Christian Democrats in the United States
Global Issues - AfghanistanWas the U.S. invasion necessary, if any wars are ever necessary? Maybe NATO should have invaded in 1998, after the theo-fascist Taliban started locking up their women, beheading nonconformists and destroying religious art. Those are more honorable intentions than private profit on the "silk pipeline" from Saudi Arabia to China. J did say some wars (and rumors of wars) were necessary, they were the "birth pains." Was this one? Forgiveness is a more difficult struggle than a terrorist jihad or a military occupation, but meanwhile, killing just keeps on killing.
The People won't take getting their buildings smashed. But the FBI strongly suspects a trusted U.S. military scientist of prodding the People's fear after 9/11. If you think the U.S. was tricked into Afghanistan on 9/11, well, then we're really in trouble. We respect the right of free thinkers to consider that possibility. Consider which major powers in the region benefit from the stabilization of this central asian trade, transportation and energy transmission nexus. The question is, why are we paying for it? Or rather, why are we borrowing for it?
The truth will set us all free. All people must be free to share their view of the truth for the truth to become known. Afghanistan was not free. It was a prisoner of many foreign interests using their peoples' pursuit of God to turn them into soldiers for life. The late twentieth century war (world war 3) was not cold. Was a hot war in Afghanistan, Vietnam and everyone else a necessary evil? Look within the heart and find that no evil is necessary. Love is all you need.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Sunday, August 23, 2009
4:03 PM
In the USA we have a tradition from our early days of representative election, through the plebiscite revolution of suffrage for all citizens, in many states, that the poll officer does not check identification, and largely does not contest a person's right to vote. We do not have to present any card sent to us in the mail. All we have to do is sign on our registration lines after confirming the addresses that we registered.
Certainly the allegations that modern voting machines may be easily manipulated deserve the gravest concern as offenses against the intelligence and character of every free American. We can solve our own problems - and we're going to. But we will never get away from the possibility of fraud, no matter how much we escalate the infrastructure that we say will combat fraud. And, we don't need to.
The only community that can wield the power of democracy is one in which everyone believes that everyone will do the right thing. All for one and one for all, regardless of race, vendetta, or heritage. This is why they try to divide Anglo Americans from ciudadanos latinos, Latinos from African Americans, Americans from Americans from Americans. We're all in this together. Either it works or it doesn't. "In God We Trust" is a good metaphor, because we have to trust each other when casting ballots, or there is no point to the exercise. We have to trust that even though we have some bad eggs, people are generally going to do the right thing as best they can figure it out, as long as we're working together.
If the government distrusts people to the point they must be marked with ink, however impermanent, the voting citizens are dehumanizing themselves in the same way nightclubs dehumanize, tokenize and exploit naive young people by pumping their senses like machines, into throwing away their lives and dignity, so those on the fringes may be preyed upon by wolves - with a stamp on the wrist to say that you are better, for a night, than the people shut out of the club. The government is not as much the People as it could be, if the People would snap out of their shock, stand up, take charge and do the right thing.
Democracy only works as long as everyone wants democracy to work, and is willing to give a little to get a little, and to treat everyone with respect. Now, Afghanistan's problems with the recent election will be used as an excuse to say that the Afghan people cannot handle democracy, that the Taleban cannot put aside their anger and their weapons and get along with the rest of the world, and therefore the only solution is a dictatorship of sexual exploitation clothed in garments of priests. Well, to hell with such priests - we are doomed if we are not each and every one a prophet.
Maybe Afghanistan's constitution should enable elections to be contested on legitimate grounds of fraud, who knows. That's for them to work out. I pray that the challengers will not protest simply to throw the country backward into even more chaos and bloodshed. I hope they can see it that way too. It will only work if they want it to work. You Afghans either try to work toward it, all together, or you submit yourselves to slavery, whether you end up as a slave or master. Dipping your finger in ink is not going to help you.
> detail, links and comments >>
indelible ink is mark of beast? but democracy still good...
Many actions by government in recent years - database codes for early computers printed on the Jews killed by the Nazis, for one - could be interpreted as imprinting the "mark of the beast" on the bodies of God's children. A more subtle form of this may be the "indelible ink" for dipping fingers after casting a ballot, to prevent fraud.In the USA we have a tradition from our early days of representative election, through the plebiscite revolution of suffrage for all citizens, in many states, that the poll officer does not check identification, and largely does not contest a person's right to vote. We do not have to present any card sent to us in the mail. All we have to do is sign on our registration lines after confirming the addresses that we registered.
Certainly the allegations that modern voting machines may be easily manipulated deserve the gravest concern as offenses against the intelligence and character of every free American. We can solve our own problems - and we're going to. But we will never get away from the possibility of fraud, no matter how much we escalate the infrastructure that we say will combat fraud. And, we don't need to.
The only community that can wield the power of democracy is one in which everyone believes that everyone will do the right thing. All for one and one for all, regardless of race, vendetta, or heritage. This is why they try to divide Anglo Americans from ciudadanos latinos, Latinos from African Americans, Americans from Americans from Americans. We're all in this together. Either it works or it doesn't. "In God We Trust" is a good metaphor, because we have to trust each other when casting ballots, or there is no point to the exercise. We have to trust that even though we have some bad eggs, people are generally going to do the right thing as best they can figure it out, as long as we're working together.
