Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post

Yorick · 09-23-2001, 04:46 PM

Georges response:

____________________________________________
Hugh,
■
My turn. This is turning into a bit of a saga and I would really love to meet you and discuss this directly.■I always relish an intelligent conversation and one with you would be most interesting, something lacking where I am at the moment with few English speaking people around.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hugh Wilson [mailto:hughdwilson@hotmail.com]
Sent: 23 September 2001 01:00

George,

Thankyou for your response brother. Good health to you.

I appreciate your view but I fail to see how■your response■contradicts my reply. Serj's piece contained misinformation and was reliant on pure■speculation rather than fact. There are more than enough "balanced views" around. If it was indeed written the day after, (in which the "bravery of fireman" that you■mentioned was already apparent) it shows a willingness to use a national tragedy as a platform to express political views, manifested in opposition to American foreign policy.

[George Halicki]■ While you highlighted some errors in Serj's essay, there can be many facts■brought forward to highlight the US govt's hypocrisy in its foreign policies. I■did not intend to contradict your reply, I only■wanted to ensure■people are aware of the angle he was coming from■which■is worth contemplating.■Whenever any of us assess a situation, we gather all available information and views to ensure we make the best possible decision to go forward.

I have heard so much anger, as has my brother in the US about bombing the hell out of them but as my brother says "who are you going to bomb?" and■he gets the reply "I don't know but we should just bomb the s...t out of them". It is this sort of angry reaction we need to temper and calm people before they react. ■

Let's look at the situation unfolding in Pakistan. In an effort to bring Bin Laden to justice,■America has asked for Pakistani help. To repay that help sanctions are being lifted and loans are being made.

[George Halicki]■I will not argue that this suits Americas purpose right now.

I do need to contemplate on, why America put the sanctions there in the first instance and did they get some form of guarantee on how■arms will be used in the forthcoming sales■that are part of the sanctions being lifted. As in Americas previous support of Iraq then the same weapons and training were used against American soldiers later, a guarantee from Pakistan today does not mean they will abide by it forever. Has America thought this through properly. Could the sanctions being lifted exclude arms deals?

If the situation hypothetically occured that the pro-Osama dissidents protesting in Karachi (currently numbering about 15% of the population) were to sieze control of the nation and use their nuclear arsenal against America, would people like Serj proclaim that America's backing and assistance■of Pakistan created the situation?

[George Halicki]■No, I do not think they would. I for one and similarly for many I know, would not say that.■

Where people get upset, is at the hypocrisy and counterinsurgent activities of the US govt via the CIA■. A prime example is the back door deal by■US turning the other way while Turkey dealt with their 'Armenian problem'■ as the US gained rights■to the oilfields of what is now Iraq and Saudi after WW1. Why turn their back on this, while they raise it now with China to try and prevent China's entry to the World Trade Organisation.

My point was not that American foreign policy was without error, but that those that commit atrocities do so of their own volition. They choose to respond in the fashion they do. There is no justification for that kind of mass murder and■extreme vandalism. The plague of terrorism is an evil that must be denounced and rid from the world if peace is to be attained. This is not to say the solution is war or mass retaliatory destruction, but that an■internationally co-ordinated response preventing the practice must occur.■

[George Halicki]■I fully agree, there is no justification whatsoever for this type of mass murder/vandalism and I do not think Serj agrees with it either. The many people I know are horrified and are appalled at what happened.■

I believe Serj, like many others I know, just want people to realise why people are so angry with the US. While they have reasons, none justifies the actions taken last week.■

I have lived in the Middle East for a number of years in the 80's and to these people, God is everything. The laws of these countries■are purely based on the Koran and Islam - which means 'peace'.■Sadly, those that generate hatred of the west and highlight their faults,■misguide followers who are prepared to die for God in a Jihad which is a guaranteed path to heaven. I have met many good Muslims who are saddened by the actions of some (e.g. Osama Bin Laden)■ who misguide■peoples faith in God to the extreme■expression of dying in a Jihad, or in reality, satisfying their own personal hatred of the west. Doesn't this sound similar to what the world has seen before.

While■I lived in the Middle East, my colleagues always criticised the Arabs for their hypocrisy. I took a look at our own society and saw the same. Who them is without sin can cast the first stone - neither society would have been justified to step forward.■There is no doubt, the extremists are being exploited by the fear generated by the few, who blame the west for undermining the way of Islam. Sadly, none of them THINK for themselves. They are human and if they really thought about being■good Muslims, they should turn away from temptation and help others to shun temptation, not generate a hate and desire to destroy the society it comes from.■

Regarding your speculation on Serjs motives, I have a different impression - strengthened by the pieces apparent removal.■Before the disaster, it seemed views of■his kind were "hip" for US artists to hold. In light of the disaster the views have been retracted. Where is the strength of conviction?

