| Sajha.com Archives | |
| Username | Post |
| Biswo | Posted
on 01-Apr-04 08:19 PM
The murder, mutilation and dragging of four American civilian workers in Faluja was shocking, and so was the scene of cheering locals. It shows the nature of Ba'athists. They had treated their own people in the worse way. One understands the motive for killing, but the way the aftermath occured shook a lot of us. A week ago, I read in the New Yorker that Nepalese Gurkha paramilitary forces are providing securities for Kellogg, Brown and Root (a major benefector of my school, Rice) in the Bagdad's famous Palestine Hotel. A NPR report yesterday mentioned there are at least 500 Nepalese serving in Iraq. God knows what condition they are in now. I am very sad to know that the Blackwater non-Nepalese employees were killed yesterday, but simultaneously I am afraid some day it may be one of our own. Let's hope things will ameliorate soon in Iraq and all good people working there , our brethrens and all others, will be safe. True, rich men make wars and poor men fight. |
| TilKumari_Ko_Poi | Posted
on 01-Apr-04 10:02 PM
Biswo ji British Gurkhas has been highly succesful in peacekeeping missions in recent years . In Northern Ireland tensions cools off as soon as british gurkhas goes there for peacekeeping otherwise white british army keep getting attacked by Irish Republican Army . Just before East Timor got independence ,there were lots of violence in the island state .Even Australian army and others got attacked and couldnt handle the deterioting situation .Eye brows were raised when British GUrkhas landed there and roamed around the country without a single attack .Mind you, this piece of news had got world wide attention and was mentioned in Main news in TV in Many countries including Hong KOng ,Singapore etc .I wouldnt say because of our brave gurkha purkhas as the only reason but gurkhas has always been succesful partly maybe of our brave history ,partly we have been lucky so far ,partly maybe we do the job right .I saw a footage of Gurkhas roaming around EAST TIMOR on main road and people just watching .They might have said " They look like us ,maybe our brothers " One of the reason we are successful if because of our neutral race .IN multiculture state like singapore ,british gurkhas are usually popular with disputes between malay ,indian ,chinese ,etc . |
| Biswo | Posted
on 02-Apr-04 12:06 PM
TKP, Yes, casualty rate is low among Nepali soldiers. Be it in Tamor, or Balkan. Let's hope it will remain so in Iraq too. Bravery to me is not in killing the others, but in saving the others. I see bravery in people who enter the house set to fire and come out with alive baby. I see bravery in people who jump to the river and come out with unconscious man who had just submerged. I also see bravery in those who fought against Nazis and other proven criminals of our history. To express it succinctly, I would rather prefer that our Nepalese Gurkha soldiers are embraced affectionately by the locals rather than feared. Yes, during second world war and Fakland war, they were also feared as killers. The pictures of beheaded babies in Fakland were published in the local media. It is wrong to invoke ageold controversy about our soldier's moral strength, but still I hope while fighting in hostile land, they remain firmly grounded in the morally high ground wherever and underwhoever's command they are working. |
| viswas | Posted
on 02-Apr-04 06:10 PM
Yes the British Gurkhas were known for their valor in the battlefield. They were said to have hacked, slaughtered and mutilated their enemy with their bare khukris and overwhelmingly defeated their enemies with sheer brutality. How much of that is myth/truth , history is the only witness. However, what bothers me is the irrational persistence of the media to cling to this clichéd and rather mythical image of these brave soldiers as being ruthless, and cold-blooded warriors. While it might have been valid half a century ago, it holds no ground of truth today. It is disheartening to see these soldiers being misrepresented and treated as being fearsome and to some degree even inhumane and backward. Not many people realize that times have changed and the British Gurkhas today are not the same old bunch. Soldiers in the British Gurkhas today don’t function in the same way that their predecessors used to. While they remain truly the same valiant soldiers, they are better equipped and organized. Heeding to the call of the time they have left their previous mode of warfare and instead are thoroughly trained in the art of modern warfare. Whether that is good or bad is a fresh topic altogether. In any case they are an elite force comprising of men of honor and dignity and I believe they deserve our utmost respect. Here is a good example of how they contribute and even add fuel (even though it may be indeliberate and full of good intention) to the cliché about the British Gurkhas as a brand of mercenaries: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Canadians and legendary Gurkhas patrol together, with contrasting styles 08:36 PM EST Apr 02 LES PERREAUX KABUL (CP) - Sgt. Francis Guimond is in pretty good shape as the leader of an elite Canadian infantry unit, but