If the government distrusts people to the point they must be marked with ink, however impermanent, the voting citizens are dehumanizing themselves in the same way nightclubs dehumanize, tokenize and exploit naive young people by pumping their senses like machines, into throwing away their lives and dignity, so those on the fringes may be preyed upon by wolves - with a stamp on the wrist to say that you are better, for a night, than the people shut out of the club. The government is not as much the People as it could be, if the People would snap out of their shock, stand up, take charge and do the right thing.
Democracy only works as long as everyone wants democracy to work, and is willing to give a little to get a little, and to treat everyone with respect. Now, Afghanistan's problems with the recent election will be used as an excuse to say that the Afghan people cannot handle democracy, that the Taleban cannot put aside their anger and their weapons and get along with the rest of the world, and therefore the only solution is a dictatorship of sexual exploitation clothed in garments of priests. Well, to hell with such priests - we are doomed if we are not each and every one a prophet.
Maybe Afghanistan's constitution should enable elections to be contested on legitimate grounds of fraud, who knows. That's for them to work out. I pray that the challengers will not protest simply to throw the country backward into even more chaos and bloodshed. I hope they can see it that way too. It will only work if they want it to work. You Afghans either try to work toward it, all together, or you submit yourselves to slavery, whether you end up as a slave or master. Dipping your finger in ink is not going to help you.
Friday, July 3, 2009
7:11 PM
Thus in the occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980's by Russian troops, the CCCP/USSR took the usual path of thought, the accepted doctrine of military might, not really much different than the 19th century imperialist European traditions against whom communism arose. Through propaganda the Russians turned racial, religious and geographic differences into "reasons" people should live or die, extending presupposed crimes against the state by allegiance to the families and children, to the entire bloodlines of the accused. This is a feudal strategy that worked tactically well for Rome, among other empires of antiquity, and was brought to a horrific plateau by Stalin.
That kind of association is not good for P.R., so to speak. Russia is a nation changed so very much for the better, in the long run, by the freedom they had the courage to express bringing down the Soviet state. Yet Russia still has some big problems with presupposing the need for centralized authority in order to be personally powerful and prosperous. Someday I hope to see some of the Russian Orthodox churches. These orders understand the world is not ours to dictate, that powerful unseen forces act out an unknown drama in our lives, in our dreams and beneath our being. Those memories run deep, and forgiving the Russians cannot be easy for any Afghan who recalls living in that kind of terror.
America at home perceives our effort as its duty to help Afghan people live free from the constant threat of violence for what they choose to believe and express, be that from oppressive states like the Soviet empire, or from spiritually regressive terrorists perverting the beauty of scripture and the creator.
Can you see how many Afghans seeing military supplies come in from Russia might think they are the ones threatened with violence now, for no good reason? Without matching action in the field, our belief is just propaganda, a mass delusion of American people enforced by the state and by manipulating the human tendency to conform. It's a nice idea, it sounds nice, but it cannot be true, if Americans acquiesce to the perceived necessity of continuing to kill innocent people in pursuit of terrorists by dropping bombs in populated areas.
As long as Americans stay the course of traditional military thinking, the Afghan perception of innocent casualties will always be that of a foreign state oppressing ethnic, religious or economic classes as a whole. Communist propaganda was a penultimate hypocrisy, claiming to equalize the status of all people, blatantly oppressing some ethnic, religious and economic classes more than others, and oppressing everyone in the path of the vampyric and intellectually inbreeding communitarian councils. As long as Americans continue a strategy of no-holds-barred violence in their warranted pursuit of lawless murderers and the forces of "organized anarchy," we will continue to step down the path laid down for us by national competitors far more powerful than a handful of terrorist brigands.
We will step straight onto the land mine, and the Russians will claim the Afghans buried it there.
> detail, links and comments >>
Russian supply route a Bad Idea
Russian Warmth once meant the indiscriminate fire of attack helicopters and tanks rendered amoral by the state's assumption of intellectual authority, and rendered palatable to the learned Russian's conscience by the anesthetizing warmth of vodka and acquiescence to fear of the state. The CCCP/USSR meted out merciless punishment upon whole villages. Americans have the power if not always the will to change their government and control their military. The all-volunteer force echoes the spirit in which Americans engage our government, by and large, egregious caricatured thugs of pop entertainment aside. It's all to easy to be lulled into the complacency of war, that the next death, of opponent or ally, is unavoidable. After being suppressed, and after oppressing, cultural norms re-orient around the spinning wheel of fortune which unavoidably seems to have this vicious outcome, and then "statistics" make it an abstract, distant thought, to encourage the mind to accept that violence is necessary and that violence will always go wrong, without judging. Once that thought becomes accepted, it is easier for a state to direct an enraged mob instinct against opposing forces, whether political or military.Thus in the occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980's by Russian troops, the CCCP/USSR took the usual path of thought, the accepted doctrine of military might, not really much different than the 19th century imperialist European traditions against whom communism arose. Through propaganda the Russians turned racial, religious and geographic differences into "reasons" people should live or die, extending presupposed crimes against the state by allegiance to the families and children, to the entire bloodlines of the accused. This is a feudal strategy that worked tactically well for Rome, among other empires of antiquity, and was brought to a horrific plateau by Stalin.
