»
Archives
»
Corner Pub #2
»
I Don't Give A Good Saddam!
| Corner Pub #2 |
|
I Don't Give A Good Saddam! |
|
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road 
|
Advisor: Mr President we want to get across your noble motivations for this coming war in Iraq. Can we go through that together please? Bush: Sure! Well,... I am a man of Peace. Advisor: Hmmm… That’s a little difficult Sir, along with our allies, the UK, didn't we sell $18.6 billion out of a world total of $36.9 billion of arms last year!? Bush: Er…., well you know it’s about upholding the rule of law, I truly believe in THAT. Advisor: Hmmm… tricky. Havn’t you already been arrested three times Sir? Bush: Ahem…, er... Well..., I feel SO sorry for the children of Iraq, we must save them mustn’t we? Advisor: Please correct me Sir, but aren't we still refusing to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? One of only two countries in the world who wont sign? Bush: Look this is awkward! You are talking to a POLITICIAN here! You are somehow expecting me to practice what I preach! Don’t you know that is a helluva challenge! Well, Sonny... listen... Don’t you know, I am a CHRISTIAN and this is one of my top motivations. Advisor: As far as I know Sir the principle moral stricture of your God is “Thou Shalt Not Kill”. Am I right Sir? Bush: Fer Christ’s sake man!! Are you really expecting moral principles from me on this!? Jeee-sus! Advisor: Okay Sir, I’ll help you out here, why don’t you tell me about your feelings on preserving the diverse eco-system of Iraq for the coming generations. Bush: Okay! Yes! That’s it I want to save Iraq and all its many ecosystems from this tyrant, (the oil in particular). Advisor: Hmmm… this could work except for one thing, our refusal to sign ‘The Kyoto Protocol’... Bush: “*@&^%$!!!!!” Uhh..., well..., let me see now... Er.... em.... Okay, I've got it! I believe in the sovereignty of nation states and that people should have the right to vote and have the political system of their choice! Advisor: Hmmm… What about all the South American countries we undermined because we didn’t like the governments the people had voted in? What about Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatamala Bush: Look you pinko somuvabitch I’m the President of the United States and I am fighting this war for unbending moral principles! Advisor: Maybe you could show me a few precedents Mr President? Bush: I don’t HAVE to show you any precedents! America does what the hell it likes!!! This is AMERICA and we don’t have to give a damn! Advisor: Ahhh… now you’re talking like a leader Sir. This is attitude! Now you sound just like Saddam! [This message has been edited by allan (02-21-2003 02:49 PM).] |
||
| © Copyright 2003 Allan Tierney - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
passing shadows Member Empyrean
since 1999-08-26
Posts 45577displaced |
 really sick[This message has been edited by passing shadows (02-21-2003 04:17 AM).] |
||
|
fractal007 Senior Member
since 2000-06-01
Posts 1958 |
Although I hardly ever post in this forum, I had to reply to these last two posts I've noticed from you, this one in particular. Firstly, are you certain this is a poem? It sounds a bit too much like a play. Seconly, the sixth commandment to which you constantly refer is best translated "You shall not murder." If I am not mistaken, the original Hebrew indicated a premeditated act. It is virtually impossible for anyone, JudeoChristian or not, to abide by a commandment like "Thou shalt not kill." Unfortunately, killing is a part of our lives and our world. Seconly, although I am not entirely for US intervention into Iraq, are you certain that your poetry is not overly emotional? I applaud your attempt at writing satirical poetry. Your previous poem, "To Every U.S. Soldier in Iraq", was a very good piece asking those who would be responsible for action in Iraq to pause and consider their actions. At the same time, however, I think you may have gone a little too far in discussing the killing of children and parents. Are you certain that the US will attack targets other than those connected with military operations? "If history is to change, let it change. If the world is to be destroyed, so be it. If my fate is to die, I must simply laugh" |
||
|
SPIRIT Senior Member
since 2002-12-29
Posts 1745California Desert |
I am not a 'biblical' person at all but you keep on aboout 'Thou shalt not kill' like a lifelong scholar who knows for sure his words. So I went hunting a little bit. "Who is the King of Glory? This portrays Lord - Jehovah as a soldier and a warrior. Since time began conflict has been and always will be a part of our everyday lives. |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