[George Halicki]■I think it is appropriate for everyone in America, especially the artists and actors, to be among those leading America in solidarity to strengthen the feeling of brotherhood and helping one another. It is good to see the focus on a positive benefits arising from■this tragedy.■

Your reference to its apparent removal, I believe the original essay was attached to my response. To ensure nothing is lost and I keep everything in context, I decided it is better to reply this way.

Yes, I concur that■it's a cynical impression, but still, discussion of American foreign policy should be seperated■from the tragedy if Americans are to look honestly at it. It's hardly the climate for aggresive■self criticisms to be effectively absorbed. Apart from■my aforementioned■criticisms, the tone alone prevents true reception and thus mass change in attitudes.

[George Halicki]■Yes, the tone was strong, but countering the massive media focus■which only generates anger. I think we have to be careful of the media, as CNN showed Palestinians rejoicing at the■tragedy, but it was Palestinians celebrating something else about 10 years ago.

While I agree this is not the time for aggressive self criticism to be effectively absorbed, it has to be done sometime. However, now is a good time before we go too far. I am not saying the resulting action would not be the same, but we should consider it. Therefore, I cannot see it being separated as the extremists are striking back at who they see as aggressors and destroyers of their faith.■Difficult to absorb and consider as we both agree.■

Look at Bushes answer to "Why do they hate us?" in his speech in congress. There was no mention of Kyoto, or riding roughshod over world opinions, or the situations you mentioned. Rather, it focussed on ideas that would unify the nation and solidify it's resolve. As well as being expected it's also possibly what the nation needs. Unless there is a reasonable internal peace, how will the US respond■with minimal agression?

[George Halicki]■I read Bush's speech■and yes, any leader wants to unify the nation and solidify its resolve. Good on him for doing that.■The stronger the support now, the longer it will take■to dissolve as brave soldiers return home in body bags or people out of work worry about how they will feed their families. I do not envy Mr Bush and I pray for his good guidance of his nation.

I don't quite understand the point of Kyoto, but Mr■Bush has stated his priority of putting■American■businesses■first,■over the■welfare of spaceship Earth where we all live.■■■■

Also do we really understand why Bin Laden did this?■Both you and Serj■are applying western reactionary rationale to his actions. Surely to understand why his followers are willing to lay down their lives in such fashion, we must also understand the thinking relevant to extreme Wahabi Sunni Islam, to which he belongs. In all possiblity a Jihad, the scenario of Islam vs the West is his desire. If this is the case an excessive American response plays right into into his hands.

[George Halicki]■The west is seen as the destroyer of their faith by all the temptations available in western society. While I lived in the Middle East,■ I could see the influence of the west compared to their original lifestyles and a gradual undermining of their society values. The extremists are acting out of fear to protect their old way of life.■In Afghanistan today, professional women are not allowed to work unless it is in a hospital for example. A woman lawyer must now stay at home, her place in the old Islamic way of life.■ Different to what I am accustomed to but we all must respect each others view and way of life.■

As I said earlier, Osama would be better off promoting good Muslim practices of avoiding temptation rather than destroying the society and killing so many innocent people. He intent to destroy the west and all it stands for, was demonstrated not only with the unforgivable act he undertook, but also what■they actually hit.■

Regarding the "Christian response", in light of events such as this, one can realise the enormity of "turning the other cheek." Truly it is so difficult, so contrary to human nature, and yet so necessary for peace -■both between two individuals and between two nations.

[George Halicki]■Agree.■

I hold the hope that the Taliban will yet excercise their option in maintaining peace and agree to the American demands. Indeed peace -■as does conflict -■needs two parties desire of it to exist.

[George Halicki]■Wouldn't it be good if the Americans asked the Talibans to sit down at the table and discuss this with them,■showing them the evidence they have to link Osama to this tragedy. Radical, not really but in reality we can only hope and pray this might just happen.■

Peace■is something I pray for.

[George Halicki]■As do I and no doubt all those who read this.■

[George Halicki]■Perhaps we may meet at Ralph's one day which would be a real pleasure. ■

God bless you too,

Hugh

[George Halicki]■God bless, George

PS I had trouble sending this so I have deleted the long distribution list - please circulate at■your respective discretion

------------------
I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....

