Hard News: The Solipsistic Left
350 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 14 Newer→ Last
-
merc,
Sorry about that, a tad immature, I could have said, Stephen, you make a very valid point there, albeit somewhat acerbic.
-
merc,
Juha, how can you comment on Wasabists, not being from Wasabi and all.
-
Sushi now with you, merc.
-
merc,
Pah, sashimi fully laden, first to blanche.
-
And I have to say I haven't noted any secular groups, no "Atheists of Manhatten", no "Secular Progressives of Berkley", no "Humanists of San Fran". Just those damned Christians helping someone out every time you turn around.
No Red Cross either? I am surprised.
I assume you are unaware that the Red Cross, despite it's symbol (which is simply the inverse of the Swiss flag), is a secular organisation. If you were unaware of this then I am glad to have let you in on the secret, so that you won't feel so badly about secular folks in the future.
-
ha-hah!!
a post on the de-liberalisation of frightened countries.
-
ha-hah!!
a post on the de-liberalisation of frightened countries.
Where do you find these crackpots Che?
-
everywhere....
it's making me increasingly paranoid...
-
Perhaps your paranoia is your own way of coping with your personal deliberalisation? The only prescription for this is to speed yourself to a library and take a large dose of Mills.
-
hmmmm.... might have to have that prescribed and issued.
i'm petrified i'd accidentally ingest a cherry-picked set of paragraphs from adam smith and develop on onset of extreme conservatism... a fate worst than death.
-
You are right to be afraid. Your brain is like a giant bowl of rhubarb crumble, awaiting the steaming custard that is neololiberalism. Combining the two might hurt a little at first, but I'm sure you will find new friends who enjoy stewed fruit and milk desserts. You will lose your old, lactose intloerant friends, but hey, if they really like you they'd suck it up and live with the nausea right?
-
a little wasabi would improve the taste of that custard
-
neololiberalism
great word. neologism + neoliberalism.
neoliberalism is after all new version of a perfectly good philosophy.
otherwise, the whole food metaphor didn't get past me going [homeresque] "rhubard.... gaaaaaa"
-
The wahabists can count more than a few well-educated, modern young men in their ranks. Indeed, their recruiting methods concentrate in part on wooing young men in Western universities. They're a little like the old communist states in that respect, and perhaps others too.
True, I was thinking more of the tribal areas in places like Pakistan. They provided many of the young men for those Wahhabist madrassas. The conservative trends (hostile to women, gays, modernism etc) are quite strongly related to communities that are in the process of moving from one world to another. It's another complicating factor in Iraq as well.
And not appear soft on the US, there's a similar process there as well. The troubling religious tendencies are related to the Irish Scotts who settled the Mid-West, taking with them a conservative family based culture with honor killings etc that to a degree still has a strong influence. Much like the Sicilians in New York. It's not just religion but the social history from which it comes.
Jared Diamond has lots of useful insights into how biology and geology conspired to set all these different states of progress in different societies.
Troops in Saudi were necessary for protecting oil supplies not the sanctions regime.
I think they were mainly there to stop Saddam invading which did protect oil supplies. But having then to deter Saddam made life difficult for the US since having foreign troops in the land of Mecca was a big problem for Muslims. The US was caught a bit there.
-
i like this one... condescend + insult = consult
neoliberalism is after all new version of a perfectly good philosophy
neocons aren't really conservatives (old or new) though. their agenda is quite radical and has nothing to do with turning the clock back or preserving the status quo. it is rather about total dismantling of the State (so those nice rich corporate people can be free to spread their love of humanity free from the evil fetters of democratic governments)
-
mmmm, lamb custard madras... [homereque] gaaaaa
-
Didn't like the rhubarb analogy? Well, luckily I found some explanatory material that may help you. Sure its no palm oil bible, but it comes from the heart all the same.
-
Re the Wasabist threat:
There is only one option. We must invade their countries, kill their chefs, and convert them to meat and three veg!
(sorry)
-
[che takes out small book and writes]
"note: terrance wood, extremist".
-
there is nothing more cruel nor inhumane than meat and 3 veg. britain's vicious legacy to the civilized world
-
I think they were mainly there to stop Saddam invading which did protect oil supplies. But having then to deter Saddam made life difficult for the US since having foreign troops in the land of Mecca was a big problem for Muslims. The US was caught a bit there.
The need to deter Saddam after 1990 was superfluous. He had no modern military to invade..his air force was largely in Iran and what small modern working equipment he had were in the hands of the Republican guards. The large and modern Saudi military could easily have dealt with any threat.
And even during GW1 the Iraqi threat to SA was, as Colin Powell later admitted, largely a fiction.
-
Riddley Walker,
Why do you hate freedom?
-
because i so love being invaded by fascist super-power states
-
The need to deter Saddam after 1990 was superfluous
Not so, US troops in Saudi were there as part of the no-fly zone regime. The minute Saddam fell they were pulled out. The BBC reports on this - US pulls out of Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia is home to some of Islam's holiest sites and the deployment of US forces there was seen as a historic betrayal by many Islamists, notably Osama Bin Laden.
Bin Laden used American presence to justify anti-US attacks
It is one of the main reasons given by the Saudi-born dissident - blamed by Washington for the 11 September attacks - to justify violence against the United States and its allies.The US was stuck - as long as Saddam remained in power they needed to keep troops in Saudi Arabia which was inflaming Muslim opinion.
PBS also gives a background to US troops in Saudi.
As for the 1st Gulf War the Saudi's were sufficiently impressed by Saddam's menace to allow 500,000 troops US to camp out. I really doubt they would have done something so unpopular if they hadn't felt threatened by Saddam. US missile defenses also saved Saudi Arabia a bit of grief.
-
The US was stuck - as long as Saddam remained in power they needed to keep troops in Saudi Arabia which was inflaming Muslim opinion.
I suspect the fact that they were protecting a major source of oil had something to do with it as well.
And the US didn't have to stay there. This was a choice to dip their military might into the Middle East.
And, even if Saddam had some ability to invade another country, USA didn't need troops there to deal with that. The message "invade another country, GW1 will look like a picnic" would have seemed just as effective. I mean, we have plenty of evidence that Iraq invading its neighbours when the USA is going to strike back doesn't work well for Iraq.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.