Thanks fractal, I wasn't saying the U.S. would attack civilian targets on purpose. I was saying that this inevitably DOES happen. It is, of course, given the euphonism "collateral damage". If you remember during the Gulf War the CIA identified a certain bunker as a command facility. As it happened it was full of old men, women and children at the time the Cruise missile hit. We weren't shown the blackened bodies being taken out. They WERE filmed but it was considered so shocking that the images could not be broadcast. Yes, I do feel strongly about this and these pieces, whether strictly poems or not reflect this. I would hope that all people will be emotional about the imminent possiblity of mass slaughter. Who among us if they conjure up the appropriate images would remain cool and indifferent. Only someone who has this "justified" as part of some "necessary" action can afford themselves the luxury of not considering these very real images of the approaching future. I do tend to let my emotions onto the page and I will continue to do so. They can be discounted for that, I know. But they also provide SOME evidence at least that not ALL righteous indignation belongs to those fervently and aggressively calling for war at any cost to innocent lives. To me these are almost sub-human and in some kind of perverse denial fostered by the jingoistic paranoia of their leaders. It never ceases to amaze me how certain people will turn things around depending on how it suits their purpose. I seem to remember "Thou shalt not kill" in reference to the "Pro-life" issue. Now are we saying that conveniently we change it to "Thou shalt not murder"? I also seem to remember Jesus saying we should turn the other cheek and forgive those who tresspass against us...? Some people seem to want to alter Christianity into something that suits their violent purposes. This is mere empty justification. And there is another word that can be used: hypocrisy. [This message has been edited by allan (02-21-2003 04:07 PM).] |
||
|
passing shadows Member Empyrean
since 1999-08-26
Posts 45577displaced |
allan, I don't know what country is yours but if someone were to destroy your country, your family, your people...would you forgive and turn the other cheek? |
||
|
Yu Lan Senior Member
since 2000-04-13
Posts 1462New Zealand |
Well I think everybody is being ridiculous. Bush is too blood thirsty, and aggressive, and Osama bin Ladin is plain evil along with others of his type like Saddam and Hitler. I don't know what the solution would be, but I'd much rather it was not as dire as the proposed solution!!! Allan, I understand your emotions, but think that this piece was perhaps not the best way of expressing them. It did you no favours.  Bless your cotten sockies, you poetic maniacs. ^_^ |
||
|
A. L. Becker Member
since 2002-09-06
Posts 167San Francisco, California |
allan, if I were to agree with anything you have written above, I would have to conclude that President Bush, and all our leadership, (including Colin Powell, Condy Rice etc.) are thoroughly evil! Alas, like most Americans, I cannot do that. If our leaders are evil, I must be too, because I agree with them. Since I am not evil, I cannot believe that they are either. And before you play the "you're just misinformed" card, please don't. I am a graduate student in history and I have thought about these issues more than most people. There were huge protests before and during the civil war, what if Lincoln had listened to them? Thankfully, he didn't, the Union survived, and slavery is dead. Many Americans protested before World War II. What if Roosevelt had listened? Thankfully he didn't and the fascists were defeated. That innocents will die is true and unfortunate. Between 750,000 and a million German civilians died from allied bombing in World War II. Hitler and the Nazis were responsible for those deaths, not the Allies. If any innocents die in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will be responsible, because he could easily prevent their deaths by disarming as he promised and as ordered by the international community. I, for one, would not lose sleep over it. In fact, i will sleep better, knowing this country is that much safer. Remember, innocents have already died, on September 11th. No, George Bush is not evil. I can understand a person disagreeing with his policy, but why must you assume that our leaders are inhuman monsters just because you don't agree? Why is it impossible to allow for the possibility that their motives are just what they say they are: to protect you and me from the occurrence of future 9/11's? "Oh, do not ask, 'What is it?' |
||
Marge Tindal 
since 1999-11-06
Posts 42384Florida's Foreverly Shores |
quote: ~*The pen of the poet never runs out of ink, as long as we breathe.*~ |
||
|
passing shadows Member Empyrean
since 1999-08-26
Posts 45577displaced |