That kind of association is not good for P.R., so to speak. Russia is a nation changed so very much for the better, in the long run, by the freedom they had the courage to express bringing down the Soviet state. Yet Russia still has some big problems with presupposing the need for centralized authority in order to be personally powerful and prosperous. Someday I hope to see some of the Russian Orthodox churches. These orders understand the world is not ours to dictate, that powerful unseen forces act out an unknown drama in our lives, in our dreams and beneath our being. Those memories run deep, and forgiving the Russians cannot be easy for any Afghan who recalls living in that kind of terror.
America at home perceives our effort as its duty to help Afghan people live free from the constant threat of violence for what they choose to believe and express, be that from oppressive states like the Soviet empire, or from spiritually regressive terrorists perverting the beauty of scripture and the creator.
Can you see how many Afghans seeing military supplies come in from Russia might think they are the ones threatened with violence now, for no good reason? Without matching action in the field, our belief is just propaganda, a mass delusion of American people enforced by the state and by manipulating the human tendency to conform. It's a nice idea, it sounds nice, but it cannot be true, if Americans acquiesce to the perceived necessity of continuing to kill innocent people in pursuit of terrorists by dropping bombs in populated areas.
As long as Americans stay the course of traditional military thinking, the Afghan perception of innocent casualties will always be that of a foreign state oppressing ethnic, religious or economic classes as a whole. Communist propaganda was a penultimate hypocrisy, claiming to equalize the status of all people, blatantly oppressing some ethnic, religious and economic classes more than others, and oppressing everyone in the path of the vampyric and intellectually inbreeding communitarian councils. As long as Americans continue a strategy of no-holds-barred violence in their warranted pursuit of lawless murderers and the forces of "organized anarchy," we will continue to step down the path laid down for us by national competitors far more powerful than a handful of terrorist brigands.
We will step straight onto the land mine, and the Russians will claim the Afghans buried it there.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
9:46 AM
That's a good sign in the bureaucracy -- Gates' bureaucratic coup against Rumsfeld and his continued service are going to make the history books, but the innocent men, women and children who were bombed that day will be forgotten, and that cannot be undone even by "integrity" in "leadership." A fact of war is, that most people who are willing to kill are brutes, and they do it badly. They have to stop some fundamental process of empathy within themselves in order to carry out their orders, and the constant stress leads them to stop caring about anyone's lives but their own. No amount of policy is going to change that. Thus, fighting is not the way to stop fighting.
Over here we don't know the victim's names, or how they lived, or who they loved. U.S., Afghan, U.N. and NGO public relations sycophants argue about numbers of people killed. But we'll never know. Some will be forgotten. Some missing may not have died, but given into rage and joined the other side for revenge. Some of the survivors may do the same and join the Afghan forces for revenge. Or they play off both sides. So the fighting does not end.
1) Join state-sanctioned forces, kill and die. 2) Join terrorist forces, kill and die. 3) Play both sides, kill, maybe get rich, and die. 4) Drop out, stop killing, maybe die, but possibly have a happy, long and blessed life.
Of those four choices in the "game theory" set up to corral people into fighting, laying down weapons is promoted as the loser, the only option which is sure suicide of the body and soul -- but this is false. The "winning points" of being able to kill them before they kill you are set up by the rules of the game. The only solution is to reject the game, and #4 is the only way to do that. The option of non-violence is the only one with the highest chance of survival for the individual and for humanity.
If everyone chose #4, the world would be awesome!
> detail, links and comments >>
u.s. dod admits errors in bombing
Robert Gates admitted U.S. troops disobeyed policy, failed to plan the attack and dropped a 2,000 pound bomb without certainty of its target.That's a good sign in the bureaucracy -- Gates' bureaucratic coup against Rumsfeld and his continued service are going to make the history books, but the innocent men, women and children who were bombed that day will be forgotten, and that cannot be undone even by "integrity" in "leadership." A fact of war is, that most people who are willing to kill are brutes, and they do it badly. They have to stop some fundamental process of empathy within themselves in order to carry out their orders, and the constant stress leads them to stop caring about anyone's lives but their own. No amount of policy is going to change that. Thus, fighting is not the way to stop fighting.
Over here we don't know the victim's names, or how they lived, or who they loved. U.S., Afghan, U.N. and NGO public relations sycophants argue about numbers of people killed. But we'll never know. Some will be forgotten. Some missing may not have died, but given into rage and joined the other side for revenge. Some of the survivors may do the same and join the Afghan forces for revenge. Or they play off both sides. So the fighting does not end.
1) Join state-sanctioned forces, kill and die. 2) Join terrorist forces, kill and die. 3) Play both sides, kill, maybe get rich, and die. 4) Drop out, stop killing, maybe die, but possibly have a happy, long and blessed life.
Of those four choices in the "game theory" set up to corral people into fighting, laying down weapons is promoted as the loser, the only option which is sure suicide of the body and soul -- but this is false. The "winning points" of being able to kill them before they kill you are set up by the rules of the game. The only solution is to reject the game, and #4 is the only way to do that. The option of non-violence is the only one with the highest chance of survival for the individual and for humanity.