even he watched in awe as a member of Britain's legendary Gurkha brigade strode up a mountain path the other day. "From time to time he would offer to carry us on his back," said Guimond, a platoon leader in Company A of the Royal 22nd Regiment, the Vandoos, who are leading Canada's mission in Afghanistan. "I think he would have had no problem. He found it very easy, compared to us." Canadian troops and Gurkhas are patrolling together in a week-long exchange aimed at sharing techniques and soldiering style. The Gurkhas are a brigade of renowned Nepalese soldiers who have fought for the British army for two centuries. Their motto is "Better to die than be a coward." They carry a 40-centimetre dagger into battle called the kukri. Legend has it that years ago, a kukri had to "taste blood" if it was drawn in battle. Otherwise, the owner was required to cut himself before putting it away. The soldiers are handpicked from young men living in the hills of Nepal. About 30,000 people sign up every year for 200 openings. Among the physical tests, the soldiers must run uphill for 40 minutes carrying a 30-kilogram load in a basket. "Their physical tests are far, far higher than ours," said Guimond, shaking his head in admiration for the strength and stamina of the Gurkhas. "And they consider it a dishonour to fail." Cpl. Desh Rai of the Royal Gurkha Rifles led a handful of British and Canadian troops on a quiet patrol in eastern Kabul early Thursday morning, collecting intelligence on local religious leaders and mosques. The Gurkha's kukris were not on display. Desh said he has easily absorbed two Canadian soldiers into his unit. They use the same procedures and tactics as British units, he said. A typical Gurkha with his short, muscular frame, Desh said the main difference he has noticed is physical. "The Canadians have big, big bodies so they move a little slow," he said. "Compared to my people, they take a little time to move." While strength and fitness were not obvious factors on the jeep patrol, Desh still put one Canadian physical attribute to use. Desh's British jeeps have a hole in the roof so a soldier can keep watch as the patrol drives down the road. Thursday he put his two lanky Canadians in the turret with machine guns. "They're nice and tall," he said. "They can watch everything." But Desh clearly has some advantages with his Asian heritage, a fact that becomes apparent on the patrol, which is partly designed to create goodwill with Afghans. At one mosque he visited, Desh jokingly claimed his ancestry as Hazara, a minority ethnic group that is frequently the target of persecution in Afghanistan. Desh shares the eastern-Asian appearance of the Hazara. His comment drew laughter from a dozen Hazara men, who slapped their Gurkha visitor on the back and shook his hand. Desh also uses his command of Urdu, a language known to many Afghanis, to help put people at ease. © The Canadian Press, 2004 http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/040318/w031844.html |
| TilKumari_Ko_Poi | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 10:09 AM
My father was one of those gurkhas who fought in Falklands war in 1982 in Argentina .He was indeed first battalian of gurkhas to have been landed on Falklands .He is 57 and whenever he meets his old numberi from his regiment ,they talk and talk and talk . After having some drinks my father always repeats the same line that I have been hearing since childhood .'Falkland ma jhari parey jhai goli barsinda pani mariyeuna gaanthe ". He says remaining gurkha battalian had nothing to do as most of the falklanders were scared away .they simply didnt choose to fight gurkhas . He describes how whole of falkland was scattered with notice saying 'deadly gurkhas are arriving in the country '.Later I learnt that Argentinians were fighting white british amry bravely causing heavy casualties to both sides .My own conclusion is that argentinians didnt run away just because gurkhas were deadly .they found it useless to fight with a third party i.e gurkhas .The then government of Argentina had written letter to His majesty the King to withdraw gurkhas from falkland as they had done nothing wrong to Nepalese people but in vain . And hence british won the battle by using gurkhas as mercenaries . In modern days gurkhas are mainly involved in dismantling the disputes rather than fight .Sometimes I think why not send british gurkhas to middle east .who knows the neutrality of gurkhas might end the years of bloodbath between Palestinian and Isrealis .I mean Lets do what we are good at . Interesting posting there viswas and biswo ,thanks |
| qallu | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 02:33 PM
"....but the way the aftermath occured shook a lot of us. " Biswo ji, please clarify. If the mutilation had not occured and it had not been so guesome, would it have been less shocking? or ....excusable?? The lack of outrage has me outraged!! And who says it wasthe Bathists? or even just Bathist type ehaviour? Remember the rejoiced in the streets of NY and egypt when on 9/11? I think they were normal citizens. People can be pretty twisted without being part of an oppressive regime. Remember what people did to those policemen in Nepal? I hope all of them rot in hell. Even in a mob, people are INDIVIDUALLY reponsible for their behavior! and should be held accountable! |
