Agreed, Izzy. To do this we will have to get the neocons out of positions of influence in our government. Can we succeed before they get us into even more trouble in Iran?
A lot of people that the US government calls terrorist are not religious, for example, Palestinians oppose Israel's seizure of their land. This has nothing to do with religion, as the Palestinians are both Muslim and Christian. The Tamil Tigers are also fighting for their political independence, not a religious objective. In Kashmir, the militants are fighting for independence from Indian control, and not a religious purpose.
Certainly, in other cases religion does play a big part. For example, right-wing Israeli 'settlers' in the West Bank town of Hebron are all religious fanatics. Many non-fanatic Israelis assert that God gave them Palestine, and that therefore they have a right to displace the Palestinians. The Ikhwan al-Muslimin primarily seek to create a unified Muslim nation.
Would we be done with terrorism if religious motivation were done away with? In some cases yes, but not in all.
So is it part of the human condition to kill others? I hope not, but would have a hard time making the case. We do know that people do live together without violence, and in many cases with genuine cooperation and mutual benefit. In my own view, tribalism, rather than religion, plays the bigger role in inetrnational conflicts. Tribalism is that sense that 'we' are different (and better) than 'them.'
Will we as a species be able to outgrow this? Even here on CS we have heard extreme forms of bigotry expressed about others....
We actually do know pretty much who to talk with, if we wanted to do so. And Malta would be a great place to hold informal discussions.
Yes, it can blow up in our faces...no doubt. But NOT talking certainly blows up in our faces.
We worked with bin Laden to aid in throwing the Soviets out of Afgahinstan, but after that was done we failed to establish a relationship with bin Laden that addressed the OTHER reasons he was fighting the Soviets, namely, the desire to rid the Muslim of all foreign oppression, including that of the US. If we had remained in constructive touch with him, it is almost certain that the bombings of the US embassies and the USS Cole would not have happened.
Alas, I cannot agree with your suggestion that we have killed ourselv4es trying to broker a peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. US policy and, more importantly, behavior have been overwhelmingly pro-Israel since we sponsored the UN resolution that was to be used to seize Palestine from the Palestinians. Every now and then we convoke a 'peace conference' but we always initially accept Israeli terms as the point of departure, e.g. Camp David II.
Only Carter was an exception to this, which resulted in the successful agreements between Israel and Egypt. And even then the Palestinians were not included int he negotiations.
And yes, we backed Saddam (I wouldn't characterize this as a 'negotiation with a terrorist') in order to encourage him to attack Iran, which he was glad to do for immoral reasons of his own. We then turned a blind eye to his desire to invade Kuwait, feigned surprise when he did so, and ended up having to attack him to free Kuwait. And the rest is known...
So, yes, we ofetn create messes for ourselves. In each case, people who know the Middle East and don't have hidden agendas were warning what would happen, but our (US) government too readily listens to those whose inetersts aren't always for the best, and so the country makes bad mistakes and suffers from it, often bringing down onto our own heads the very things we wish to avoid. Our invasion of Iraq is doing this and will only get worse for us. Afganistan is taking a predicted turn for the worse as well.... Stay tuned as we watch the ignorance and ill-intentions of the neocons continue to create havoc and danger for the US.
It is sad, and from apoint of view of US foreign policy, it is pathetic.
Many thanks. It seems to me that the matter of putting money before anything else is the greatest problem of all that you listed, in part because it may be the one that drives all of our interaction with the environment. How in the world do we reverse this???? I do think we have to figure this one out.
I've given a couple of classes on Western culture and its impacts on the rest of the social and physical world. It is not a good situation, as 'Western culture' -- with all its dysfunctionalities, is still rapidly spreading beyond the West. I do see in some kids here in the US a reaction against Western culture -- sometimes th reaction is healthy, and at other times it seems to me to be as destructive as anything.
In a sense, some of the things you point to have been going on 'a long time' -- like the general patterns of cooling and warming -- and some even stranger ones, like the magnetic reversal of the poles. (What is THAT all about???). The temperature trends that we are now seeing are well within the pattern of the last 100,000 years, say. Of course, this doesn't mean that human beings won't be harmed of affected; it only suggests that only human activity is to 'blame' for these trends.
Will human beings become wise enough to 'manage' our environment effectively and beneficially? That is the big, question, IMHO. It is the question that I spend most of time trying to figure out and influence. And I still don't know how to answer it. What do you think?
Thanks again for your thinking, and for the thread.
What reasons for the Walmart boycott, Wikked? I know there is a lot of criticism of Walmart, and am wondering what yours are after working there for those five years.
OK< I've talked enough with Teilhard. Switching to man-mode. She is here on CS, but I wouldn't want to put her on a bleak and deserted island, even with me and my Swiss army knife and a copy of Swiss Family Robinson.
I am finding myself getting a little jaded at the prospect and hope of finding 'the right person.' A year ago, my heart would leap at the thought and at the possibility that I had met her. Now, I feel numbed. Have I become cynical? Am I half-way to giving up? I don't want to.
I long for a true partner; I long for a family. Am I too jaded?
Thanks for your thoughtful and generous reply, Red. I completely sympathize with the difficulty. It is especially hard for single parents. I was in the odd situation of in effect having to raise my son by myself the last few years of my wife's life, and while her love for both of us was always present and felt, I deeply missed her involvement and wisdom. I was very, very, very lucky: my son grew up wonderfully and never presented me with the kind of challenge that you face around this car accident.
My heart goes out to you. You sound like a wonderful person, and I saw further on in the thread that you had done several things beyond address the 'who pays' question. Your response to my posting shows that you are a thoughtful, kind, genuine, big-hearted, and learning person. Your son, and your other kids, are very lucky to have you as their Mom.
Agreed. I wonder to what extent this can be worked out before a couple makes a commitment to each other?
I look back on relationships I've had -- wonderful people -- and why they don't work out, and I am frigtened by how ignorant or blind I was during them....
Why do you say 'they' can't be trusted? History is replete with 'terror' leaders who reached agreements with their oppressors and lived up to them. E.g. the FLN's Ahmed Ben Bella, Shining Path, the Irgun and Stern Gang, FATAH, the PoK's Jama'a al-Mujahideen, Gerry Adams and the IRA, EOKA, Phoolan Devi, Majlis al-Mujahideen (Indonesia), etc.
Trust is not always a prerequsite to talks: the outcome of the talks can be crafted in such a way that trust is not an issue. As Reagan said: "'Trust', but verify."
And, yes, there are terrorists that CAN'T be trusted and with whom one can't negotiate, like Prabakaram. He has to be assassinated, IMO.
Best way to 'stop terrorism' is 1. to stop acting as terrorists ourselves, or encouraging other countries that act like terrorists 2. enter into effective dialog to settle differences
I know a lot of Americans do not believe that one can 'negotiate with terrorists' but this is flat incorrect, as any reading of history amply shows. But, believeing this, those Americans doom themselves to further cycles of attack and counter-attack. And doom the rest of the world to suffering the effects of this ignorance.
Eventually, I assure my friends from elsewhere, America will learn what it needs to learn, and we will find our way back to living in harmony with others in the world. We don't have a right to demand your patience, but we can ask for it.
Sapin was one of the countries that joined with the US to invade Iraq. So, it was natural that they would then be attacked. It happened to England, too.
Whenever we attack someone, we must expect to be attacked in revenge.
A recent NIE concluded that our occupation of Iraq had INCREASED the threat of attack against us. Is anyone surprised???
This will sound a little severe, I'm afraid. I am responding to your title for this thread: your son didn't make a 'dumb decision'. He (and the others) demonstrated a profoundly flawed sense of judgment, and some of the responsibility for that must lie with his parents and their parenting.
The issue of 'who pays' is trivial compared to the issue of parenting and responsibility for 'dumb decisions.' If you handle this event through the lens of 'who pays' you are not requiring your son to take responsibility for the bad judgement, only its particular and immediate results. What teaching have you imparted to him about this? Or is this only being addressed because there was monetary damage to someone's property? What 'parenting' are you doing around this? These are all far more important questions than 'who pays.'
And if we are only to address the 'who pays' issue: would it not be appropriate for your son to pay 'more' than for mere repair, as a token of genuine apology and regret for his behavior? He should be grateful to the person whose car was stolen and damaged that the owner didn't call the police; arguing about 'who pays' seems to me to be the wrong response and one that completely fails to teach your son the right lessons.
Again, my apologies for the severity of this response. It is not always easy being a parent, I know. I believe that you and your son have an opportunity here to learn some life-changing lessons. I hope you seize the opportunity.
I prefer women who have their own opinions and epxress them, and who have given life some thought. I do not find women (or men, for that matter) intimidating. I do find it easy to ignore those who are annoying or don't learn....
I think that in today's world both partners almost have to be 'equal' in the relationship for it to work long term. Too many contrary cultural messages out there to allow a really unbalanced relationship as exists in a 'kept' situation. Of course, it was the ideal dacades and centuries ago....
We do live in a great age, one ripe for innovation and experimentation.
For me, it has been five years. I fight impatience every day. Recently I have been 'programming' myself to accept the idea that I may not find the 'right person' and have experienced myself opening up to the many other opportunities that do surround me....
I hope that you too can find a similar peacefulness, while not giving up on the dream of finding one's true life partner.
oceans5555 Forum Posts (803)
RE: Love It or Leave It?
And I with you....Sailing