A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

09-23-2001, 04:46 PM	#5
Yorick Very Mad Bird Join Date: January 7, 2001 Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam) Age: 52 Posts: 9,246	Georges response: ____________________________________________ Hugh, ■ My turn. This is turning into a bit of a saga and I would really love to meet you and discuss this directly.■I always relish an intelligent conversation and one with you would be most interesting, something lacking where I am at the moment with few English speaking people around. -----Original Message----- From: Hugh Wilson [mailto:hughdwilson@hotmail.com] Sent: 23 September 2001 01:00 George, Thankyou for your response brother. Good health to you. I appreciate your view but I fail to see how■your response■contradicts my reply. Serj's piece contained misinformation and was reliant on pure■speculation rather than fact. There are more than enough "balanced views" around. If it was indeed written the day after, (in which the "bravery of fireman" that you■mentioned was already apparent) it shows a willingness to use a national tragedy as a platform to express political views, manifested in opposition to American foreign policy. [George Halicki]■ While you highlighted some errors in Serj's essay, there can be many facts■brought forward to highlight the US govt's hypocrisy in its foreign policies. I■did not intend to contradict your reply, I only■wanted to ensure■people are aware of the angle he was coming from■which■is worth contemplating.■Whenever any of us assess a situation, we gather all available information and views to ensure we make the best possible decision to go forward. I have heard so much anger, as has my brother in the US about bombing the hell out of them but as my brother says "who are you going to bomb?" and■he gets the reply "I don't know but we should just bomb the s...t out of them". It is this sort of angry reaction we need to temper and calm people before they react. ■ Let's look at the situation unfolding in Pakistan. In an effort to bring Bin Laden to justice,■America has asked for Pakistani help. To repay that help sanctions are being lifted and loans are being made. [George Halicki]■I will not argue that this suits Americas purpose right now. I do need to contemplate on, why America put the sanctions there in the first instance and did they get some form of guarantee on how■arms will be used in the forthcoming sales■that are part of the sanctions being lifted. As in Americas previous support of Iraq then the same weapons and training were used against American soldiers later, a guarantee from Pakistan today does not mean they will abide by it forever. Has America thought this through properly. Could the sanctions being lifted exclude arms deals? If the situation hypothetically occured that the pro-Osama dissidents protesting in Karachi (currently numbering about 15% of the population) were to sieze control of the nation and use their nuclear arsenal against America, would people like Serj proclaim that America's backing and assistance■of Pakistan created the situation? [George Halicki]■No, I do not think they would. I for one and similarly for many I know, would not say that.■ Where people get upset, is at the hypocrisy and counterinsurgent activities of the US govt via the CIA■. A prime example is the back door deal by■US turning the other way while Turkey dealt with their 'Armenian problem'■ as the US gained rights■to the oilfields of what is now Iraq and Saudi after WW1. Why turn their back on this, while they raise it now with China to try and prevent China's entry to the World Trade Organisation. My point was not that American foreign policy was without error, but that those that commit atrocities do so of their own volition. They choose to respond in the fashion they do. There is no justification for that kind of mass murder and■extreme vandalism. The plague of terrorism is an evil that must be denounced and rid from the world if peace is to be attained. This is not to say the solution is war or mass retaliatory destruction, but that an■internationally co-ordinated response preventing the practice must occur.■ [George Halicki]■I fully agree, there is no justification whatsoever for this type of mass murder/vandalism and I do not think Serj agrees with it either. The many people I know are horrified and are appalled at what happened.■ I believe Serj, like many others I know, just want people to realise why people are so angry with the US. While they have reasons, none justifies the actions taken last week.■ I have lived in the Middle East for a number of years in the 80's and to these people, God is everything. The laws of these countries■are purely based on the Koran and Islam - which means 'peace'.■Sadly, those that generate hatred of the west and highlight their faults,■misguide followers who are prepared to die for God in a Jihad which is a guaranteed path to heaven. I have met many good Muslims who are saddened by the actions of some (e.g. Osama Bin Laden)■ who misguide■peoples faith in God to the extreme■expression of dying in a Jihad, or in reality, satisfying their own personal hatred of the west. Doesn't this sound similar to what the world has seen before. While■I lived in the Middle East, my colleagues always criticised the Arabs for their hypocrisy. I took a look at our own society and saw the same. Who them is without sin can cast the first stone - neither society would have been justified to step forward.■There is no doubt, the extremists are being exploited by the fear generated by the few, who blame the west for undermining the way of Islam. Sadly, none of them THINK for themselves. They are human and if they really thought about being■good Muslims, they should turn away from temptation and help others to shun temptation, not generate a hate and desire to destroy the society it comes from.■ Regarding your speculation on Serjs motives, I have a different impression - strengthened by the pieces apparent removal.■Before the disaster, it seemed views of■his kind were "hip" for US artists to hold. In light of the disaster the views have been retracted. Where is the strength of conviction? [George Halicki]■I think it is appropriate for everyone in America, especially the artists and actors, to be among those leading America in solidarity to strengthen the feeling of brotherhood and helping one another. It is good to see the focus on a positive benefits arising from■this tragedy.■ Your reference to its apparent removal, I believe the original essay was attached to my response. To ensure nothing is lost and I keep everything in context, I decided it is better to reply this way. Yes, I concur that■it's a cynical impression, but still, discussion of American foreign policy should be seperated■from the tragedy if Americans are to look honestly at it. It's hardly the climate for aggresive■self criticisms to be effectively absorbed. Apart from■my aforementioned■criticisms, the tone alone prevents true reception and thus mass change in attitudes. [George Halicki]■Yes, the tone was strong, but countering the massive media focus■which only generates anger. I think we have to be careful of the media, as CNN showed Palestinians rejoicing at the■tragedy, but it was Palestinians celebrating something else about 10 years ago. While I agree this is not the time for aggressive self criticism to be effectively absorbed, it has to be done sometime. However, now is a good time before we go too far. I am not saying the resulting action would not be the same, but we should consider it. Therefore, I cannot see it being separated as the extremists are striking back at who they see as aggressors and destroyers of their faith.■Difficult to absorb and consider as we both agree.■ Look at Bushes answer to "Why do they hate us?" in his speech in congress. There was no mention of Kyoto, or riding roughshod over world opinions, or the situations you mentioned. Rather, it focussed on ideas that would unify the nation and solidify it's resolve. As well as being expected it's also possibly what the nation needs. Unless there is a reasonable internal peace, how will the US respond■with minimal agression? [George Halicki]■I read Bush's speech■and yes, any leader wants to unify the nation and solidify its resolve. Good on him for doing that.■The stronger the support now, the longer it will take■to dissolve as brave soldiers return home in body bags or people out of work worry about how they will feed their families. I do not envy Mr Bush and I pray for his good guidance of his nation. I don't quite understand the point of Kyoto, but Mr■Bush has stated his priority of putting■American■businesses■first,■over the■welfare of spaceship Earth where we all live.■■■■ Also do we really understand why Bin Laden did this?■Both you and Serj■are applying western reactionary rationale to his actions. Surely to understand why his followers are willing to lay down their lives in such fashion, we must also understand the thinking relevant to extreme Wahabi Sunni Islam, to which he belongs. In all possiblity a Jihad, the scenario of Islam vs the West is his desire. If this is the case an excessive American response plays right into into his hands. [George Halicki]■The west is seen as the destroyer of their faith by all the temptations available in western society. While I lived in the Middle East,■ I could see the influence of the west compared to their original lifestyles and a gradual undermining of their society values. The extremists are acting out of fear to protect their old way of life.■In Afghanistan today, professional women are not allowed to work unless it is in a hospital for example. A woman lawyer must now stay at home, her place in the old Islamic way of life.■ Different to what I am accustomed to but we all must respect each others view and way of life.■ As I said earlier, Osama would be better off promoting good Muslim practices of avoiding temptation rather than destroying the society and killing so many innocent people. He intent to destroy the west and all it stands for, was demonstrated not only with the unforgivable act he undertook, but also what■they actually hit.■ Regarding the "Christian response", in light of events such as this, one can realise the enormity of "turning the other cheek." Truly it is so difficult, so contrary to human nature, and yet so necessary for peace -■both between two individuals and between two nations. [George Halicki]■Agree.■ I hold the hope that the Taliban will yet excercise their option in maintaining peace and agree to the American demands. Indeed peace -■as does conflict -■needs two parties desire of it to exist. [George Halicki]■Wouldn't it be good if the Americans asked the Talibans to sit down at the table and discuss this with them,■showing them the evidence they have to link Osama to this tragedy. Radical, not really but in reality we can only hope and pray this might just happen.■ Peace■is something I pray for. [George Halicki]■As do I and no doubt all those who read this.■ [George Halicki]■Perhaps we may meet at Ralph's one day which would be a real pleasure. ■ God bless you too, Hugh [George Halicki]■God bless, George PS I had trouble sending this so I have deleted the long distribution list - please circulate at■your respective discretion ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!