| czar | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 03:15 PM
Slain By Dana Priest and Mary Pat Flaherty The four men brutally slain Wednesday in Fallujah were among the most elite The men, all employees of Blackwater Security Consulting, were in the A Blackwater spokesman said the men were guarding a convoy http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43364-2004Apr1.html It is interesting to note that there is NO mention in Reportedly, the hottest commodities in the Iraqi
|
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 03:37 PM
If you're justifying your response based on the article you posted/linked to, then I don't understand how you came up with the conclusion that they were mercenaries. First, just because they're "mercenaries" doesn't mean they have to be murdered. Second, fact is they were not mercenaries. Look up the definition of the word for the exact definition of the term. They were there for protecting certain groups of people. However, it doesn't change the fact that they still were employees of American firms. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 04:03 PM
Qallu, I sincerely think just the killings wouldn't have been as shocking. Condonable? Of course, not. I support the American soldiers fighting in Iraq without agreeing with the root cause laid out by the current administration for the administration. I know the soldiers are just soldiers. They didn't make war. They went there because they believed they were upto something good. But because so many people are dying there, all deaths are not capable to shock me anymore. It was the aftermath of the death in Faluja that shook me.That's all I wanted to say. Rummy, whose oratorial acument I always praise, once gave the reason for the war: after inspectors of UN came out empty in their search for biological/chemical weapons,"Absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. " Now, we all know it seems to be the case. >And who says it wasthe Bathists? or >even just Bathist type ehaviour? Interestingly, unlike Hamas or our Maoists, Iraq doesn't have system of claiming responsibility for murders. Eye-witnesses, journalists, and Coalition forces have said they were the Ba'athists, and I guess I am going to believe them. Well, I agree the mob is not totally Ba'athists exclusive. The mob was like the group of people under the spell of those evil elements. But those who danced there, who dismembered those dead bodies, they were either evil, or had potential to be evil because they didn't have respect for the dignity of human life, nor did they have capacity to descriminate right from wrong. If somebody had killed our Gurkha soldiers, and danced like that, guess what?, I would have even supported dropping carpet bomb there. Well ,on the second thought, not exactly that extreme measure, but something approximating that. czar: Mercenary market is pretty hot these days. But it is not the complete picture. In Africa, dictators and rebels (including Mobutu, Wanda etc) consistently hired European mercenaries. Let's face it: our Gurkhas fighting in UK army are also mercenaries. But that shouldn't detract from the fact that even mercenaries have right to die without being desecrated. This is the reason why the aftermath, more than death itself, shook us more. |
| czar | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 07:16 PM
MOBILE BSC also http://www.blackwatersecurity.com/services.html http://www.blackwatersecurity.com/ “Training and Tactical Solution” Just what does 'tactical solutions' mean ? Sunday school catechism or picking daisies ? The fallen employees of Blackwater were hired guns, gun toting personnel ready to kill or be killed. Just like thousands of others operating in the Iraqi war zone. "in "Supporting US national security At the end of the Cold War, the peace dividend Now were those slain in Falujah mercenaries? Are the Thesaurus thumping faithful aware of the entire scope of Soldiering, in private or state armies, isn't about reveille or marching around parade grounds in sharply pressed khakis. Its about training to kill others. Facing those that are prepared to kill you. Mutilation of fallen enemies is part of traditional tactics of war in many parts of the world. Unpalatable, but that's how it is. The dragging of those slain was a horrific event. I do NOT support such actions. Now being employees of an American company somehow makes them sacrosanct? Why? And the thousands Before some get their knickers in a Biswo Be they Brits, Americans or Nepali, some choose to be in Iraq as contractors to use their skills of warfare to make a living. Hazard pay is, unfortunately, sometimes earned with a bullet through the skull. Some of my ancestors fought in WWII in the Young men from our hills signed up to fight wars in |
| Robert Frost | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 07:57 PM
If the allies and the Iraq Interim Government council donot unite and come down hard on those trying to spray violence, then it is very likely that Iraq will descend itself into civil war which the United States and the allies will have greater difficulty walking away from. The best way to restore stability now is to hand over full sovereignty to the Iraqi Government Council and the people of Iraq. |
