coward engaging in this kind of activity. Ruthless. Now Hezbollah hiding among the population is not Israel's fault. What to do? Retreat and give them a permanent sanctuary to rest before regrouping and restarting the violence.

I laugh, and I know other words stronger, UTTER CONTEMPT at Shiva and Chimp for suggesting that Hezbollah is acting in self-defense. Laughable aqua, just laughable.

What would you do if you were Israel? I tried getting into that in another thread about the jews and Europe. I'll see if I can rekindle that. Europe has nothing to be proud of in this matter. Given their history and if I were a jew I would not want to go their.


If I were an Israeli, I suspect I would fight. My parents moved me to the worst neighborhood in town, where everyone hates me. I'd better learn to fight or lie down.

I would hate my parents for it though.

My question is why is the US building up massive amounts of resentment worldwide by siding with Israel when we no longer have to? Old habits?

Regarding civilian casualities:

It is not those we hate that we treat the worst but those for whom we have no concern at all.

-F. Nietzsche

[35Pete]

Aqua. This is an editorial But this man is saying exactly what I am thinking. True their are some patriotic Americans that just genuinely disagree with Israels response. Probably think it is disproportionate. I am not talking about them.

Great editorial. Please keep an open mind and read.

BTW Spiked. Gluckmann may be a jew. There is your angle of attack.

http://www.signandsight.com/features/894.html

The Jerusalem Syndrome

André Glucksmann on reactions to the war in Lebanon: From surrealistic geopolitics to apocalyptic delusion.

The outrage of so many outraged people outrages me. On the scales of world opinion, some Muslim corpses are light as a feather, and others weigh tonnes. Two measures, two weights. The daily terrorist attacks on civilians in Baghdad, killing 50 people or more, are checked off in reports under the heading of miscellaneous, while the bomb that took 28 lives in Qana is denounced as a crime against humanity. Only a few intellectuals like Bernard-Henri Lévy or Magdi Allam, chief editor of the Corriere della Sera, find this surprising. Why do the 200,000 slaughtered Muslims of Darfur not arouse even half a quarter of the fury caused by 200-times fewer dead in Lebanon? Must we deduce that Muslims killed by other Muslims don't count - whether in the eyes of Muslim authorities or viewed through the bad conscience of the west? This conclusion has its weak spots, because if the Russian Army - Christian, and blessed by their popes - razes the capital of Chechnian Muslims (Grosny, with 400,000 residents) killing tens of thousands of children in the process, this doesn't count either. The Security Council does not hold meeting after meeting, and the Organization of Islamic States piously averts its eyes. From that we may conclude that the world is appalled only when a Muslim is killed by Israelis.

Should we thus presume that the public at large implicitly endorses the ideas that Ahmadinedjad shouts at the top of his lungs? And yet so many of those sceptics who display consternation over bombings in Lebanon seem shocked if you suspect them of anti-Semitism. I want to trust them. We don't want to imagine that the entire planet is mired in anti-Jewish paranoia! But then the matter becomes even more puzzling. What is the source of this hemiplegia? Why is the world frightened by Israeli bombs alone?

Perhaps the reason why the deaths in Lebanon are so disproportionately shocking as compared with the starving people of Darfur and the ruins of Chechnya is that they are seen as a surrealistic geopolitical signal. Anyone who follows the news in Gaza or Qana does not simply count the dead on a particularly violent day - rather, the coffins of these victims encircle the aura of a fatal promise - a promise that the hundreds of thousands of corpses from Africa and the Caucasus have no chance of approaching. Haven't legions of experts - for decades now - identified the Mideast conflict as the centre of the world's chaos and the key to its pacification? Is there any diplomat who does not repeat ad nauseum the formula about the gates to a hell of future wars versus the gates to world harmony, all of which open in Jerusalem? A never-changing script haunts 21st century minds. The script maintains that everything is decided on the banks of the Jordan. In its most grim version, that means: As long as four million Israelis and as many Palestinians are facing off against one another, 300 million Arabs and 1.5 billion Muslims are condemned to live in hate, bloody slaughter and desperation. And the rosier version: We just need peace in Jerusalem to put out the fires in Tehran, Karachi, Khartoum and Baghdad and to set the course for universal harmony.

