The war in Iraq is over THOUGHTS?

[Kevin Green]

The issue with Nuclear Weapons is not about people having them. Its about motivating them not to use them.

America might need to learn to say sorry.

How about lifting all the sanctions and working on opening lines of trade? Nothing dampens religious ferver and rampant extremism like soft living and consumerism. People are less inclined to make a habbit of plotting when they are fucking round on an Iphone or discussing deep international issues on a Jiu Jitsu forum at 2:58 in the morning.

A hug, iphones and jiu jitsu for world peace.. I love it

[Tim Elliott]

Well, Im glad we sorted that out then. Only took five pages. Dont know what all the fuss was about.

[ifreez]

1) There is a definitive correlation between Iraq and Afghanistan as far as terrroism goes. There is a link for training and funding.

2) However, the biggest problems are a culture, society, and doctrine that is over 2000 years old in the near and middle east. We can't expect cultural norms and beliefs to be changed in a decade, or even two decades. Without education, an exposure and participation to the rest of the world, and a significant political and cultural shift in the near and middle east.

Interesting.

1) But, there are excessive links with many trading countries. The US currently funds the Taliban through money to Pakistan. The US funded a fully supported Saddam during the 80s, and they gave him the biological weapons they knew he had, and gave him more support after he committed horrible acts. During those times, could Turkey, Russia or Iran use that as an excuse to not only invade US interests abroad, but the vast array of countries that traded with the US? Remember, it is indisputable that the US funded problematic countries, and the links are clearly there.

Remember the Iran contra affair?? The only difference is Bush Sr, saw things differently than Reagan.

And as stated above, there are stronger links between Pakistan, an ally, and the Tiliban, than there are between Iraq and Afganistan. Why don't we invade Pakistan? This whole idea that magnifies 'links' to justify wars is bullshit created by politicians to sell the wars to the American people (they have people on pay rolls whose job it is to think about how to do this).

If we were to go on the idea that focuses on 'links' between hostile regimes and the other countries that fund them, we would be at war with half the western hemisphere before we even get to the middle east. It is because the general public doesn't know any better that when media says, "such and such is linked to such and such", they believe that no other problematic link exist, but those type of money trails are all over the place.

2) The following is a very shorthanded general sense.

The idea to educate another country has its problems. It can sometimes implicitly communicate that they are lessor than us, and that is not always the case. It has been a fact throughout history that the more powerful country can reshape other peoples of varying smaller cultures, and they do for no other reason, ultimately, than to create safety for its own (the bigger power's) citizens, by taking away perceptual power away from the conquered peoples.

Cultural practices are like a language. You only master them over time, and they communicate (implicitly) your command of that culture. Think about going to the 'hood', and trying to make life. The problem is you would need to spend extra energy on cocking your ears and eyes, just to survive, while the master of that 'language' will perpetually have you in a vulnerable state, and it'll be too easy to either catch you off balance, or take away your balance (kind of like how Jiu Jitsu is a language). Rigan Machado once said, the ground is an ocean, I am the shark, and you can't swim. All languages, whether linguistic, symbolic, or gestural are like this.

Once someone gives up their customs and ways for a dominating country, they lose tremendous power over their own personal experiences and, more crucially, the interpretation of those experiences. This is why when Japan invaded Korea, they forbid Koreans to speak their language -- it gave the invaders colossal, monumental power over their captive -- and all great invaders, who are students of history, know and deploy this strategy (remember, we are going beyond linguistic language, and into symbolic and gestural language)

A culture, or you could describe it as a social synergy, takes years of intimate relations, relations within one's social setting, for one to fully absorb the subtle, nuanced, intricate manners and rules (which include agreeing with the environment's subjective moral base).

In other words, to share a worldview with people within your physical proximity is a phenomenology that comes from within. There are internal reasons why we 'agree' wit one's social setting. This aspiration to 'agree' with those close to us is fueled by our nurturing instinct -- to maintain social relations with others whom are important to us (of course it takes a secondary thought to 'disagree' (deviate), and we do so after we consider the dangers of diverting from a common line of thought. We've all said, "fuck this shit", and we proceed to disagree with someone, which we know might lead to an argument, or a lost friend -- which is why some people don't argue politics).

We 'agree' for no other reason than we share a social space, and less conflict is the easiest way to do so. Those that don't follow the 'rules' are either physically banished (jailed for breaking laws), or ideologically banished (anything from being a nerd, uncool, or you say in a crowd of progressives that you don't like gay people, or that you like to rip off your friends).

Back to the topic. When you say educate, are you speaking of an education from within the community, or from without? This is huge.

In the colonial days, the conquerors set up generals to oversee the parts of Africa that they colonized. Over many years, this installed a mindset of inferiority for the colonized peoples. They colonized people started to aspire to be like the European in manners and class structure, and this is what is at issue with the middle east, but in a more subtle, ideological manner.

