Anti-War on the Web

[jonb]

[quote author=balls link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#19 date=03/24/03 at 14:10:07]
The Crow and Pawnee were victims of Sioux unilateral aggression.[/quote]

Oh? Plains Indians had ritualized combat. "Death" was just being struck four times with a coup stick. What if I counted every time a white man said "I'm going to kill you."

Now, let's look at the Western way of war. Rape, mass murder, scalping...On the plus side, the bounty hunters used all of the Indian, using the skin for leather, the spine for buttons, the skull to divine racial theories using the most advanced methods of phrenology, and the rest of the bones for knives and combs. The muscle meat was of course used for food, while the organs were used for dog food. (See? I can have a sense of humor.)

 

[jonb]

You see, balls, if you take someone at their word, not asking what they mean...Well, you get The Fierce People, a book that claims the Yanomamo annually kill more than the entire population of the Amazon.

 

[13788]

BIGBOYDAVE: [quote author=mindseye link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#18 date=03/24/03 at 11:35:56]

Why not ask the three permanent chairs on the UN Security Council who said just that?

[/quote]
Maybe you should also ask the rest of the members why they didn't support those three. Those three couldn't even buy, beg or barter there support so the original 3 withdrew the resolution and went to War anyway. Those other Nations never saw the need or the Proof to justify the invasion of another country "this time". Even under tremendous pressure they would not cave in to the dictation of powerfull governments including the "RULER of The Free World"

 

[Pecker]

BBDave - you seem to have forgotten Resolution 1441, which was passed UNANIMOUSLY.

Actually, no more resolutions are needed - just the guts to back that one up.

Pecker

 

[13788]

balls: [quote author=jonb link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#20 date=03/24/03 at 15:04:20]

Oh? Plains Indians had ritualized combat. "Death" was just being struck four times with a coup stick. What if I counted every time a white man said "I'm going to kill you."

Now, let's look at the Western way of war. Rape, mass murder, scalping...On the plus side, the bounty hunters used all of the Indian, using the skin for leather, the spine for buttons, the skull to divine racial theories using the most advanced methods of phrenology, and the rest of the bones for knives and combs. The muscle meat was of course used for food, while the organs were used for dog food. (See? I can have a sense of humor.)[/quote]
I agree with your description of death being struck four times with a coup stick. That applied to tribes other than the Crow and Pawnee, their earthly enemies. One of the primary purposes of fighting the Crow and Pawnee was to destroy them, and scalp them. Scalping made it so the Crow and Pawnee were not whole, which means they were unable to enter the spirit world. This was a good thing because the Sioux did not want to run into them in the spirit world.
If you weren’t Crow and Pawnee and went to battle with them it was a very civilized affair and the loss of life was minimal.

 

[13788]

balls: [quote author=jonb link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#21 date=03/24/03 at 15:09:11]You see, balls, if you take someone at their word, not asking what they mean...Well, you get The Fierce People, a book that claims the Yanomamo annually kill more than the entire population of the Amazon.[/quote]
I don't follow you.

 

[13788]

mindseye: [quote author=BIGBOYDAVE link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#22 date=03/24/03 at 21:09:33]
Maybe you should also ask the rest of the members why they didn't support those three. Those three couldn't even buy, beg or barter there support so the original 3 withdrew the resolution and went to War anyway. Those other Nations never saw the need or the Proof to justify the invasion of another country "this time". Even under tremendous pressure they would not cave in to the dictation of  powerfull governments including the "RULER of The Free World"[/quote]

Dave, I think you've misread my post. There are five permanent members of the UN Security Council. Three of them, China, Russia, and France opposed military action at this time; only the US and UK supported it.

You mention the 'original 3' as going to war -- I'm not sure if you were including Spain, but Spain is not a permanent chair on the Council, and certainly wasn't one of the three I described.


[quote author=bilbobagginsx;link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#23 date=03/25/03 at 17:58:33]BBDave - you seem to have forgotten Resolution 1441, which was passed UNANIMOUSLY.

Actually, no more resolutions are needed - just the guts to back that one up.
[/quote]

For those who are interested, here is the text of Resolution 1441, along with critical commentary on the nature of the resolution.