| hyaterica | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 08:08 PM
...'but we shouldn't walk away with a job that hasn't been finished off' ...This is the opinion of most of my american friends with whom I have talked about the Iraq war ! Me too thinks that US has put itself in a very difficult position. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 08:24 PM
Czar is the biggest slinger of red herrings on this board that it is so easy to read his MO. Anybody can spin it any way he wants by conveniently cutting and pasting certain passages from certain articles. Now let's give Czar a taste of his own medicine, shall we? From: http://www.blackwatersecurity.com/ "Blackwater USA is comprised of five companies; Blackwater Training Center, Blackwater Target Systems, Blackwater Security Consulting, Blackwater Canine, and Blackwater Air (AWS). We have established a global presence and provide training and tactical solutions for the 21st century." Our clients include federal law enforcement agencies, the Department of Defense, Department of State, and Department of Transportation, local and state entities from around the country, multi-national corporations, and friendly nations from all over the globe. We customize and execute solutions for our clients to help keep them at the level of readiness required to meet today's law enforcement, homeland security, and defense challenges. Any and all defense services supplied to foreign nationals will only be pursuant to proper authorization by the Department of State. " What exactly is the definition of a mercenary, according to the dictionary? 1. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling. 2. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army. First point, according to the first definition, a mercenary is a hireling, but here we are talking about people hired for a FIRM. A firm is always motivated by greed, so the definition is moot. What then, are you gonna call Tyco a mercenary too? As for the second definition, well, guess what, I'll let you figure it out; it is pretty obvious, don't you think? It is rather pathetic that someone would try to question the motives of the American government, when it was employees from an American firm that were dying, and not someone in the military. "Teams stand ready to be deployed around the world with little notice in support of US national security objectives, private or foreign interests. " Exactly, the firm supports American national security objectives. Your point being? Were they working for some foreign army, then I would understand. "Private security detail requires being ready to kill, or be killed, protecting assigned assets. Such assets may include, but not be limited to, people." Did you even read the original article that you posted? How are bodyguards mercenaries, pray tell? What do you think, would the peeps protecting George W. Bush not take action were they to receive intelligence that someone would attempt to kill him? So, taking action when "protecting assigned assets" does not count as mercenary duty. "Soldiering, in private or state armies, isn't about reveille or marching around parade grounds in sharply pressed khakis. Its about training to kill others. Facing those that are prepared to kill you" Nobody is saying it is about marching around parade grounds, of course they have to undergo thorough training, but dismissing the four murdered individuals as mercenaries was not only uncalled for, but also an attempt at belittling the lives of the deceased. As I explained already mercenaries are hired for different reasons, but not for the reason primarily abused by you. Of course it's easy to sling nouns here and there, but affronts like these(calling them mercenaries) are unbecoming. "A direct consequence of the confusion is that now ALL non-Iraqis are viewed as combatants." Wow, a good way to justify murder of four innocent individuals. Do the terrorists(or Jihadists/freedom fighters if your euphemistic soul prefers any of these) have the discretion to kill people who were there to liberate them in the first place. Of course European nations and Arab world are going to envy united states and promote propaganda against the US as much as possible. Ultimately though, it is good for the Iraqis. Confusion or not, Americans in Iraq do not deserved to be killed. |
| Jonny_Blaze | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 09:27 PM
The question of wether the gurkha is a mercenary is confusing. Technically the gurkha is a mercenary, but also the argument arises that no mercenary would show such bravery or loyalty in the battlefield. The Argentinians who feared the myth of the ruthless gurkhas, i have also heard they did not want to fight because they felt they had nothing against the Gurkhas. please read Imperial Warriors by Tony Gould. Great book. -blaze |
| czar | Posted
on 05-Apr-04 10:05 PM