If everyone chose #4, the world would be awesome!
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
10:16 AM
That report says "over half" of the innocent victims in Afghanistan, numbering 2,200 just last year, were victims of "the other side."
"Over half" in reporting captions probably means 50 to 55%... about even anyway. But that many innocent people a year, so many tens of thousands more than the victims of 9/11, whoever would count that score lower or greater as a measure of victory is criminally insane. The numbers rationalize it, make it a fact in a distant place, our lives insulated from the guilt borne by the name of our nation.
In this Reuters article, the U.S. claims that most of the dead were Taleban fighters. But look at the specifics of the claims. The ground commander said the Taleban fighters were fleeing into two houses, so the air commander bombed both those houses. At no point did U.S. forces know who was already in those houses before the Taleban fighters entered. The Afghan story is quite likely true, that the bombed houses were full of civilians hiding from the fighting.
How can you dig a grave for someone who has been blown to bits by a huge bomb?
In the United States, no police force would drop a bomb to deal with a terrorist or criminal force when innocent hostages are in the building. The message U.S. forces are sending is that third-world people are not good enough for American justice. The message that U.S. military trainers are sending to Afghan and Iraqi military and armed forces is that they can and should be more brutal and destructive than the terrorists. This is the wrong message. By taking on Afghanistan and Iraq as an ideological crusade at the same level as the terrorists, instead of dealing with them as police actions and criminal investigations, United States policy has deliberately slaughtered innocent people when other options have been available. There is no way around this cold fact.
If you look at the total numbers of people, both the U.S.-allied forces and those fighting against them are in the minority, and both persist the minority view that murder of innocent people is justified in pursuit of the guilty.
I am sad the President ordered such an attack. (McCain likely would have ordered it too; it is "company policy.")
There were multiple alternatives. One military alternative at our disposal is to use our satellite resources to track them as they leave, and pursue them covertly on the ground.
Another alternative is to convince the relatives of al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters that the harshest Islamic legal schools of thought are themselves intellectual idols, that worshiping a system of human law rooted in cruelty is far more a worship of idols than cartoons of the prophet of all Islamic schools of thought. Ultimately a cruel legal system is just an excuse for men feel sexual power through violence - trapped by the world, blind and deaf to God's message.
The United States can hardly convince the fighters' relatives of that, if they're all dead because we killed them going after the bad ones. Any idiot can see that.
Beyond that, it's just lies that people tell themselves because they feel trapped in a system, by lust for vengeance, by mechanistic tradition - trapped by an idol. Both sides.
Do people in the U.S. worship our own law and the assumed superiority of our political and religious thought just as much as their "hardliners" worship theirs?
Those who wage this senseless slaughter of innocent people, on both sides, who believe this wholesale sacrifice of the innocent is justified in pursuit of belief, are lying to themselves, or they are lying to everyone, simply to exercise murderous tendencies.
Most of us in the world - your neighbors, near and far, rich and poor, religion or none - do not want to kill anyone, and that's the way life should be.
> detail, links and comments >>
taliban and U.S. are BOTH in the minority, BOTH murder the innocent
Most of the victims of the latest bombing were innocent civilians.That report says "over half" of the innocent victims in Afghanistan, numbering 2,200 just last year, were victims of "the other side."
"Over half" in reporting captions probably means 50 to 55%... about even anyway. But that many innocent people a year, so many tens of thousands more than the victims of 9/11, whoever would count that score lower or greater as a measure of victory is criminally insane. The numbers rationalize it, make it a fact in a distant place, our lives insulated from the guilt borne by the name of our nation.
In this Reuters article, the U.S. claims that most of the dead were Taleban fighters. But look at the specifics of the claims. The ground commander said the Taleban fighters were fleeing into two houses, so the air commander bombed both those houses. At no point did U.S. forces know who was already in those houses before the Taleban fighters entered. The Afghan story is quite likely true, that the bombed houses were full of civilians hiding from the fighting.
[U.S. military spokesman Colonel] Julian also said the massive bombs dropped on the houses would make it difficult to examine any remains. "We blew those buildings apart. There's not going to be much to bury," he said.
How can you dig a grave for someone who has been blown to bits by a huge bomb?
In the United States, no police force would drop a bomb to deal with a terrorist or criminal force when innocent hostages are in the building. The message U.S. forces are sending is that third-world people are not good enough for American justice. The message that U.S. military trainers are sending to Afghan and Iraqi military and armed forces is that they can and should be more brutal and destructive than the terrorists. This is the wrong message. By taking on Afghanistan and Iraq as an ideological crusade at the same level as the terrorists, instead of dealing with them as police actions and criminal investigations, United States policy has deliberately slaughtered innocent people when other options have been available. There is no way around this cold fact.
If you look at the total numbers of people, both the U.S.-allied forces and those fighting against them are in the minority, and both persist the minority view that murder of innocent people is justified in pursuit of the guilty.
I am sad the President ordered such an attack. (McCain likely would have ordered it too; it is "company policy.")
There were multiple alternatives. One military alternative at our disposal is to use our satellite resources to track them as they leave, and pursue them covertly on the ground.