 to A.L. Becker! Thank you for your input! I thought I was here alone.  Marge...you're a champ. |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Enjoyed the read. Whether the opinions expressed in a poem, or any writing for that matter, are an accurate reflection of my own personal beliefs or feelings I think they can still be worth reading. Stagnation is the result of a redundancy of alternate opinions, if we all held the same views and mindset the world would be a greyer place, and a refusal to read or listen with at least an attempt to understand such views is, in my opinion, foolhardy. I don’t know if Bush is good, evil or just plain stupid in the same way that I don’t know if Saddam is good, evil or stupid, I’ve never met either to form a concrete understanding. The best I can do is read and listen and formulate my own opinion based upon my best guess and my understanding of the evidence I hear and read. Alternative opinions allow me the freedom to formulate my own, which is no better or no worse than the next mans. Thanks for the chance to read and reply. |
||
|
SPIRIT Senior Member
since 2002-12-29
Posts 1745California Desert |
No Passing Shadow, you are not alone. I am not terribly expressive in these sort of situations but I have been jabbing away since post one of Allan's writings on this subject. He says he doesn't have hatred or show hatred in his posts, or something like that - I say I will have to disagree on that because I have never heard such utter rot and disrespect and oft-times childishness ("I needed such words for rhyming" his excuse) and hatred spewed out as it has been spewed out on these boards. Lucky him, he is entitled to do just that. The best thing we could have done was not to have responded at all I suppose - but he knows what buttons to push - and I for one find it hard to be a part of his 'WE' when I am not. Well he's got the top of the board loaded and I am sure he's feeling pretty chuffed at the controversy he has started. Thou shalt not kill - reminds me of placard bearers outside abortion clinics who then in their hatred murder the Doctor for the rights of the unborn foetus. I just don't get that sort of double standard at all. Anyway I gotta get off this soapbox and give it back to Allan. HERE'ssssssssssssssss Allan! [This message has been edited by SPIRIT (02-22-2003 11:05 AM).] |
||
|
passing shadows Member Empyrean
since 1999-08-26
Posts 45577displaced |
SPIRIT, you are right about not responding, and I had thought of that...but just could not help myself. This has taken me away from the Open Forums. I had stepped in here to visit, and was not planning on sticking around long. I have said all I had to say about allan's writings and so I'm leaving the corner pub. I will just go to the archives of the Open Forums when I feel the need for more reading material. |
||
|
aries_luv_ppl Senior Member
since 2001-09-20
Posts 1448Universal Mind |
At first when Bush said attack Afganistan (I hope I spell it right) I supported, but then, I wasn't so sure when I heard citzen or hospital get involved accidentally. One thing I'm sure is that he speak disregard other nation's face, feelings. That really turn me off. Like when that plane crash near China Sea Boundaries. BTW, I thought the UN disagree with US, if that was so, why US insist on doing it? If you know anything I said is inaccurate, please inform and correct me. ~Every girl has a dream within. |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
A.L Becker - I didn't say Bush was evil, you did. I believe him to be irresponsible, hypocritical, disingenous, pretty corrup as far as politicians go (which is pretty far) and capable of putting his career and Americans before the safety of the whole world. Those who hold the same views as myself are no small minority. If you believe that then you don't know the strength of opinion on this here in Europe. I'm afraid it wont do to simply rubbish those of a different frame of mind expecting them to go away with their tails between their legs. If you ARE unaware of anything it is that there is a ground swell of disgust at your leaders here in Europe whereas after Sep 11 there was an outpouring of sympathy and wish to support you. I have never known the British people so united in their disgust as they are right now. You are entitled to your view. I presume you acknowledge I am entitled to mine. And, by the way I am hearing more and more perfectly respectable American voices reflecting these views on Bush. Because you want us to simply go away doesn't mean much. We believe extremely strongly in what we are saying - for us our children and the future path of the world is at stake here. This is an incredibly important crossroads and we must and will follow our consciences. I'm afraid so-called patriots in America find that inconvenient and unhelpful. I'm sorry but this is much too important to us to indulge your sensitivities. We feel our lives and our world may well be at stake here and desire to have our say. As Americans are so fond of saying there is free speech. We have it here in the UK, in Germany and France and all over Europe too. We don't want Bush speaking for us. As you say there, "No way!" |
||
|
A. L. Becker Member
since 2002-09-06