The initial welcome pages do http://www.blackwatersecurity.com/services.html Definitions or “What exactly is the definition of a mercenary, according to the dictionary? My point precisely. Quod Erat “It is rather pathetic The motives of the American So did some of its arrogant Its telling when quite a few American trekkers sew on red Maple Leaf (symbol of Canada) patches before heading off trekking in Nepal and other parts. Some would do well to cast aside blinkers, travel the world and experience itsdiversity and learn if they are capable of it. Before engaging in chest-thumping, sneeringly sanctimonious declarations of America's I do not support killing of Americans. Or Poles or Spaniards, Brits, Nepalese or anyone for that matter. Those who prescribe to the Texan "with us or against us- lets go in guns blazing" school of thought are incapable of America has achievements it can rightly be proud of, a nation the world used to look up to. It can still be that way. A visit to historic Jamestown, Monticello and Freedom Hall can be inspiring. And begs the question: why has that magnificent nation disappeared under a cloud of gunpowder? Its time to clear the air. |
| sajhakoraja | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 07:49 AM
Nepali soldiers in British Army serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. Radical islamists ignore combatant/civilian distinctions. Every Nepali everywhere is now fair game. Welcome to the club. |
| qallu | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 08:21 AM
descacrating dead bodies is sick. making excuses for it is even sicker. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 11:15 AM
"My point precisely. Quod Erat Demonstratum" No, you haven't proved anything. Most firms operate for money anyway. Are Halliburton employees mercenaries too? Exactly, the "Training and Tactical Solutions" phrase highlighted in bold only serves to assert that the principle duty of the firm is not to act as "hirelings", but mainly to provide aid in the form of training. So, what are the primary objectives of the company? They are, according to the site: 1.SECURITY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS AND RISK ANALYSIS - isn't really risky business, so I wouldn't classify it as mercenary duty. 2.TRAINING : Again, no risks involved. Hardly mercenary duty. 3. MOBILE SECURITY TEAMS: Essentially speaking "bodyguards", for protection. Hardly qualifies as mercenary duty. 4. "PROTECTIVE SOLUTIONS ": Again, it's just counseling. Guess what then, BSC basically counsels the government and other private firms on security and protection issues, with only one objective that sticks out like a sore thumb, that is "mobile security teams". Nevertheless, the third objective still is not mercenary duty. If they were fighting overtly, side-by-side with the American military, then I would of course have agreed with you. So is not the case, unfortunately. "The motives of the American government are beyond question ? So the present American government operates on the direction of God Almighty, do they now? Any nation that bequeaths for itself the mantle of infallibility and invincibility would do well to remember Rome thought that of itself too" You're putting words into my mouth. I never said that. The American government of course isn't Almight God, and ergo, is capable of miscalculating and making erroneous judgements and calls, I grant you that. Anybody can criticize the government. However, when it comes to lives of American citizens(ex. of the four murdered in Falujah), the government will not try to misinterpret reality, because, let's face it, the government is like putty in the hands of the American people. One grave mistake, and the government is gone come next election. So, I don't understand why people in the White House would try to hide things anyway! Plus, the media is not controlled by the government, so I hope you're not pointing to some form of conspiracy theory in that regard. "So did some of its arrogant citizens as they glowed in thoughts of their own grandeur. Right up the minute the barbarian hordes slaughtered them" Fine words, but a subtle fallacy to be talked about is that we have a completely different equation at present. America was not a reality in the past. So, personally, I think America will always be on the top controlling and policing the world. America is a country of immigrants. No other country can boast this title. Before America, all cultures were indigenous in nature. This is a very vital point. Not to forget that the world is a global village, so more than transfer of civilization, it will be dispersion of civilization from the focus which is America/Western culture. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the last 500 years has seen one progress after another, that other cultures just pale in comparison to what the West has achieved. "Those who prescribe to the Texan "with us or against us- lets go in guns blazing" school of thought are incapable of grasping the finer nuances of any ideas but their own" I do not prescribe to that school of thought, but Saddam played games with America for 12(maybe more by now) full years, violating one taboo after another. Solely this reason is enough to attack Iraq and topple the despotic Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein. "A visit to historic Jamestown, Monticello and Freedom Hall can be inspiring. And begs the question: why has that magnificent nation disappeared under a cloud of gunpowder? Its time to clear the air." I point to the second amendment. Since the inception of America, Americans have always been gun-toting, belligerent, jingoistic group of people, whether it be for good or not. Without this, there would be no America. |
| suva chintak | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 11:34 AM
I find it eminently amusing to observe that the pompous and self-righteous high purets of human rights and democracy in the Third World - say Nepal - turn out to be nothing more than callous Uncle Toms when it comes to cheering the march of Pax Amerikana around the globe. How does imperial diktat and human rights go together? *** Desecrating human dead corpses is an heinous act by any measure; but that is nothing compared to the acts that turn once thriving people, communities, and nations into corpses. *** Falluja is now encircled, locked, and under assault by one of the toughest branches of the US military. Those of us who are in favor of a collective vengence of epic proportions; including "I would have even supported dropping carpet bomb there. Well ,on the second thought, not exactly that extreme measure, but something approximating that" ought to rejoice. That divine retribution is being carried out even as we speak. The Lord be Praised! |
| SITARA | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 12:00 PM
Suva ji: The "carpet bombing" is not too far fetched, trust me... as long as the US is doing it, there some of us who would happily support it... desecration or no desecration, as long as the end results in death! And Amen to that! |
| qallu | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 01:29 PM
A "thriving" country...? Hello. |
| the other one | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 02:26 PM
Once upon a time, and we all remember that time, when Sunni’s ruled under Saddam’s wing fanning mustard gas and terror we now see through the burnt corpses. Is one burnt corps more humane than the other? No pun but, if you get to close to the fire you are bound to get burnt either merceneris or not. |
| Robert Frost | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 03:06 PM
It is unreasonable to think that when one invades a sovereign nation, sets up contractors to rebuild, and expect people to remain silent when their land is being taken over completely. What we saw is just another crossover of violence when people reacting angrily to foreign nation stepping up on their land and claiming the authority without regards to civilian lives and the lives of the young soldiers, sacrificing their lives to an administration who has little knowledge of what it is doing. I hope the administration has realized that they have opened up Pandora's Box, and a neverending act of barbarism. |
| czar | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 03:09 PM
If they were fighting overtly, side-by-side with the American military, Forces from private "However, when it comes to lives of American citizens(ex. of the four Which people, exactly? Definitely putty in Politicians will not try to misinterpret reality Here's a primer: Collin Powell publicly admitted So, I don't understand why people in the White House would try to hide 101 on damage control: Huge media coverage of Veteran groups and serving members have been "Americans have always been gun-toting, belligerent, jingoistic group America was built by hard working, honest to The belligerent, jingoists were the |
| czar | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 03:29 PM
Now there’s some about who equate my discourse as justifications of the corpse mutilations. Those were barbaric events. But a reality of the insanity of war. That does not imply support of it, merely that I am willing to point out the reality of conflict. A closer reading of my writing by those with an open mind will discover that: - I have not supported killings of any kind, anywhere, by anyone, - I have chosen to enter into a discourse with a view to arriving at a clearer understanding of the situation - some quarters would be discomfited by some of the harsher realities I may point out to. I was brutal in my opinions here and I do so to drive home the point that it is invalid to judge the world using one lense. Those that cast it aside will be more successful in appreciating the diversity of opinions and realities of this blue planet we call home. Those that are unable to will likely be condemned to being haunted by demons of their own making. Let not hubris be their undoing. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 04:17 PM