Have our sages gone crazy? Do they really believe that sans Israeli-Palestinian conflict nothing bad would have happened, neither the deadly Khomeini Revolution, nor the bloody Baathist dictatorships in Syria and Iraq, nor the decade of Islamic terrorism in Algeria, nor the Taliban in Afghanistan, nor the angry warriors of God the world over? The sad, reverse hypothesis is seldom posed, but it is actually much more likely: Every truce along the Jordan is fleeting, as long as the palaces and streets, the majority of the intelligentsia and the officials of the Muslim world hang on to their anti-western passion. Globalization (which entails the dismantling of economic barriers but more importantly all social and mental barriers) necessarily leads to tough and terrible defensive reactions. The development of anti-western ideologies in Germany, from Fichte to Hitler, does not depend on the foundation of the Zionist state. The anti-western affect is constantly renewed in Russia, from the tsars to Stalin and on up through Putin. And it would be naive to presume that the Iranian lust for power, in search of its Khomeinistic force de frappe, uses the "Jewish question" as anything more than a pretence for a universal Jihad. Does anyone think that the green subversion, after erasing Israel from the map, will mark its success by laying down its weapons?

A hypocritical geopolitics, which ordains the Mideast as a basic pillar of the world order, has become the religion of the European Union, the belief of the unbelievers and of the doubters of the west. Post-modern thinkers have no justification in proclaiming the end of all ideologies. In fact, we are swimming in an ideological illusion and have secretly exchanged our deceptive hopes for a final battle with a fearful incantation conjuring a catastrophe to end all catastrophes, that is just as absolute. While our head swarms with surrealistic ghosts, our heart perceives, in every photo from Lebanon, the death of humankind. Jerusalem is only the centre of the world because it is considered the centre of the end of the world. Our illusions feed on apocalyptic notions.

And so every Mideast conflict is like a rehearsal for the end of days. Just look at the undefinable war of cultures, if you need convincing. And anyone taking that position is resigned to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The years of bombing of Israeli cities by the rockets of the Party of God become a foretaste of the Iranian godfather's promised destruction. And so, as Clausewitz already noted with irony, it is not the aggressor who starts the war. Instead it is he who steps in to stop the aggression. So Israel is guilty. Guilty of a collectively fomented fantasy of the end of days. From surrealistic geopolitics to delusion - just one step.

[35Pete]

Aqua. How's that beer taste? :D

[Green Lantern]

BTW aqua. Good, intellectual posting, as usual.

Still owe you a beer.


Thanks, I like your posts when you get serious.

[Green Lantern]

Aqua. How's that beer taste? :D

Good, thanks. I stepped away for dinner.

[Green Lantern]

That won't help the people who live there, though. Eastern Kongo has rich ressources, diamonds - in an area like that, that spells trouble. If it were only about separatism.

I am not saying it is only about anything. Rather, why is it we think the world has to be divided up into countries. Venice was a tiny republican city-state until almost 1800. Who says the Congo needs to have one ruler for the lines that europeans drew on maps 150 years ago?

Maybe we should expand our thinking for solutions to these problems. Supposing, of course, that we have any effect on these problems.

[35Pete]

Thanks, I like your posts when you get serious.

I get serious with serious people. I go into combat mode with the Charlatan's. Notice we don't do combat? :)

[SpikedLemonade]

That's even more indicting. If you Canadians are such good humanitarians and you let this go untalked about in the US (because you can't link it to tryiing to embarrass the US) then you guys look awfully foolish. Awfully foolish.

In any event it is principle and not politics, right? :guy:

Of course.

It was debated in the Canadian Federal Parliament a while back.

I think Canada is sending significant aid to them.

I agree we should discuss it more here.

There is too much Left vs. Right shit here and less substantive world/international issues.

[Green Lantern]

Aqua. This is an editorial But this man is saying exactly what I am thinking. True their are some patriotic Americans that just genuinely disagree with Israels response. Probably think it is disproportionate. I am not talking about them.

Great editorial. Please keep an open mind and read.

BTW Spiked. Gluckmann may be a jew. There is your angle of attack.

http://www.signandsight.com/features/894.html

The Jerusalem Syndrome

André Glucksmann on reactions to the war in Lebanon: From surrealistic geopolitics to apocalyptic delusion.

The outrage of so many outraged people outrages me. On the scales of world opinion, some Muslim corpses are light as a feather, and others weigh tonnes. Two measures, two weights. The daily terrorist attacks on civilians in Baghdad, killing 50 people or more, are checked off in reports under the heading of miscellaneous, while the bomb that took 28 lives in Qana is denounced as a crime against humanity. Only a few intellectuals like Bernard-Henri Lévy or Magdi Allam, chief editor of the Corriere della Sera, find this surprising. Why do the 200,000 slaughtered Muslims of Darfur not arouse even half a quarter of the fury caused by 200-times fewer dead in Lebanon? Must we deduce that Muslims killed by other Muslims don't count - whether in the eyes of Muslim authorities or viewed through the bad conscience of the west? This conclusion has its weak spots, because if the Russian Army - Christian, and blessed by their popes - razes the capital of Chechnian Muslims (Grosny, with 400,000 residents) killing tens of thousands of children in the process, this doesn't count either. The Security Council does not hold meeting after meeting, and the Organization of Islamic States piously averts its eyes. From that we may conclude that the world is appalled only when a Muslim is killed by Israelis.