Posts 167San Francisco, California |
allan, i know that you did not explicitly say Bush was evil. My point is this: if our president and those around him are so "irresponsible, hypocritical, disingenous, . . . corrup[t] . . . and capable of putting [their] careers and Americans before the safety of the whole world" for no reason other than egotism or personal financial gain, as you and others say, then they must by definition be evil. Either that, or their motivations are more reasonable noble and valid, than you are willing to admit. I believe reasonable persons can differ on the propriety of the upcoming war, and that is why i would never want you (plural) to "simply go away." On the contrary, i welcome this chance to dialogue with a talented writer and spokesman such as yourself about this "incredibly important crossroads" we are at. That said, i hope you understand that there are some pretty respectable voices on the other side too, whether you like it or not. We on the other side of this issue are not all misguided, uninformed, ignorant, evil or worse, as some of the rhetoric has painted us. It looks like the US and the UK will be going to war and time will tell which of us will be saying "i told you so" afterward. i am sure there is one point on which we can agree: i hope we will both be around to have that debate. Our disagreement lies in the best way to ensure that survival. "Oh, do not ask, 'What is it?' |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
A.L. Becker. Thank you for your constructive post. Yes, I know there are people of integrity on either side of the argument. As far as the definition of evil in regard to what I said I'm afraid for me it tends to simply define a rather more corrupt (or stupid) politician than usual. I believe it will not be news to say that the true depths of politicians ambition have never been accurately plumbed. Oftimes they will move in the way of most justification and deniability that just happens to aid their agenda whatever that may be. This is standard fare however. The more I study American foreign policy the more I realise just how rigorously American politicians have followed the rule of national self interest. Even in the area of aid. Recently I read through some interesting documents at the official USAID website. It is often thrown in the faces of those who question the motives of the American government that the US is extremely well motivated, humanitarian and overgenerous in its largesse to the developing world. Please cast your eye over a few brief quotes from the USAID site which covers the prime reason for aid which is not usually the PR story usually used: “As the indispensable state, America is uniquely positioned to advance its national agenda... The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) administers America's foreign assistance programs, which account for less than one-half of 1% of the federal budget. These strategic objectives reflect the following U.S. foreign policy interests: Promoting U.S. economic security by creating markets abroad for U.S. goods and services through programs that support lasting economic growth; ... Protecting the United States from the loss of biodiversity, unchecked population growth, and the spread of communicable diseases. ... This overview of agency performance highlights the effectiveness of USAID's programs in 1995-1996 to support the advancement of the foreign policy agenda of the United States. ... BROAD-BASED ECONOMIC GROWTH ACHIEVED The growth in the importance of exports to the American economy is clear. The 1996 Economic Report of the President projects that this sector will grow faster than any other part of the U.S. economy over the coming decade. The growth of U.S. exports to countries receiving U.S. foreign assistance increased by 76% between 1990-1995. It is anticipated that four out of five consumers in the year 2000 will live in developing countries. ... Accelerated economic growth in USAID recipient countries results in increased foreign trade and investment, which in turn creates new jobs and higher incomes for U.S. citizens. U.S. exports of goods and services increasingly drive the U.S. economy, and U.S. exports to developing countries now account for 44% of total exports. ... The United States provides less than 20% of the official development assistance going to developing countries.” http://www.usaid.gov/pubs/cp98/progprview.htm When the activities of the US in regard to other countries is examined closely I think you'll find this strict use of economic logic to be THE prime factor in decision making. Perhaps the present stance of the US government in respect of Iraq wouldn't stick in the craw of so many Europeans if we didn't instinctively know that the motivations as stated by the figureheads of the US government are far from the simple truth. [This message has been edited by allan (02-26-2003 09:06 AM).] |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
