Cluster Bombs and Food Packages

[Gaelic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


You have been gone too long

The only slight disagreement I have is with the first sentance of your last point.

#6. "...in war civilians sometimes die."


I disagree not with the idea, but the wording because "in war, civilians always die." It can't be prevented.

---

Ah! Totally true! I appreciate your correction, I agree completely. It bites, but it is true.

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaelic:


Ah! Totally true! I appreciate your correction, I agree completely. It bites, but it is true.

---

Gaelic and RonnB - I'm not going to reply to the many points both you quys have raised, for the simple reason that they've all been made before, ad infinitum, over the past six weeks, and I and others have replied to them all before... I really don't see any point in engaging in yet another circular argument - besides which, it's boring.

Just one thing, Gaelic - re your point on the same colour of the cluster bombs and the food parcels - obviously the same person wouldn't be responsible for both. Does the word 'co-ordination' mean anything to anybody, perchance?

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah:


Gaelic and RonnB - I'm not going to reply to the many points both you quys have raised, for the simple reason that they've all been made before, ad infinitum, over the past six weeks, and I and others have replied to them all before... I really don't see any point in engaging in yet another circular argument - besides which, it's boring.

Just one thing, Gaelic - re your point on the same colour of the cluster bombs and the food parcels - obviously the same person wouldn't be responsible for both. Does the word 'co-ordination' mean anything to anybody, perchance?

---

They can be as boring to me as to you SC, but if people ask...

Co-ordination does mean something to me, as I'm sure it does to Gaelic, in the same way "human error" means something.

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

[Gaelic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah:


Just one thing, Gaelic - re your point on the same colour of the cluster bombs and the food parcels - obviously the same person wouldn't be responsible for both. Does the word 'co-ordination' mean anything to anybody, perchance?

---

Certainly it does, and certainly this point was not coordinated before the operation. I just wanted to point out that the speculation that perhaps this was done intentionally is simply ludicrous. The US military is not run by a bunch of Mr. Burns clones saying "Excellent Smithers! Make them all the same color, muahahahaha!" The coloring was a mistake and it was corrected immediatly upon discovery, at what I am sure was no small price. Our military has not and will not intentionally harm civilians. Assertions to the contrary are born out of political cry baby-ing rather than reality.

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


They can be as boring to me as to you SC, but if people ask...

Co-ordination does mean something to me, as I'm sure it does to Gaelic, just as the term "human error" does.

---

Right, well, we're never going to agree on the colours issue, so I guess we may as well let it go.

On the other points, I get a little tired of saying the same thing over again in different ways, but here goes...

As I've just said on another thread on here, bombing hell out of Afghanistan is not going to destroy the al-quaida network. Due to the way it is constructed - i.e. many cells in many different countries, made up of different organisations some of whom only join with bin Laden to carry out a specific mission and then disappear from view again, funded from every which way, - this is a resilient beast we are talking about here. I don't understand why the US government thinks laying waste to the Taliban is going to seriously hurt the network. It is not the Taliban who have power over the network, but the other way round. All we are doing is rallying yet more recruits to the terrorist course, by confirming all their worst fears about the 'bullying' west, who not only continue to prop up some pretty shit regimes in the ME, but are now bombing a Muslim country again to boot.

I am not an apologist for lousy human rights abusive Muslim governments. But I do not think US and British actions in Afghanistan are going to solve matters with regard to terrorism. You say, what are we supposed to do if not this? It's a very pertinent question. For myself, I would have preferred to see action taken on an international basis, as part of a properly planned and thought out program against worldwide terrorism, including dialogue with Muslim countries on human rights, terrorism, aid etc.

An agenda for global peace is what I believe we need, looking at cause, effect and solution. You wait, we'll be forced to come to it in the end, after Muslim states are decimated by civil war and terrorism flourishes yet further in reponse to perceived and actual injustice. We may even come to world war three, the route that we're currently travelling, getting populations all over the Muslim world stirred up, and further destabalising an already delicate Arab world situation. But I hope not, by all the different names for god that there are in the world.

