| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
17 Nov 2003 03:33:09 AM |
| Object: |
OT: Get mad - and get even |
Get mad - and get even
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1086683,00.html
Bush deserves our rage, but Blair should take the brunt of it. We
elected him, now we must get rid of him
Gary Younge
Monday November 17, 2003
The Guardian
The US president, George Bush, looks pretty baffled at the best of
times. But after an hour-long meeting with "moderates" in Bali during
his whistle-stop tour of Asia last month he cut a particularly
confused figure. For reasons he could not quite grasp, his
self-professed vision of America as a benign superpower spreading
democracy through the Middle East was received with polite scepticism,
even among those nations and leaders he considered allies. "Do they
really believe that we think all Muslims are terrorists?" he asked.
"I've been saying all along that not every policy issue needs to be
dealt with by force."
Gary Younge
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=18510aff.0311070215.56f53365%40posting.google.com
.
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Get mad - and get even |
17 Nov 2003 12:55:33 PM |
|
|
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0311170133.9350e2d@posting.google.com...
Get mad - and get even
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1086683,00.html
Bush deserves our rage, but Blair should take the brunt of it. We
elected him, now we must get rid of him
Gary Younge
Monday November 17, 2003
The Guardian
The US president, George Bush, looks pretty baffled at the best of
times. But after an hour-long meeting with "moderates" in Bali during
his whistle-stop tour of Asia last month he cut a particularly
confused figure. For reasons he could not quite grasp, his
self-professed vision of America as a benign superpower spreading
democracy through the Middle East was received with polite scepticism,
even among those nations and leaders he considered allies. "Do they
really believe that we think all Muslims are terrorists?" he asked.
"I've been saying all along that not every policy issue needs to be
dealt with by force."
Gary Younge
I suspect that most feel the last sentence above is not complete when it
comes to brush speak.
"I've been saying all along that not every policy issue needs to be dealt
with by force, unless they disagree with us."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Get mad - and get even |
18 Nov 2003 11:02:31 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:55:33 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net>
posted in alt.atheism:
"I've been saying all along that not every policy issue needs to be dealt
with by force, unless they disagree with us."
I think the addition in his case is more along the lines of "unless it
would be fun and make me oodles of money".
--
Zymurgist # 2
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Get mad - and get even |
21 Nov 2003 08:38:29 PM |
|
|
On 17 Nov 2003 01:33:09 -0800, (maff), Message ID:
<18510aff.0311170133.9350e2d@posting.google.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Get mad - and get even
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1086683,00.html
Get mad - and get even
Bush deserves our rage, but Blair should take the brunt of it. We
elected him, now we must get rid of him
Gary Younge
Monday November 17, 2003
The Guardian
The US president, George Bush, looks pretty baffled at the best of
times. But after an hour-long meeting with "moderates" in Bali during
his whistle-stop tour of Asia last month he cut a particularly confused
figure. For reasons he could not quite grasp, his self-professed vision
of America as a benign superpower spreading democracy through the Middle
East was received with polite scepticism, even among those nations and
leaders he considered allies. "Do they really believe that we think all
Muslims are terrorists?" he asked. "I've been saying all along that not
every policy issue needs to be dealt with by force."
The difference between how Bush and his administration perceive the
world and almost everybody else experiences it would be comic if the
consequences were not so tragic. It is not the product of a
misunderstanding but carefully crafted, wilful ignorance. Once, when
asked how he gets his information, Bush said: "The best way to get the
news is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have
are people on my staff."
Nonetheless, the fact that both he and his staff have finally realised
that the difference between their perception and reality actually does
exist is a small breakthrough. "On a trip like this he can get a glimpse
of it, but only a glimpse," said one senior official who attended
several of the meetings in Asia. "Of course, when you are moving at warp
speed, there isn't a lot of time to think about what you are hearing."
Given that Bush's state visit to Britain, which starts tomorrow, will be
conducted at a more leisurely pace, we can only hope that the huge
demonstrations that greet him will give him more than a glimpse of where
this "perception gap" might have come from.
Travel, if you let it, can broaden the mind. So from the time Bush
lands, it is important that he is aware that while the British prime
minister may be his ally in the war against Iraq the British people are
not and, barring a short spell at the outset of the fighting, never have
been. That is why the upcoming demonstrations around Bush's visit are
not only necessary but demand our full support. The threat of them alone
has shifted the focus of the visit from the two leaders' proposed
declaration of a quick exit from Iraq to the question of why they ever
entered in the first place.
Meanwhile, America's preparation for them shows just how much they value
our special relationship and what kind of democracy they like to export
on their travels. Among other things, US armed special agents have asked
for diplomatic immunity in case they kill a protester; to patrol the
skies with Black Hawk helicopters; and include a tank, equipped with a
gun that can kill a dozen people in one go, in their presidential
cavalcade. While these requests have been turned down much of central
London will still be closed down to create a "sterile zone" so that
Bush's belief that he has the support of the British people will not be
contaminated. If ever there was an example of a guest taking liberties
this is it.
But if Bush's visit provides the motivation for the demonstrations it
would be a mistake if it also monopolised their message. For to be
effective the protests should not mark a reflexive response to the
arrival of an unpopular foreign dignitary, but reflect an expression of
the popular will that has been forced on to the streets because our own
parliament's inability to adequately represent us.
If the leader who is coming is a problem, the leader who invited him is
no less so. As the man who led the charge to war Bush is a worthy target
of our ire. As the man who followed him and in so doing lent the war
what little legitimacy it ever had, Blair is even more so.
We did not elect Bush (it is a moot point whether anybody did) and can
do little about him but hope that the Democrats get it together to beat
him next year. We did elect Blair, and if these demonstrations are going
to be about anything more than ire, then it is our responsibility to get
rid of him.
For if the demonstrations show our strength in numbers they also reveal
a weakness in application. We have shown that we can get mad; we have
yet to show that we can get even. This is a global problem, not a local
one. The vast majority of humanity did not want this war to happen, and
it happened anyway. Even in those countries that are prosecuting it,
including America, opinion polls showed that most were opposed to
military action without UN approval.
If that were not bad enough we now know that in order to gain even
minority support they had to lie about weapons that do not exist, using
intelligence that could not be trusted. So we have a war we did not
want, led by people we can no longer believe. And yet it remains to be
seen whether anyone will be held accountable or forced to pay an
electoral price. So, while the problem may manifest itself on a global
scale, the solution is essentially local. Leaders like Blair, who use
their association with Bush to strut the world stage with hubris, must
be shown the meaning of humility at home. Having found a way to
demonstrate our frustration, we must now find a way to make it count.
In fact, it is a challenge more pertinent to Britain than anywhere else.
For unlike Bush, Silvio Berlusconi, Jose Maria Aznar or John Howard,
Blair - ostensibly - comes from the left. So, unlike the anti-war
demonstrators in the US, Italy, Spain or Australia, most of those who
oppose the war also supported the man who is prosecuting it. And unless
they come up with an alternative they may well end up doing so again.
It is in this one crucial respect that America remains a far more
hopeful place than Britain. For there is little confusion in the
American anti-war movement about whom the enemy is and what needs to be
done about him. Their protests are having real consequences in the
Democratic race for the presidential nomination, where anti-war
candidates are making all the running and lifted the level of debate to
a far higher level than we are currently seeing in the Labour party.
This is what makes the charges that the demonstrations are anti-American
as ridiculous as they are predictable. Americans are not the problem:
Bush is. The majority of Americans disapprove of his handling of the
war. As the bodybags and the bill for occupation mount, so the
opposition keeps rising. If anyone is bucking the tide of US public
opinion it is Blair and Bush, not the protesters.
Meanwhile, Bush comes to the same country that turned out in droves to
welcome Bill Clinton, when he walked through the centre of London with a
smile and a wave and not a combat vehicle in sight. Bush is not
synonymous with America any more than Blair is synonymous with Britain.
We can make Bush uncomfortable; it is only Blair we can make unemployed.
g.younge@guardian.co.uk
(c) 2003 Guardian Newspapers
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