Resolution 1441 was originally proposed over a month earlier by the US. The original draft of the resolution explicitly promised military force if Iraq did not comply with its terms.

The original draft did not pass, and after weeks of negotiation, a modified version was passed removing the explicit reference to military force and instead promising only "serious consequences".

Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov comments on the negotiations between the original failed draft of the resolution and the toned-down version which later passed. He said that the sponsors of the resolution, US and UK, confirmed during negotiations that automatic use of force would not be a consequence of the resolution.

Colombian Ambassador Alfonso Valdivieso made the case even more strongly: "[Resolution 1441] is not, nor could be, a resolution authorizing the use of force."

The 'guts' you speak of, Pecker, were removed from the resolution back in November. Resolution 1441 would not have passed (and in fact, did not pass) with a clause authorizing unilateral military action.

 

[jay_too]

shame on you mindseye...

introducing facts to this discussion. ;D

jay

 

[jay_too]

I do not think that many in the west think Saddam is a good and valiant leader. He has modeled his regime on Stalin; Saddam adopted the cult of personality, the use of state terrorism to destroy dissent, and the abrogation of a code of law.

The question is what is the international law that was violated and caused the U.S. to invade and seek regime change. Support for al Queda? Unfortunately, the Bush administration has not been able to demonstrate a strong connection between a corrupt, secular government and the religious and social fanatics of al Queda (outside of a common hatred of the U.S.). Is U.N. Resolution 1441 the key? In times past, France ignored U.N. resolutions regarding Algeria, the U.S.S.R. ignored the U.N. on Hungary and Czechoslovakia, and the U.S. ignored the U.N. on Grenada. Thus, Iraq is not the first to ignore a resolution; perhaps, this is the reason that many friendly and non-aligned countries did not support us.

It is difficult to argue that the U.S. is acting on the behalf of the United Nations when the
Security Council was threatened by a veto from France, China and Russia; and despite arm-twisting and promises of financial aid, the Bush administration was unable to convince a majority on the Security Council (total of 15) to support military action at this time. Apparently, the rest of the world wanted more time to come to a decision. Bush painted himself into a corner after the build-up of forces in the middle east; he could not delay action indefinitely without serious damage politically. So America goes to war against a fourth-rate power that may not have been a threat to the U.S. For what reason? I do not know…maybe for the glory of Exxon-Mobil or BP or to reelect Dubya.

jay

 

[13788]

BIGBOYDAVE: Thanks mindseye for the clarifacation I had assumed incorectly u were refering to USA Britan & Spain and my answere was based on that I stand corrected and thanks for the update on the original un resolution.

And Thank you too jay_too for your info very interesting how the media never covers all the information on the resolution guess its part of the propraganda machine

 

[jonb]

[quote author=balls link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=15#24 date=03/25/03 at 08:22:53]
I agree with your description of death being struck four times with a coup stick. That applied to tribes other than the Crow and Pawnee, their earthly enemies.  One of the primary purposes of fighting the Crow and Pawnee was to destroy them, and scalp them. Scalping made it so the Crow and Pawnee were not whole, which means they were unable to enter the spirit world.  This was a good thing because the Sioux did not want to run into them in the spirit world.
If you weren?t Crow and Pawnee and went to battle with them it was a very civilized affair and the loss of life was minimal.[/quote]

LOL! Scalping was invented by Europeans, the Gauls to be exact. Or maybe it was invented by Romans as propaganda against the Gauls? Who knows? But the first reference to the practices is during the Gallic Wars.

 

[13788]

balls: [quote author=jonb link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=30#30 date=03/25/03 at 16:52:56]

LOL! Scalping was invented by Europeans, the Gauls to be exact. Or maybe it was invented by Romans as propaganda against the Gauls? Who knows? But the first reference to the practices is during the Gallic Wars.[/quote]
That isn’t entirely true. Native American cultures did not have a written history and regardless of what Native Americans say oral histories are incomplete and inaccurate. Archeologists are finding evidence of scalping that date back to before Europeans settled in America. I gave scalping as an example of how the Sioux mutilated their enemies. There is also evidence of decapitation, severed limbs, and other types of mutilation. Other tribes did the same things.
It is very PC to blame America for any ugliness that is happening in the world and claim that the Europeans are responsible for introducing any despicable and brutal behavior in North America. Every race of people on earth has something in their history that, when looked back on, can be viewed as barbaric. The original point I was trying to make was that brutal behavior is a part of human nature that is not only limited to European Americans.

 

[13788]

sammygirly: I am, as you probably know, Canadian. Yeah, boo hiss at us I know. I am as disappointed in our Prime Minister for refusing help as you are. I will be the LAST person to cry "Nuke me all". I despise the current western mentality that screams for blood. I am not excited about the prospect of war AT ALL, but I can clearly see it's necessity. Politcal musings about bill 1441 and whether Bush had the right to declare war or not legally, at this late date, are moot points.

He did. Saddam Hussein IS a dicatator who needs to be removed from power. Haven't you seen enough monstrosities to know that by now? The man has killed more of his own people than the coalition might. This is more than American-Pride propaganda - Saddam Hussein must be stopped.

If not with decisive action, then how? Asking him didn't work after 12 years. For all the anti-war protestors, tell me HOW you would stop Saddam from killing his people and keeping them in the dismal squalor they live in now. Tell me how else to liberate that country? Tell me how else to eliminate the threat of illegal weapons of mass destruction?

It's all good and well to say that the current solution is wrong, but it all means nothing if you don't have an alternative solution.

So, I throw down the gauntlet to the peaceseekers- tell me what else could have been done?

 

[jonb]

[quote author=balls link=board=99;num=1048195651;start=30#31 date=03/26/03 at 09:43:22]
That isn?t entirely true. Native American cultures did not have a written history and regardless of what Native Americans say oral histories are incomplete and inaccurate.[/quote]

The first reference to scalping is during the Gallic Wars. Yep, I'm guessing those Indians sailed to Gaul just to teach them how to scalp and left no other evidence - or at the very least, the Romans were able to imagine it and thus produce the propaganda.

As for oral history (Do I sense an ad hominem of the racial variety?), ever heard of Mt Mazama? That was 7500 years ago, yet it remains in the oral tradition of the local Indians. Just because your written religion says that the world's only 6000 years old doesn't mean oral traditions are inaccurate.

Archeologists are finding evidence of scalping that date back to before Europeans settled in America.

Oh, yeah? Where is this s00per sekrit evidence?

I gave scalping as an example of how the Sioux mutilated their enemies.  There is also evidence of decapitation, severed limbs, and other types of mutilation.  Other tribes did the same things.

Okay, so you're willing to admit we didn't really kill our enemies, but not that we didn't mutilate them? Do you know how hard it is to mutilate a living adult?

It is very PC to blame America for any ugliness that is happening in the world and claim that the Europeans are responsible for introducing any despicable and brutal behavior in North America.

PC? Moi? I just call a spade a spade. You're the only one talking Newspeak here, you and every other Bushite.

 

[jay_too]

I finally got on this site to read the blogs of perhaps an Iraqi surviving in Baghdad. In the past few days i have tried maybe 6 or 7-times with no success. Is this a real account or fiction or propaganda? I do not know, but it sounds real to me. Regardless of how you feel about the war....support for Bush/Cheney, anti-war, or just ambivalent, I think this blog is worth a browse.

http://dear_raed.blogspot.com/

jay

 

[13788]

7x6andchg: Sammygirly-

Well said back on 3/26.

(and I never boo at Canadians - unless they wearing black and white striped shirts and signaling 2 minutes for holding)

As an American, I am not for war. I do think something needed to be done - and truth me told I don't think France, Russia, and Germany are telling us (or the UN) everything, either. Internal politics within each of our own countries is comlicated enough...this was a maelstrom wrapped in a blender....and it seemed like it was awfully personal sometimes from the words coming from President Bush's mouth.

Just my 2 cents

Paul
7x6&C

 

[13788]

miniver_cheevy: here's a site i found with a russian perspective on the iraqi aggression:

http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/coalition_losses.htm

 

[13788]

miniver_cheevy: for pro-war on the web (it's always good to know what the other side is thinking -- for-warned is fore-armed, so to speak) check out:

andrewsullivan.com

i HATE this guy!