What we see in Afghanistan is the pus on the end of the global boil, the result of what happens when a fast growing population of six billion and rising are obsessed with the differences between themselves, rather than the things that make us all the same. When we all insist, - Muslims, Christians and other denominations - on being 'right' rather than being 'one way to possible truth'. When our societies focus on agression and competitiveness as being praiseworthy characteristics that will get us 'ahead', rather than community, caring and sharing, and by that I mean across borders.

When we make profit our god, and forget about ethics, as with the sale of arms, dangerous chemicals, products and substances that harm and kill...

When we do all these things, we move further towards building a world too terrible to think about. Parts of it are already in place.

We never even thought seriously about possible peaceful solutions to the terrorist problem. Where is the international body that we need to set up, having members from all world countries?

Terrorism has many causes. Yes, there are those in the world who love violence for its own sake. We have those in the west, too. Not all soldiers join the army to 'keep the peace'! Many love the idea of the thrill of war.

We also have what many would call 'the enemy within'. All those members of our society, the number growing day by day, who don't relate to our society and its members, who are full of hatred for that society, and who take action against it. These people are called 'criminals' and the seriousness of their actions against society is hugely variable from person to person. The majority of those people are made, rather than born, from the environment that formed them, and the beliefs they were taught/encouraged to hold about both themselves and the world outside them. Generally, their actions do not endanger 6,000 people at a time - but they to, for whatever reason, are filled with hatred.

Whilst the world remains as unequal in giving as it currently is today, with some having and some not having, anger, fury and despair will reign. It is wrong that a child in one part of the world should be born into poverty, disease and a short painful life, never knowing a full belly, whilst another, just as cute, just as deserving, gets everything she/he wants, and grows up fat and spoilt, complaining that his every whim is not met.

I believe that most who become terrorists do so because they are angry and desperate. And no, I am not saying it is all America's fault, or all Britain's fault that these people are angry and desperate. But we have played our part, playing our colonial games, our oil games throughout the middle east, as throughout the world. We have and are supporting regimes which abuse their own people. We sell them arms. We sell them arms. *We sell them arms*. What do you want?

Have you ever heard the phrase, what goes around comes around? Countries who make billions each year from arms and arms related services - it's only logical we might get a little of that back in our faces sometime. And before you all start jumping on me for that comment, for pity's sake *think about it* !!!! He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword. Ever heard that one? This foul trade goes on and on and on. I believe it is the business of all of us who claim to love either god, or our fellow man/woman/child or anyone at all, to help stop it, in whatever way we can.

Global problems need global solutions. Governments needs to start acting collectively. And if those of us who believe in peaceful solutions are to 'encourage* governments to act peacefully and with long term aims in view, we need to play our part as individuals, and put our money, and our actions, where our mouths are.

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Silver Cheetah ]

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaelic:


Certainly it does, and certainly this point was not coordinated before the operation. I just wanted to point out that the speculation that perhaps this was done intentionally is simply ludicrous. The US military is not run by a bunch of Mr. Burns clones saying "Excellent Smithers! Make them all the same color, muahahahaha!" The coloring was a mistake and it was corrected immediatly upon discovery, at what I am sure was no small price. Our military has not and will not intentionally harm civilians. Assertions to the contrary are born out of political cry baby-ing rather than reality.

---

Well of course it was a mistake. One hell of a mistake. I have not suggested otherwise.

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Silver Cheetah ]

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah:


Well of course it was a mistake. One hell of a mistake. I have not suggested otherwise.

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Silver Cheetah ]

---

And I agree it was a mistake, but the implication is that because it happened it somehow justifies your POV and it doesn't.

I respect your POV, but this doesn't validate it, even in a small way.

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:



And I agree it was a mistake, but the implication is that because it happened it somehow justifies your POV and it doesn't.

I respect your POV, but this doesn't validate it, even in a small way.

---

Ron, I think I'm right and you think you are right. Fair enough! I'm quite happy to leave this, okay?

(That doesn't mean that I accept your point of view, or think it is valid. hehe..)

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Silver Cheetah ]

[Ronn_Bman]

You want me don't you?

*tries to get control of himself*

Agreed!

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:
You want me don't you?

*tries to get control of himself*

Agreed!

---

hehe I see your agenda, Ronn_B, you want mother AND daughter....

You might be able to bite it off, - the question is, can you chew it??

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Silver Cheetah ]