Anyone who has studies political history knows of this danger, and this is what people of conquered countries resist. It is not the loss of their culture that they find scary, because no culture lasts forever, and cultures are always changing. We can see this easily if we compare 1920, or 1960s America to today. Or 1950s Bollywood to Bollywood currently, or even China in the 1980s to the present day China.

The thing they resist most, and rightfully so, is another culture telling them, even sometimes demanding (and sometime mere military presence indicates this) that they must change to *our* way of life. Instinctively they know this sets up a relationship where they are no longer masters of their world or their house, but a total stranger will have symbolic power over them, and in that metaphoric type of cultural language, it will give us (the west) the advantage over them, where we will teach them the 'only' ways of life. They will be lost for a while, as strangers in their own home, obediently asking the 'master' (a outside culture) if this way or that way is the right way to do so (analogy). If I were that culture, this would sounds scary to me.

And that's what war has always been about -- to get to the basics of things, the best way to protect our boarders is if the whole world was as one family, one culture without cultural and/or lifestyle disagreements. This is what the left and right fight about. This is why communism was such a threat. I mean, think about it. Just let them (the communists) live they way they want, right? Nope, it's like a disease, if it exists, it can spread, so we must wipe it out. And this is what G.W. Bush meant when he wants to spread democracy around the world.

The only problem is that with the world and its diverse population, don't want to rely on strangers to break them down and rebuild them, which means they *will* be inferior in the process. They, reverting to an instinctive sense of survival, want to be the master of their own house. They don't want you to tell them how their house should function.

And that instinctive trait creates huge problems for cultural progression, and for cultural reshaping.

This is one of the many reasons why the war was/is such as struggle, and the middle east resists the US presence.

Sorry for being so long winded.

[Kevin Green]

First - I have a headache from reading so much

Second: I wanna comment on one point - you are 100% correct with the "educate" comment. Much like early settlers did with the Native Americans. They used terms like "civilize" them...which implies they are not civilized. They coined the term "savage" when talking about them...this all to support their thought of being superior. One look into anciet Native American culture shows this attitude to be far from correct. The early Native Americans were very sophisticated and cultured...hell, Ben Franklin stole democracy and its idea from them...so this type of rhetoric has always been used to paint our enemies (percevied or real) in a negative light in order to justify their poor treatment...

[DesiCuellar]

It doesn't mean a thing to me. My best friend will be deployed to Iraq in February. He's training for it right now.

[Kevin Green]

It doesn't mean a thing to me. My best friend will be deployed to Iraq in February. He's training for it right now.

Tell him to be safe....

[ifreez]

I have to say for one, I am pleasingly suprised at the intellectual conversation of this thread...

I also agree with you.. The day of the "military Industrial Complex" have come to an end and do not boost the economy as they did in the past. The "Prison Industrial Complex" however is alive and well. Politicians use the threat of "crime: and the solution of "more prisons" and "more and stricter law and sentencing" of non-violent offenders as the"solution". Sorry about all the qutes
That being said, the "war on drugs" and the "three strikes your out" rule are perfect examples. Again our fears or spun by the 1% of America that owns the media and political agenda.

But I disgress...Im interested now to see what you all feel about the Mosque being proposed for construction near the 911 site in NY. Anyone?

Now, that is scary chit! Not just the prison industrial complex and the idea of the scary 'other', whether it be cultural, or juvenile, or just for strategic control of society -- making people more afraid of being locked up by swelling prison ranks so they (citizens) stay within the law, it is all just rule by fear.

But, what more scary are the special interests that fund radical, bias media outlets, those that skew the truth for political gain. It's a clash between media ethics and the first amendment, the right to lie. Where the first amendment, whether a lie or truth, wins every time. Of course it's a slippery slope when it comes to slander, but when a news outlet specifically calls a section of its programming 'opinion' (under the disguise of news), all is fair game.

And about the mosque, I feel that before sept 11, no worries, after sept 11, big problems. One thing is for sure, we can no longer say, "they hate us for our freedoms".

[Clayton]

All the Republicans I talk to support the war. But they sure as hell won't join the forces.

I guess you can call me a republican...well, more independent conservative and I have proudly served since 1997.

[michael craig]

i hear they are looking for over 8000 people to hire for private security firms for iraq..so its not tat safe yet

[Ryan Cook]

The idea that war stimulates the economy started with WWII, because at that time, it did.

No it didn't. What saved the economy were the austerity measures (i.e. rationing) and shift towards saving among families. Also, American people bought up huge portions of government debt instead of having it monetized by the Fed or selling it to the chinese.

I deal with GOV contracts and money everyday....we have the bank roll...trust me.

No we don't. Just because digits are showing up on computers doesn't mean that there is any value there. Shit, I have a scanner and a color printer... I could be the federal government and the Federal Reserve combined.