Should we thus presume that the public at large implicitly endorses the ideas that Ahmadinedjad shouts at the top of his lungs? And yet so many of those sceptics who display consternation over bombings in Lebanon seem shocked if you suspect them of anti-Semitism. I want to trust them. We don't want to imagine that the entire planet is mired in anti-Jewish paranoia! But then the matter becomes even more puzzling. What is the source of this hemiplegia? Why is the world frightened by Israeli bombs alone?

Perhaps the reason why the deaths in Lebanon are so disproportionately shocking as compared with the starving people of Darfur and the ruins of Chechnya is that they are seen as a surrealistic geopolitical signal. Anyone who follows the news in Gaza or Qana does not simply count the dead on a particularly violent day - rather, the coffins of these victims encircle the aura of a fatal promise - a promise that the hundreds of thousands of corpses from Africa and the Caucasus have no chance of approaching. Haven't legions of experts - for decades now - identified the Mideast conflict as the centre of the world's chaos and the key to its pacification? Is there any diplomat who does not repeat ad nauseum the formula about the gates to a hell of future wars versus the gates to world harmony, all of which open in Jerusalem? A never-changing script haunts 21st century minds. The script maintains that everything is decided on the banks of the Jordan. In its most grim version, that means: As long as four million Israelis and as many Palestinians are facing off against one another, 300 million Arabs and 1.5 billion Muslims are condemned to live in hate, bloody slaughter and desperation. And the rosier version: We just need peace in Jerusalem to put out the fires in Tehran, Karachi, Khartoum and Baghdad and to set the course for universal harmony.

Have our sages gone crazy? Do they really believe that sans Israeli-Palestinian conflict nothing bad would have happened, neither the deadly Khomeini Revolution, nor the bloody Baathist dictatorships in Syria and Iraq, nor the decade of Islamic terrorism in Algeria, nor the Taliban in Afghanistan, nor the angry warriors of God the world over? The sad, reverse hypothesis is seldom posed, but it is actually much more likely: Every truce along the Jordan is fleeting, as long as the palaces and streets, the majority of the intelligentsia and the officials of the Muslim world hang on to their anti-western passion. Globalization (which entails the dismantling of economic barriers but more importantly all social and mental barriers) necessarily leads to tough and terrible defensive reactions. The development of anti-western ideologies in Germany, from Fichte to Hitler, does not depend on the foundation of the Zionist state. The anti-western affect is constantly renewed in Russia, from the tsars to Stalin and on up through Putin. And it would be naive to presume that the Iranian lust for power, in search of its Khomeinistic force de frappe, uses the "Jewish question" as anything more than a pretence for a universal Jihad. Does anyone think that the green subversion, after erasing Israel from the map, will mark its success by laying down its weapons?

A hypocritical geopolitics, which ordains the Mideast as a basic pillar of the world order, has become the religion of the European Union, the belief of the unbelievers and of the doubters of the west. Post-modern thinkers have no justification in proclaiming the end of all ideologies. In fact, we are swimming in an ideological illusion and have secretly exchanged our deceptive hopes for a final battle with a fearful incantation conjuring a catastrophe to end all catastrophes, that is just as absolute. While our head swarms with surrealistic ghosts, our heart perceives, in every photo from Lebanon, the death of humankind. Jerusalem is only the centre of the world because it is considered the centre of the end of the world. Our illusions feed on apocalyptic notions.

And so every Mideast conflict is like a rehearsal for the end of days. Just look at the undefinable war of cultures, if you need convincing. And anyone taking that position is resigned to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The years of bombing of Israeli cities by the rockets of the Party of God become a foretaste of the Iranian godfather's promised destruction. And so, as Clausewitz already noted with irony, it is not the aggressor who starts the war. Instead it is he who steps in to stop the aggression. So Israel is guilty. Guilty of a collectively fomented fantasy of the end of days. From surrealistic geopolitics to delusion - just one step.

I like it. Good post. Thanks.

[SpikedLemonade]

BTW Spiked. Gluck mann may be a jew. There is your angle of attack.


Ah, blow me Pete.:eatme: