Attacks in Paris

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Don Ferguson Jr.

Oh, it is very important to realize the Islamic State is Islamic. This is a good article.
Don

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-wants/384980/

Don,

Remarkable writing! Of course, ISIS is a reincarnation of 7th Century Islam and as such it's genuine and not perverted Islam, but an apocalyptic movement no less than him Jim Jones's group, except it runs a state and collects taxes and mints coins over an area larger than the U.K. But, in numbers it's a splinter sect and very different from Islam practiced by the vast majority of the hundreds of millions of pious Muslims around the world.

......and yes, it's to our peril to not realize exactly what 7th century practice requires!

Yes, merely claiming Buddhism, Christianity or Islam are, as the PC folk insist, "Religions of a Peace" is really Interfaith or "Baby Bush" wishful and naive nonsense or else delusional thinking.

Trouble is people know more about The Kardashians,, Channel or Elvis than about the origin of religions and like to think they all must be good as we are good!

I have a longstanding deep interest in the evolution of human society and massacres, so ISIS doesn't surprise me. OTOH, besides a scant few figures, I am ignorant of stock prices or of most sports teams where my children, by contrast, can recount all the players, coaches and scores! I am essentially a social outsider, LOL!

But I can tell you what happened in all the villages in Turkish Armenia from 1915 to 1918 or discuss the flu pandemics or the nature of dying in a World War I trench covered with mustard gas! I am not a popular conversationalist, I guess!


Asher

[James Lemon]

Originally Posted by Don Ferguson Jr.

Oh, it is very important to realize the Islamic State is Islamic. This is a good article.
Don

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-wants/384980/

Thanks for the link Don! I wonder why the current U.S President refuses to acknowledge this distinction and why is he participating in an illegal war against Bashar Hammar al-Assad? He should pull out of there and start arming the Kurds and work with them against ISIS This would make more sense.

[Michael_Stones]

Originally Posted by Asher Kelman

If for the last 50 years had we resolutely conditioned trade, banking system, sports and other engagement on progress in human rights, we wouldn't be now facing a murderous religious sect. We tolerate regimes that teach inferiority of "others"! "Verminization" of other people allows for their extermination! Our persistent ranking peoples as being "less than worthy", [(I]and[/I] lack of employment opportunity) are together the root causes of ISIS. American interventions merely accelerated their natural development as regimes came to the end of their lifespan!

As dictatorships always implode, as seen in the so-called "Arab Spring" they do not need an "American Intervention" to become so radicalized. In Egypt, for example, the people turned against Coptic Christians overnight when the "brotherhood" swept in to power. That was no the result of American actions, just the fact that generations had been raised with severe prejudice!

In the second world war, it was not German intervention solely caused the rounding up of Jews in Hungary and in Latvia for slave labor or disposal. The locals did it on their own! ...........all based on how they were taught values in their normal education for generations! It's convenient to blame the Germans then or the Americans now, but not really valid! Opening the gate of a cattle pen does not make cows into raging bulls!

....and as to War, the Canadians might consider contributing to fight with France to neutralize the bands murdering in Iraq and Syria. Sympathy is heart warming but not any contribution to the current fire raging,. . We need both intervention on the ground and the equivalent of a long term Marshall plan to rebuild these countries. Canada is not insulted. Canadians can, if they so choose wait until they are certain that they are also direct targets for attacks as in Paris. But we would be disappointed if we were left to shoulder all the responsibility for putting out this fire. After all, what's the meaning of having allies if France's tragedy is not something that makes us join their battle.

One cannot simply ignore ISIS. If we leave them to their own devices, they will spread and Europe itself will be the springboard for coming to the North American continent too. not today or tomorrow, but it will come. I simply cannot think it's fair for Canada to benefit from trade and not consider that any attack on Paris is an attack on Canadian citizens in Montreal and and Ottawa!

Today one could say, in homage to Martin Niemöller, (1892-1984),

When they came for kids in a Tel-Aviv Café, we didn't protest, as we Are not Jews
When they bomb the Kurds daily, we do not protest, as we are not Kurds,
When they persecute Gypsies in Europe, we do not protest as we are not Gypsies,
When they Massacre Yazdis in Syria, we did not protest, as we didn't even know they existed!
When they massacred the Christians in Darfur, we were busy,
When they slaughtered Parisians we sent our sympathy ......but no muscle,
So when they finally come to Montreal, who will we call?

Asher

I came to this thread only recently, Asher, but can't let what you wrote go unanswered. I suspect that some Americans are about the only people left on the planet that think that the main mischief makers in world politics during the last 70 years "merely accelerated" the end of political entities with other ideologies. Wikipedia lists 24 wars after WW2 that involved the USA. 24 wars!! Did USA's involvement accelerate the end of those regimens or make things worse. A study lead by the University of Washington reported two years ago that "About half a million people died in Iraq as a result of war-related causes between the US-led invasion in 2003 and mid-2011". Need I write more?

You cite human rights as a reason why "we" shouldn't tolerate some alternative political ideologies. Yet the history of the USA is one of intolerance. Just some examples country are the destruction of Indian culture, the "verminization" of Mexicans by Trump and others, the slavery of Africans, which your authorities continue to abuse, excessively imprison, execute and shoot to this day. You are fortunate to belong to a favoured minority. People from other minorities might think differently. Outside the USA, do you really believe that your leaders think cases of "collateral damage" in Pakistan or Afghanistan rank much above vermin in importance? Sure the authorities apologize later, but the victims are still dead.

Should Canada continue to bomb ISIS with its 6 warplanes? My answer is yes in principle but not if led by the USA. The recent past suggests an unlikely Holland/Putin collaboration would be more effective than anything organized to date. And here's a bad joke that might come to pass: a future USA led by Trump, Carson, Rubio or Cruz. A Canada led by Justin - the spoiled, rich, self-entitled son of Pierre, a spoiled, rich, self-entitled father - ain't too bad. We'll muddle through regardless and probably turf him out at the next election. Will there be an ISIS version of a Montreal massacre? I hope not.

Cheers, Mike

[Don Ferguson Jr.]

Originally Posted by Michael_Stones

I came tosuspect that some Americans are about the only people left on the planet that think that the main mischief makers in world politics during the last 70 years "merely accelerated" the end of political entities with other ideologies. Wikipedia lists 24 wars after WW2 that involved the USA. 24 wars!! Did USA's involvement accelerate the end of those regimens or make things worse. A study lead by the University of Washington reported two years ago that "About half a million people died in Iraq as a result of war-related causes between the US-led invasion in 2003 and mid-2011". Need I write more?

You cite human rights as a reason why "we" shouldn't tolerate some alternative political ideologies. Yet the history of the USA is one of intolerance. Just some examples country are the destruction of Indian culture, the "verminization" of Mexicans by Trump and others, the slavery of Africans, which your authorities continue to abuse, excessively imprison, execute and shoot to this day. You are fortunate to belong to a favoured minority. People from other minorities might think differently. Outside the USA, do you really believe that your leaders think cases of "collateral damage" in Pakistan or Afghanistan rank much above vermin in importance? Sure the authorities apologize later, but the victims are still dead.

Should Canada continue to bomb ISIS with its 6 warplanes? My answer is yes in principle but not if led by the USA. The recent past suggests an unlikely Holland/Putin collaboration would be more effective than anything organized to date. And here's a bad joke that might come to pass: a future USA led by Trump, Carson, Rubio or Cruz. A Canada led by Justin - the spoiled, rich, self-entitled son of Pierre, a spoiled, rich, self-entitled father - ain't too bad. We'll muddle through regardless and probably turf him out at the next election. Will there be an ISIS version of a Montreal massacre? I hope not.

Cheers, Mike

Putin couldn't care less about collateral damage. on iPad.
Don

[Asher Kelman]

Originally Posted by Michael_Stones

I came to this thread only recently, Asher, but can't let what you wrote go unanswered. I suspect that some Americans are about the only people left on the planet that think that the main mischief makers in world politics during the last 70 years "merely accelerated" the end of political entities with other ideologies. Wikipedia lists 24 wars after WW2 that involved the USA. 24 wars!! Did USA's involvement accelerate the end of those regimens or make things worse. A study lead by the University of Washington reported two years ago that "About half a million people died in Iraq as a result of war-related causes between the US-led invasion in 2003 and mid-2011". Need I write more?

You cite human rights as a reason why "we" shouldn't tolerate some alternative political ideologies. Yet the history of the USA is one of intolerance. Just some examples country are the destruction of Indian culture, the "verminization" of Mexicans by Trump and others, the slavery of Africans, which your authorities continue to abuse, excessively imprison, execute and shoot to this day. You are fortunate to belong to a favoured minority. People from other minorities might think differently. Outside the USA, do you really believe that your leaders think cases of "collateral damage" in Pakistan or Afghanistan rank much above vermin in importance? Sure the authorities apologize later, but the victims are still dead.

Should Canada continue to bomb ISIS with its 6 warplanes? My answer is yes in principle but not if led by the USA. The recent past suggests an unlikely Holland/Putin collaboration would be more effective than anything organized to date. And here's a bad joke that might come to pass: a future USA led by Trump, Carson, Rubio or Cruz. A Canada led by Justin - the spoiled, rich, self-entitled son of Pierre, a spoiled, rich, self-entitled father - ain't too bad. We'll muddle through regardless and probably turf him out at the next election. Will there be an ISIS version of a Montreal massacre? I hope not.

Cheers, Mike

Well written, Mike.

"Verminization" is a great word! When I grew up, the mice would approach as I studied later at night, looking for crumbs from my cheese sandwich dinner........ and the police would arrive in the morning to take me to school through a gauntlet of screaming, "Christ killer! or "Go back to Palestine!"

But what happened then does not mean the children of the guilty are guilty too. Because we intervened wrongly before does not free us of responsibility today. Yes, with ignorance arrogance we inserted ourselves in Viet Nam and Iraq decades ago. But does that mean we must abandon 10 million refugees in Syria today? Worse, because of an excuse called, "ISIS", Muslims as a whole seem to be "too risky" to take in, just as Roosevelt disallowed refuge to the Jews, sending back escapees back to Germany and the death camps. Details are different, for sure, but these are only "peculiarities" and details of the same manner of racist thinking, but set in different times.

Mike, what you write is no challenge to my way of thinking, not at all! What you point is is merely the "caveat of reality" on which our ideas for intervention have to be played out and considered.

Yes, I do feel very privileged, indeed, to be in an environment where all are equal. I am exceedingly proud that our State of California looks after it's millions of mostly Latino immigrants, giving them health care, schooling and advanced education and access to aid for dependent children on an equal basis to Whites. It does take time for immigrants to take full advantage of our rich society but we have an abundance of Latino professors, physicians, lawyers, engineers and scientists. The newly arrived struggle but they work hard and their children will have a better life, for sure. So, I must correct you. Don't chastize me for having advantages better than most, LOL! I do not and will not feel "guilty" for raising my children here, privileged to be free....... and ignorant of that dreaded gauntlet I once knew! The USA is, unlike what you hear in sensationalist papers and the news, not a racist country, but one that is in a constant struggle to be more equal.

Still, add my response to James Lemon's protest picture of Syria to provide some more of the balance of my thoughts.

We're in constant struggle. We are in a cauldron of values. On the one hand we have basic instincts for domination, exploitation and ravagement which emerge from otherwise friendly youngsters. Our aim has to be to become worthy of calling ourselves "civilized". We should be honestly celebrating diversity and promoting respect to all without exception. Our society, schools, universities, news outlets and entertainment industry constantly reflects on our own shortcomings and sets new standards to allow us to improve our record. In that, we're a fine country with the most generous people. I am very optimistic for the "Rights of Man" being fully realized in this complex polyglot society.

So you bring up Trump and his views on Mexicans! That "big mouth" is as popular as mascara and makeup on women, and as superficial! It's what's underneath that counts, the humanity and then the skills and music and nothing else. If one lacks the humanity part, then I do not seek those skills or that music.

Asher

[Michael_Stones]

Originally Posted by Asher Kelman

We're in constant struggle. We are in a cauldron of values. On the one hand we have basic instincts for domination, exploitation and ravagement which emerge from otherwise friendly youngsters. Our aim has to be to become worthy of calling ourselves "civilized". We should be honestly celebrating diversity and promoting respect to all without exception. Our society, schools, universities, news outlets and entertainment industry constantly reflects on our own shortcomings and sets new standards to allow us to improve our record. In that, we're a fine country with the most generous people. I am very optimistic for the "Rights of Man" being fully realized in this complex polyglot society.

So you bring up Trump and his views on Mexicans! That "big mouth" is as popular as mascara and makeup on women, and as superficial! It's what's underneath that counts, the humanity and then the skills and music and nothing else. If one lacks the humanity part, then I do not seek those skills or that music.

Asher

Absolutely, I agree with pretty much everything you wrote, being only a bit less optimistic about the outcomes. We forget at peril Dawkins' selfish genes, which provide both impetus for altruism and reasons for fear or hatred of those perceived as different. It's a delicate balancing act that seesawed both ways throughout history.

I'm coming to a reluctant opinion that national leaders cannot possess optimistic naivety and be effective. "Peace in Our Time" Chamberlain was a prime example, unable to believe Hitler was a psychopath. Similar between Roosevelt and Stalin. Churchill had the number of both these bad guys, because (to use Nietzsche's words) he had looked into the abyss and cared not about what he became. Back to the present: Obama versus Putin: who's winning, do you think? Trudeau versus Putin: no contest. See what I mean. Cheers, Mike.