Another alternative is to convince the relatives of al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters that the harshest Islamic legal schools of thought are themselves intellectual idols, that worshiping a system of human law rooted in cruelty is far more a worship of idols than cartoons of the prophet of all Islamic schools of thought. Ultimately a cruel legal system is just an excuse for men feel sexual power through violence - trapped by the world, blind and deaf to God's message.
The United States can hardly convince the fighters' relatives of that, if they're all dead because we killed them going after the bad ones. Any idiot can see that.
Beyond that, it's just lies that people tell themselves because they feel trapped in a system, by lust for vengeance, by mechanistic tradition - trapped by an idol. Both sides.
Do people in the U.S. worship our own law and the assumed superiority of our political and religious thought just as much as their "hardliners" worship theirs?
Those who wage this senseless slaughter of innocent people, on both sides, who believe this wholesale sacrifice of the innocent is justified in pursuit of belief, are lying to themselves, or they are lying to everyone, simply to exercise murderous tendencies.
Most of us in the world - your neighbors, near and far, rich and poor, religion or none - do not want to kill anyone, and that's the way life should be.
Monday, October 20, 2008
10:36 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/3257953/Family-of-murdered-aid-worker-tell-of-anger.html
I think too often, genuinely altruistic Christians are afraid of being preachy, not because they are afraid of retribution, for those who lose their life for Christ receive it back in the future, but they are afraid to preach because of the way the aggressive and hateful politicos of the quasi-Christian religious right come across.
This woman helped disabled children. What did she do to deserve death, even if she did preach the charity and love of Jesus?
The people who killed her, and the Taliban who took credit for this senseless violence deserve not death, but knowledge. They deserve to have their minds and hearts opened by God so they will know themselves and recognize how the shadow of darkness twisted their hearts.
Persevering is the only option for Christians - calm, patient persistence, to lead by example in the way of peace.
Her family asks, what was accomplished by Gayle's death? The Taliban accomplished nothing. They only revealed to the emerging evolution of thought in their nation how backward and despicable they are. They only hurt themselves and their own purpose.
Knowledge is inevitable. Love is inevitable. These are not achieved by the force of our armies, but by people like Gayle Williams.
> detail, links and comments >>
Another martyr of peace
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/20/asia/afghan.phphttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/3257953/Family-of-murdered-aid-worker-tell-of-anger.html
I think too often, genuinely altruistic Christians are afraid of being preachy, not because they are afraid of retribution, for those who lose their life for Christ receive it back in the future, but they are afraid to preach because of the way the aggressive and hateful politicos of the quasi-Christian religious right come across.
This woman helped disabled children. What did she do to deserve death, even if she did preach the charity and love of Jesus?
The people who killed her, and the Taliban who took credit for this senseless violence deserve not death, but knowledge. They deserve to have their minds and hearts opened by God so they will know themselves and recognize how the shadow of darkness twisted their hearts.
Persevering is the only option for Christians - calm, patient persistence, to lead by example in the way of peace.
Her family asks, what was accomplished by Gayle's death? The Taliban accomplished nothing. They only revealed to the emerging evolution of thought in their nation how backward and despicable they are. They only hurt themselves and their own purpose.
Knowledge is inevitable. Love is inevitable. These are not achieved by the force of our armies, but by people like Gayle Williams.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
6:37 PM
That's just the problem of war. It makes no sense when the Taliban kill a bus full of civilians, just as it makes no sense when NATO drops a bomb on a house full of civilians. Neither action serves any goal except the perpetuation of conflict.
This is a reflection of a crisis of leadership. Leaders in the United States, Afghanistan's government and the Taliban leadership are all drawn up in this thirst for blood, too concerned with pleasing the various mobs under their tenuous grasp than with doing the right thing to bring an end to bloodshed and embrace a future in which all people can live in harmony. Is this mostly the Taliban's fault, or mostly NATO's fault, or whose? Despite the atrocious mis-aimed bombings of civilians, I would tend to say it's the Taliban's fault.
However, from actions like this, it's clear that the Taliban leadership, who are probably intelligent people in their own way, themselves have little to no control over the groups of psychotic, drugged-out murderers whom they have recruited in the war. These afghan women and children were not involved in the conflict. Their deaths serve no strategic purpose.
If done as a response to the death of Afghan civilians in aerial bomb attacks, it makes even less sense. If your enemy makes a mistake, you do not emulate the mistake in order to prove your superiority. All that proves is common stupidity.
> detail, links and comments >>
on the other hand, how do you reconcile
On the other hand, how do you reconcile with people who would stop a civilian bus and execute the women and children inside? This is nuts - it does not make sense why anyone would do such a thing.That's just the problem of war. It makes no sense when the Taliban kill a bus full of civilians, just as it makes no sense when NATO drops a bomb on a house full of civilians. Neither action serves any goal except the perpetuation of conflict.
This is a reflection of a crisis of leadership. Leaders in the United States, Afghanistan's government and the Taliban leadership are all drawn up in this thirst for blood, too concerned with pleasing the various mobs under their tenuous grasp than with doing the right thing to bring an end to bloodshed and embrace a future in which all people can live in harmony. Is this mostly the Taliban's fault, or mostly NATO's fault, or whose? Despite the atrocious mis-aimed bombings of civilians, I would tend to say it's the Taliban's fault.
