A genocide in Darfur?
Do you really think, are you sure?
Let's wait a while
'fore we decide.
After all they're 'frican and poor.
Geno-cide?
Geno-cide?
I don't think 'Therefore, I am.' Therefore, I am.
Yes. And what to do about it. We should do more than we have, right? I even once suggested that the ol' Imperial Army might be dispatched to help quell such atrocity.... not a very popular idea, at least on this site. What was I thinking? Though let's face it-- a pretty popular idea in '03 with some folks who wanted to invade Iraq to help the downtrodden Iraqis. It's a real estate thing... location, location, location...
Spreadin' freee-dom's weapons, ring the bell,
the Army goeth forth to liberate and quell,
as long as your land qualifies,
our policy we will modify.
and it's oil's well that ends well..
Spreadin' freee-dom's weapons, ring the bell,
the Army goeth forth to liberate and quell,
as long as your land qualifies,
our policy we will modify.
and it's oil's well that ends well..
-
Totenkopf
Yeah, it was a horrific, murderous nightmare of a century, no doubt. But what does Mao/Stalin/Naziism have to do with genocide in Darfur? Trading cards? That an atrocity is not the worst in all of history does not make it any more tolerable. My point is that current-day Western "humanitarian" efforts are profit-based above all other considerations to a far greater degree than ever before. Are others worse? Perhaps. But that still doesn't excuse the profit-obsessed, mercenary approach.
On the other hand, I suppose for example one could say: preemptively (and essentially unilaterally) liberating Iraq from a tyrant (and those deadly sanctions) is actually an improvement over previous policy, which utilized Saddam as a henchman. One might say that the action was long overdue, or even some sort of vague moral obligation of the Western powers. And I suppose that reasoning might have some merit-- that is, if the endless Iraq occupation were really about that, which it isn't.
On the other hand, I suppose for example one could say: preemptively (and essentially unilaterally) liberating Iraq from a tyrant (and those deadly sanctions) is actually an improvement over previous policy, which utilized Saddam as a henchman. One might say that the action was long overdue, or even some sort of vague moral obligation of the Western powers. And I suppose that reasoning might have some merit-- that is, if the endless Iraq occupation were really about that, which it isn't.
yeah saddamn was our man in Baghdad for many years
and there was a better way to deal with him,
but the deed is done and now we do hope that the Iraqis can heal themselves with a better social order
once on lit kicks i re-posted a poem verse written by another
with credits and she got all pissy at me for doing so
just a lit kicks flashback)
By the way, a neat pakistani doctor I work with, his name is Khan,
I once asked him if he was descended from Genghis,
he said No, Man, it's Shaka
anyhow he just came back from Mecca for a pilgrimage
He said it was a deep spiritual experience
genocide i seen it the aftermath myself what we done in III corps, Vietnam
small in scale to what wreaked the Khmer Rouge to be true
but passive handwringing does nothing
we need a way to counter this kind of abuse
and a true peacekeeping force with muscle would do
in my hunmble opinion
it's the abuse and misuse of power that precludes an appropriate use of said power
a misuse and aberrant lack of use when necessary
and there was a better way to deal with him,
but the deed is done and now we do hope that the Iraqis can heal themselves with a better social order
(i had to put them togetherA genocide in Darfur?
Do you really think, are you sure?
Let's wait a while
'fore we decide.
After all they're 'frican and poor.
Spreadin' freee-dom's weapons, ring the bell,
the Army goeth forth to liberate and quell,
as long as your land qualifies,
our policy we will modify.
and it's oil's well that ends well..
yeah they say now that water is reason to war
that there's water somewhere down below old Darfur
if only Evian water would lobby for profit
they'd find some excuse that would benefit
and private contractors would clamour to get in on the ground floor
in thirsty old Darfur, then we could not ignore
once on lit kicks i re-posted a poem verse written by another
with credits and she got all pissy at me for doing so
just a lit kicks flashback)
By the way, a neat pakistani doctor I work with, his name is Khan,
I once asked him if he was descended from Genghis,
he said No, Man, it's Shaka
anyhow he just came back from Mecca for a pilgrimage
He said it was a deep spiritual experience
genocide i seen it the aftermath myself what we done in III corps, Vietnam
small in scale to what wreaked the Khmer Rouge to be true
but passive handwringing does nothing
we need a way to counter this kind of abuse
and a true peacekeeping force with muscle would do
in my hunmble opinion
it's the abuse and misuse of power that precludes an appropriate use of said power
a misuse and aberrant lack of use when necessary
[color=darkcyan]i'm on a survival mission
yo ho ho an a bottle of rum om[/color]
yo ho ho an a bottle of rum om[/color]
-
Totenkopf
O yeah. Like cool zap comix likenesses of Mao, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, the Pakis, Turks, generals, dictators, tyrants, etc. Stats. Ratings. Kill count average (K.C.A.). Relevant Bio-info. Collect 'em all! Could put the S8 cartoon whiz on it.Trading cards?
(Seriously, Darfur does look pretty horrible. But there are shitholes all over the world--North Korea has many gulags. Who knows what goes down in China, where dissent has pretty much been abolished. Or most muslim theocracies (including west africa), or the mafia-controlled wastelands of Russia.
Read Camus' The Guest, set in Algeria in 50s, for sort of an exploration of this theme of right atrocity matched by leftist atrocity. That doesn't excuse either side---but as Camus's schoolteacher realizes, the leftist rebels, however noble their cause or intentions, easily forget those noble causes once the proverbial sheeit hits the fan. Or for that matter, peruse some accounts of Zhukov's march towards Berlin in '45 ).
The USA should not go in anywhere. ever. The Bush regime is the number one terrorist threat in the world, just ahead of AlQuaida. But The UN could do somewthing in Darfur, more than they did in Rwanda. I agree wit mnaz that the fact that past attrocities are worse not mean that its okay to ignore Darfur.
Create a brand new peacemaking team for a brand new era.
Send in the Rainbow helmets, an all-gay peacekeeping force.
Create a brand new peacemaking team for a brand new era.
Send in the Rainbow helmets, an all-gay peacekeeping force.
I don't think 'Therefore, I am.' Therefore, I am.
-
Totenkopf
who's to enforce such a secular constitution?
the power that would assert its authority to do so would thereby make itself the worst totalitarian offender of em all.
anywho, the US is a theological regime, consy Christians. What big nuke-toting regimes are secular in this world? China and France, maybe? The Ruskies? Too, they're all either anti-Buddhist or anti-Musl'm or anti-Semantic, or what have you.
the people assert democracy. French Revolution world over.
the power that would assert its authority to do so would thereby make itself the worst totalitarian offender of em all.
anywho, the US is a theological regime, consy Christians. What big nuke-toting regimes are secular in this world? China and France, maybe? The Ruskies? Too, they're all either anti-Buddhist or anti-Musl'm or anti-Semantic, or what have you.
the people assert democracy. French Revolution world over.
I don't think 'Therefore, I am.' Therefore, I am.
I suppose "the greatest generation" might disagree, after going in and helping to save the world from Hitler. But you're right. By now the industrio/corporato/military machine is outta control, an entity not to be trusted, acting mainly to support its own institutionalized death merchant habit more than to protect or save, 'tho protectin' and savin' may be the occasional side effect, if the numbers crunch out just right.The USA should not go in anywhere. ever.
I still think this is our best shot, instead of individual nations playing world cop. But lost in all of Bush's massive crimes is the fact that the U.N. has been in a bit of decline, weakened by its own internal corruption, among other things. One of the mistakes the rightie neo-con types made was to claim that since the UN had problems, that gave the US free reign to play world cop as it saw fit, sufficiently justified or not, and for maximum $$$ for the shareholders. Umm, no. Sorry.But The UN could do somewthing in Darfur, more than they did in Rwanda.
The totalitarian Soviet Union had a secular constitution, no? More like cutting down govt's massive power in general. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and all that...secular constitution
Yeah, i meant the future. That Civil War thing was fun too, freed the slaves and all. The Union is great. Too bad that's back in the ole days of Republic, maybe. [Ignoring for a moment genocide of Native Amer'cans, invasiones of MexiCo. etc.] We's in imperial land Now.I suppose "the greatest generation" might disagree, after going in and helping to save the world from Hitler.
if they're the greatest genewration, then what's Bush's? the Satest Gen.? Generation Tex? The (Oil) Revenue Generation?
We be the Spontaneous Generation. ?That's my new band name, don't steal it.?
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Feminist power corrupts feminists. Solar power corrupts solely.
If Studio Eight spins off an exercise video it should be called Abs-olute Power. {that's a trademark muthaf'er. don't try steal it.}
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest