File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2003/lyotard.0310, message 39


From: "Glen Fuller" <g.fuller-AT-uws.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Endless War
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:06:52 +1000


Judy, quick question, what is a 'blog'? I am not hip to this argot.;) Glen.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy" <jaw-AT-earthlink.net>
To: <lyotard-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: Endless War


> >Judy/All,
> >
> >The good reports are from Televsion, mostly Administration officials, and
> >sympathetic Congresspersons
> >who have visited Iraq.  Not being tortured or murdered by Saddam is a
good
> >thing.  Children are back in school with new textbooks that don't
glorify
> >Saddam.  Electrical power is said to be restored to pre-war levels and is
> >increasing.  The country north and south of Baghdad and Tikrete is said
to
> >be peaceful.
> >
> >Yes, it's difficult to know who to believe.  If and when the killing of
> >Americans and Iraquis by terrorists is stopped, there will be a chance of
> >peace,
>
>
> Maybe when Americans stop occupying Iraq, there will be a chance of
> peace, but maybe it's necessary for Iraqis to fight the Americans
> until it becomes costly enough and bloody enough that US domestic
> legitimacy dries up.  that is a different way of thinking about the
> chance for peace, such as it is.
>
>
> When i hear about 'terrorists' killing Americans and others who
> support the occupation, I am always caught by the way in which the
> portrayal is one in which if an Iraqi kills an American soldier, they
> are by definition a terrorist.  that bothers me.  There's no thinking
> involved, least of all about whether the killer may have had a good
> reason for killing an American soldier (a reason one could identify
> with if in the same position). That the American military is in some
> way good, is presupposed in these discourses. Iraqis who oppose them
> are presupposed to be bad, terrorists, evil. The Americans' behavior
> and reasons for being in Iraq are beyond question, at least where it
> might be suggested that Americans are terrorizing people,
> slaughtering people.  Somehow that is different, that is for a good
> cause, "toppling Saddam", and it is not called "slaughtering" or
> "terrorizing."  But the people I read about in the blog from Iraq
> sound rather terrorized (by the Americans and by criiminals liberated
> by the Americans, including the one placed at the head of the "Iraqi"
> government, Chalaby).  I haven't yet heard the reports from the blog
> of the improving conditions the administration claims.  In fact, the
> writer of that blog tells of how prior to the overthrow of Saddam,
> women could move about freely in the country, holding good jobs and
> being respected as human beings.  Now, she says that the removal of
> the repression of fundamentalists has resulted in women being driven
> back into the home, forced to wear old fashioned coverings, and being
> beaten for violations of these customs.  I don't get the impression
> that the writer is pro Saddam or approves of Saddam repression, but I
> clearly hear that life was better in general before the US "toppled"
> Saddam.  the writer has contempt for Bremer and others who whitewash
> the situation for home consumption. certainlly there are Iraqis who
> are better off, but from these reports, it sounds like it would be
> mistaken to generalize about most people being better off.
>
> I often hear on the 'news' from administration sources that the
> reason the US has not been able to "rebuild" Iraq as quickly as the
> public would hope, is because they didn't realize how bad the Iraqi
> infrastructure had become under 25 years of Saddam rule, caused by
> palace building and war on Iran in particular.  The US sanctions are
> never mentioned, during which the country could not import spare
> parts to maintain infrastructure, nor is it mentioned that Iraq
> received an award from the UN in the late 80s for the degree to which
> the government had improved the quality of life for the masses of the
> country, in terms of standard of living, health care, education, and
> various cultural and social programs.  It was by far in the best
> shape of the Arab countries.  The government did a lot for the
> people.  It's not a black and white picture, but it's a rare American
> who's aware of that. The occupation has been extremely destructive,
> and from the blog I'm reading, it's hard to see whether anything
> constructive has happened, for Iraqis in general.  It's been very
> constructive for Haliburton, Bechtel, Israel, those folks.  Iraqis
> which never experienced suicide bombers in their midst before now
> never know when a car or truck will blow up.  Where once there was
> public safety, now everyone is threatened by violent crime.
>
> Was the US administration "unaware" (as they say) that these things
> would happen?  How could they not be aware?   They've had their
> intelligence organizations operating all over Iraq since Gulf War
> One.  They would rather play dumb, figuring Americans will
> understand, after all, none of us knew, who understands those crazy
> arabs?  The alternative to seeming dumb would be to fail to obscure
> the fact that they were not concerned about the destruction of Iraqi
> social fabric and material living standard because it was the price
> that had to be paid for the realization of the goals of having
> western corporate business and military dominance in that area.  They
> knew exactly what would happen.  It's not rocket science.
>
> thanks for the Chomsky piece.  I thought it was good.
> Judy
>
>
>
> >  but two years after the last terrorist attack in the U.S. the
> >authorities expect more attacks.  If and when Americans believe there
will
> >be no more attacks at home,
> >they can save a bundle on homeland defense, or send the bundle to Iraq,
or
> >give more tax cuts to the wealthy.
> >
> >More and more people are saying the long-term goal of Republicans is to
> >eliminate the social programs that began with FDR, and that  the Bush
> >deficits are a great way to do it.
> >
> >regards,
> >Hugh
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>  Hugh,
> >>  Where/what are the reports that there is progress in making the lives
> >>  of Iraqis better?   last night I just read this the latest
> >>  installment in this weblog from Baghdad:
> >>  http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/
> >>  Sounds as bad or worse than under the previous regime.
> >>  judy
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  >Steve/All,
> >>  >
> >>  >Here is a quote from a long article by Chomsky on ZNet.
> >>  >
> >>  >"Since the mid-1940s, Washington has regarded the Gulf as "a
stupendous
> >>  >source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in
> >world
> >>  >history" - in Eisenhower's words, the "most strategically important
area
> >of
> >>  >the world" because of its "strategic position and resources." Control
> >over
> >>  >the region and its resources remains a policy imperative.  After
taking
> >over
> >>  >a core oil producer, and presumably acquiring its first reliable
military
> >>  >bases at the heart of the world's major energy-producing system,
> >Washington
> >>  >will doubtless be happy to establish an "Arab façade," to borrow the
term
> >of
> >>  >the British during their day in the sun.  Formal democracy will be
fine,
> >but
> >>  >only if it is of the submissive kind tolerated in Washington's
> >"backyard,"
> >>  >at least if history and current practice are any guide"
> >>  >
> >>  >Chomsky  has a great deal to say about US ability to strike almost
> >anywhere
> >>  >and any time with space-guided missiles.
> >>  >
> >>  >He doesn't speak of the differences between conventional war and
> >terrorist
> >>  >war.  Iraq may be the counterpart of Palestine in a "Sharon Model"
> >>  >  conflict - 50 years of mutual killings which neither side has the
will
> >to
> >>  >end..
> >>  >
> >>  >The U.S. has supported Israel for 50 years - may not have the same
> >>  >enthusiasm for endless deaths of US  troops.
> >>  >
> >>  >On the cheerful side, thre are enthusiastic reports of great progress
in
> >>  >making life better for the Iraquis.
> >>  >
> >>  >regards,
> >>  >Hugh.
> >>
> >>


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005