However, from actions like this, it's clear that the Taliban leadership, who are probably intelligent people in their own way, themselves have little to no control over the groups of psychotic, drugged-out murderers whom they have recruited in the war. These afghan women and children were not involved in the conflict. Their deaths serve no strategic purpose.
If done as a response to the death of Afghan civilians in aerial bomb attacks, it makes even less sense. If your enemy makes a mistake, you do not emulate the mistake in order to prove your superiority. All that proves is common stupidity.
Friday, October 10, 2008
5:19 PM
We cannot see everything in black and white, since politics are shades of gray, and war is red. Politicians who pander to people's anger and say that dialog with rivals and enemies is "surrender" are being counter-productive, and lying, since pragmatically they cannot cling to absolutes once they are in office.
In Iraq, "We promoted a reconciliation that involved people we were pretty confident had been shooting at us and killing our soldiers," Gates said. "At the end of the day, that's how most wars end."
Modern wars cannot be won by force. Korea, Vietnam, El Salvador, Iraq I, Afghanistan, Iraq II - none of these wars could be won by force. War is not a hockey game. The only victory is political. The only victory is peace, and to achieve peace, everyone has to stop fighting.
> detail, links and comments >>
reconciliation is not "surrender"
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has offered a very positive step forward necessary to end the war in Afghanistan, by being open to the idea of reconciliation with the Taliban to stop the conflict.We cannot see everything in black and white, since politics are shades of gray, and war is red. Politicians who pander to people's anger and say that dialog with rivals and enemies is "surrender" are being counter-productive, and lying, since pragmatically they cannot cling to absolutes once they are in office.
In Iraq, "We promoted a reconciliation that involved people we were pretty confident had been shooting at us and killing our soldiers," Gates said. "At the end of the day, that's how most wars end."
Modern wars cannot be won by force. Korea, Vietnam, El Salvador, Iraq I, Afghanistan, Iraq II - none of these wars could be won by force. War is not a hockey game. The only victory is political. The only victory is peace, and to achieve peace, everyone has to stop fighting.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
9:53 AM
Pentagon disputes casualties
Pentagon's second investigation - may have been a lot of casualties
We simply cannot go on doing this. What happened? Did the Afghan general not care about civilian casualties? Did he want to make us look like the enemy by directing us to kill his own people without regard for their lives? Did the U.S. forces blindly follow his requests without analyzing the situation? Why would we drop a bomb on civilian houses on a suspicion of someone meeting there, without confirmation, without a direct threat to anyone? Why would anyone do this?
What do any of these questions matter to the people who have just lost their families?
The Pentagon and NATO dispute the reports from the ground, saying only 5 civilians were killed. Maybe that is so, but whether it was 5 or 60 or 3000, does that matter? If the so-called "religious right" says that there is no "moral relativism," then how can anyone claim that 5 innocent deaths are better than 60? You can't have it both ways.
American people cannot any longer bury their head in the sands or wave their hands and claim that "war is hell" or "accidents happen." We are a democracy. We are responsible. If necessary we must rise up and take control of our own government from the hands of the weapons dealers and the snakes who play both sides. But violence will only lead to violence. Violence is futile, but resistance is not. If we all refuse to pay our taxes, what are they going to do? If we all refuse to go to work, what would they do? If we all join hands, march in front of the tanks and our deceived brothers pointing guns at us, and walk into the White House, they can do nothing. We must do this. Some may fall before the guns and tanks of our own countrymen.
The naysayers and deluded servants of the death machine will respond, "give to Caesar that which is Caesar's", or "slaves, obey your masters," that Christians should not be political. But this is not Caesar's Rome, and George Bush is not Caesar or king. This is our country. We are not slaves. We are free people. That is the meaning of Christian Democracy. This is a free country and it belongs to everyone who participates in the spirit of that freedom.
I do not see how, after so many incidents like this, that the people who lost their children and families can see us as any better than the 9/11 terrorists or the Soviets. This must end. If we do not turn 180 degrees around from this path, all the people whose children we have bombed will one day learn how to make nuclear weapons and they'll bomb the hell out of us just for spite. Doesn't that make any sense to anyone?
Am I alone in my horror and revulsion at the war crimes of our President? He is the Commander in Chief. He is responsible. He's got to man up and take responsibility with more than empty words at press releases. He's got to say NO to the puppeteers pulling his strings and do the right thing. Let the cat out of the bag, the genie out of the bottle, and tell the American people the truth about 9/11 and the war!
> detail, links and comments >>
this cannot go on
Initial BBC reportPentagon disputes casualties
Pentagon's second investigation - may have been a lot of casualties
We simply cannot go on doing this. What happened? Did the Afghan general not care about civilian casualties? Did he want to make us look like the enemy by directing us to kill his own people without regard for their lives? Did the U.S. forces blindly follow his requests without analyzing the situation? Why would we drop a bomb on civilian houses on a suspicion of someone meeting there, without confirmation, without a direct threat to anyone? Why would anyone do this?
What do any of these questions matter to the people who have just lost their families?
The Pentagon and NATO dispute the reports from the ground, saying only 5 civilians were killed. Maybe that is so, but whether it was 5 or 60 or 3000, does that matter? If the so-called "religious right" says that there is no "moral relativism," then how can anyone claim that 5 innocent deaths are better than 60? You can't have it both ways.
American people cannot any longer bury their head in the sands or wave their hands and claim that "war is hell" or "accidents happen." We are a democracy. We are responsible. If necessary we must rise up and take control of our own government from the hands of the weapons dealers and the snakes who play both sides. But violence will only lead to violence. Violence is futile, but resistance is not. If we all refuse to pay our taxes, what are they going to do? If we all refuse to go to work, what would they do? If we all join hands, march in front of the tanks and our deceived brothers pointing guns at us, and walk into the White House, they can do nothing. We must do this. Some may fall before the guns and tanks of our own countrymen.
The naysayers and deluded servants of the death machine will respond, "give to Caesar that which is Caesar's", or "slaves, obey your masters," that Christians should not be political. But this is not Caesar's Rome, and George Bush is not Caesar or king. This is our country. We are not slaves. We are free people. That is the meaning of Christian Democracy. This is a free country and it belongs to everyone who participates in the spirit of that freedom.
I do not see how, after so many incidents like this, that the people who lost their children and families can see us as any better than the 9/11 terrorists or the Soviets. This must end. If we do not turn 180 degrees around from this path, all the people whose children we have bombed will one day learn how to make nuclear weapons and they'll bomb the hell out of us just for spite. Doesn't that make any sense to anyone?
Am I alone in my horror and revulsion at the war crimes of our President? He is the Commander in Chief. He is responsible. He's got to man up and take responsibility with more than empty words at press releases. He's got to say NO to the puppeteers pulling his strings and do the right thing. Let the cat out of the bag, the genie out of the bottle, and tell the American people the truth about 9/11 and the war!
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
7:57 PM
In theory, we can all will our way out of war. If the war machine were to protect us against an extraterrestrial or extradimensional force, the People should be told, straight up, no bull. If that is not a threat, we should all stop killing. It will take a lot. Forgiveness is a more difficult struggle than a terrorist jihad or a military occupation, but meanwhile, killing just keeps on killing.
The People won't take getting their buildings smashed. But the FBI strongly suspects a trusted U.S. military scientist of prodding the People's fear after 9/11. If you think the U.S. was tricked into Afghanistan on 9/11, well, then we're really in trouble. We respect the right of free thinkers to consider that possibility. Consider which major powers in the region benefit from the stabilization of this central asian trade, transportation and energy transmission nexus. The question is, why are we paying for it? Or rather, why are we borrowing for it?
The truth will set us all free. All people must be free to share their view of the truth for the truth to become known. Afghanistan was not free. It was a prisoner of many foreign interests using their peoples' pursuit of God to turn them into soldiers for life. The late twentieth century war (world war 3) was not cold. Was the hot war in Afghanistan, Vietnam and everywhere else a necessary evil? Look within the heart and find that no evil is necessary. Love is all you need.
> detail, links and comments >>
love really is all you need
J did say some wars (and rumors of wars) were necessary, they were the "birth pains." Was this one?In theory, we can all will our way out of war. If the war machine were to protect us against an extraterrestrial or extradimensional force, the People should be told, straight up, no bull. If that is not a threat, we should all stop killing. It will take a lot. Forgiveness is a more difficult struggle than a terrorist jihad or a military occupation, but meanwhile, killing just keeps on killing.
The People won't take getting their buildings smashed. But the FBI strongly suspects a trusted U.S. military scientist of prodding the People's fear after 9/11. If you think the U.S. was tricked into Afghanistan on 9/11, well, then we're really in trouble. We respect the right of free thinkers to consider that possibility. Consider which major powers in the region benefit from the stabilization of this central asian trade, transportation and energy transmission nexus. The question is, why are we paying for it? Or rather, why are we borrowing for it?
The truth will set us all free. All people must be free to share their view of the truth for the truth to become known. Afghanistan was not free. It was a prisoner of many foreign interests using their peoples' pursuit of God to turn them into soldiers for life. The late twentieth century war (world war 3) was not cold. Was the hot war in Afghanistan, Vietnam and everywhere else a necessary evil? Look within the heart and find that no evil is necessary. Love is all you need.
Friday, August 3, 2007
7:25 AM
> detail, links and comments >>
korean missionary hostages
The Korean missionaries held hostage by the Taliban are saints of peace... pray for them. They have far more courage that I. I chant hollow mantras of Christianity and hide in my room from a cruel world — they went into the heart of violence without weapons, without anger, to show compassion to their captors. No number of bombs or guns will melt the heart of Islamic extremists, but only compassion and peaceful resistance exercised by free will. If the Taliban kill the hostages, the hostages will be martyrs, in the true spirit of the word, not in the spirit of twisted anger and violence that both suicide bombers and western soldiers share. These men and women have far more courage than any soldier or terrorist. They dared to risk their lives to bring the Word to where it is not, to bring light into darkness. They may pay the price of their lives, and sadly, they may even be forgotten for it, but God will never forget, and they have already made a difference. We should follow them.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
7:00 PM
If Saudi Arabia and Iraq build a pipeline through Afghanistan to China, the world's largest emerging energy market, it will have to go through Iran as well.
So the sentiment that the U.S. is fighting for its oil rights... not as much as it fights for Chinese oil rights... another distraction from the real issue.
Being at the center of the "Silk Pipeline" is seen as a profitable position... but profitable for who? Very profitable for very few.
Profitable for the American people? Doubtful. The key word in "Neo-Con" is CON, stupid. Does anyone else get the feeling they are going to skip town and leave us with the bill?
Hmmm, Osama Bin Laden, Saudi, tricks the Taliban, tricks the hijackers by manipulating their religion, tricks the United States into invading to get the Taliban out of the way. Hmmm, Bin Laden, big Saudi oil family who had deals with Bush family oil. Hmmm. Well, there are some connections, and a lot of money that winds up in the pockets of everyone involved. People have been convicted on less. If there were a Bush conspiracy, that would be treason, wouldn't it? It is, at the least, a treasonous profit.
Forget impeachment. If there were a Bush/Bin Laden conspiracy, that would mean a firing squad for good ol' G.W.B., but I am against the death penalty -- we do not want to unleash something like the French revolution, where the people got out of control in their revenge for the theft of their common wealth.
> detail, links and comments >>
khyber pass pipeline... iran the only obstacle
I think Iran is just haggling for a fair price. They use the macho wife-beater image to manipulate and control a part of the male populace that is angry and uneducated.If Saudi Arabia and Iraq build a pipeline through Afghanistan to China, the world's largest emerging energy market, it will have to go through Iran as well.
So the sentiment that the U.S. is fighting for its oil rights... not as much as it fights for Chinese oil rights... another distraction from the real issue.
Being at the center of the "Silk Pipeline" is seen as a profitable position... but profitable for who? Very profitable for very few.
Profitable for the American people? Doubtful. The key word in "Neo-Con" is CON, stupid. Does anyone else get the feeling they are going to skip town and leave us with the bill?
Hmmm, Osama Bin Laden, Saudi, tricks the Taliban, tricks the hijackers by manipulating their religion, tricks the United States into invading to get the Taliban out of the way. Hmmm, Bin Laden, big Saudi oil family who had deals with Bush family oil. Hmmm. Well, there are some connections, and a lot of money that winds up in the pockets of everyone involved. People have been convicted on less. If there were a Bush conspiracy, that would be treason, wouldn't it? It is, at the least, a treasonous profit.
Forget impeachment. If there were a Bush/Bin Laden conspiracy, that would mean a firing squad for good ol' G.W.B., but I am against the death penalty -- we do not want to unleash something like the French revolution, where the people got out of control in their revenge for the theft of their common wealth.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
1:00 PM
Maybe most people in the government were not in favor of importing cocaine. But when you start that kind of transportation corridor with an "official" security layer that can be manipulated by anyone who can pull the levers, the drugs flow. So it's no surprise that heroin use has gone up in the U.S.
Guess who suffers between both fronts on the war on drugs — America's kids, especially any who have been divided from their parents.
Afghanistan grows a lot of opium poppies. This is a direct problem for Americans. We should focus on healing the emotional and economic rifts that increase demand, as well as supply-side efforts to eradicate poppies, but there's only so much you can do when people have no other economic industry available.
Afghanistan also grows a lot of marijuana. Face it — this really isn't as much of a problem for Americans.
Afghanistan could set an example to the middle-eastern world and oil-producing nations everywhere, by starting a hemp manufacturing industry. Would you rather they export it as hashish, or as deck chairs, particle board, paper and clothes?
> detail, links and comments >>
afghanistan's drugs and a new deal for jobs
Do you think it's any coincidence that crack cocaine and military guns hit the streets of America in 1983 at the same time as the latin American contra-communist war funded by weapons sales to Iran?Maybe most people in the government were not in favor of importing cocaine. But when you start that kind of transportation corridor with an "official" security layer that can be manipulated by anyone who can pull the levers, the drugs flow. So it's no surprise that heroin use has gone up in the U.S.
Guess who suffers between both fronts on the war on drugs — America's kids, especially any who have been divided from their parents.
Afghanistan grows a lot of opium poppies. This is a direct problem for Americans. We should focus on healing the emotional and economic rifts that increase demand, as well as supply-side efforts to eradicate poppies, but there's only so much you can do when people have no other economic industry available.
Afghanistan also grows a lot of marijuana. Face it — this really isn't as much of a problem for Americans.
Afghanistan could set an example to the middle-eastern world and oil-producing nations everywhere, by starting a hemp manufacturing industry. Would you rather they export it as hashish, or as deck chairs, particle board, paper and clothes?
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
6:54 PM
> detail, links and comments >>
Afghanistan
Afghanistan was probably necessary. Maybe we should have done it earlier, when they started locking up their women and beheading nonconformists. If you think the U.S. was played in Afghanistan and on 9/11, well, then we're really in trouble. We respect the right of free thinkers to consider that possibility. Consider which major powers in the region benefit from the stabilization of this central asian trade, transportation and energy transmission nexus. The question is, why are we paying for it? Or rather, why are we borrowing for it?Archives May 2007 / August 2007 / August 2008 / October 2008 / May 2009 / June 2009 / July 2009 / August 2009 /