This is probably the article that czar is referring to: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53059-2004Apr5.html "The role of Blackwater's commandos in Sunday's fighting in Najaf illuminates the gray zone between their formal role as bodyguards and the realities of operating in an active war zone" I knew Czar would try to tip-toe is way out after I pinned him down. Note that the article mentions that their formal role is as bodyguards, although they have had to face the reality of operating in a warzone and repel attacks by Iraqi "freedom fighters". HOW does that change the fact that these people were not hired to fight, but to protect? It just does not. Czar is tap-dancing out of the "mercenary duty" issue he was so keen on defending a few hours ago. You're just bolstering my position if you keep on linking to articles that mention their formal role as bodyguards. As for "secret roles" that they might play, they are probably conjectures. If they're secret roles, then how did the secrets get promulgated? Conspiracy theories again. "Which people, exactly? Definitely putty in the hands of Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld et al. Oh yes, lets not forget Haliburton and a host of others" Oh what claptrap. Then why is Bush's popularity rating on a free-fall if people are not aware of the Iraq situation? Doesn't John Kerry keep mentioning ties between Halliburton and Dick Cheney? While you're at it, since John Kerry is so keen on putting a stop on/slowing down outsourcing, why has Heinz outsourced a big deal of its business? Also, is it not true that Halliburton is the most suitable of the companies to handle the job that they were hired to do in Iraq? With or without ties to Cheney, Halliburton WOULD have been chosen. Why is Hillary Clinton supporting the war on Iraq? Is it because the intelligence Bill Clinton gathered in the late 90's also pointed to the fact that Saddam Hussein was indulging in shady deals? Dropping a bomb or two doesn't work as good as mobilizing troops. "Here's a primer: Collin Powell publicly admitted that the information on which he based his theatricals at the UN were less than reliable" He did no such thing. Collin Powel was for a full-fledged war against Iraq, and he laid out all evidences in support of going to war honestly and eloquently during his address to the UN. Here is his full speech to the UN, so people can judge for themselves what Colin Powell believed. http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/17300.htm Note worthy passage: "My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources. " Also, it is highly unlikely that the government would try to hide information from the media, at least not in Iraq. Journalists were even allowed to "embed" with the troops and travel with them, the result of which was that we got a pretty accurate delineation of the war. Nitpicking to find one or two idiosyncratic cases does not count as evidence to make the protestation that the government has a penchant for making false claims. "The belligerent, jingoists were the no-account bums who were too sodden on cheap whiskey to ever put in an honest day's work" 1. Drinking is a part and parcel of the American culture since America was founded. 2. What was the second Amendment about again? Gunpowder is as American as hamburgers. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 04:43 PM
Any views on how the Sadr problem should be tackled anybody??? Problem is that 1. Sadr is a revered figure in Iraq 2. Sadr is anti America How should the cleric be dealt with?? 12 Marines, 66 Iraqis Killed in Battles By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer NAJAF, Iraq - Iraqi insurgents and rebellious Shiites mounted a string of attacks across the south and fought pitched battles against Marines in the turbulent city of Fallujah on Tuesday. Up to a dozen Marines, two more coalition soldiers and at least 66 Iraqis were reported killed. Reports from the city of Ramadi, near Fallujah, said dozens of Iraqis attacked a Marine position near the governor's palace, a senior defense official said from Washington. "A significant number" of Marines were killed, and initial reports indicate it may be up to a dozen, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. U.S. authorities also launched a crackdown on radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr al-Sadr and his militia after a series of weekend uprisings in Baghdad and cities and towns to the south that took a heavy toll in both American and Iraqi lives. The fighting marks the first major outbreak of violence between the U.S.-led occupation force and the Shiites since Baghdad fell a year ago. " http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040406/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_13 |
| Biswo | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 05:27 PM
Sitara, Re Carpet bombing: I had a condition there: if Nepalese were killed, and had their body desecrated like that, and had the town celebrated that desecration. Because like I mentioned before, Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg,Brown and Root employs Nepalese 'mercenaries' as their guard. And finally, I also said I didn't exactly mean carpet bombing on my second thought. Shuva Chintak: Thanks for your thought. The problem is somehow it happens that whichever country we talk about, you just seem to support the tyrrants, and I seem to oppose the tyrant. Its funny you just love to be on the wrong side of history. I respect your right to be on the wrong side of history and judgement, but ke garne, you have very wrong arguments to support your position. In Iraq, you somehow find Iraq under Saddam 'thriving'. Hello? Just go to the library, and read about Iraq under Saddam, specially since 78. That may help you to disabuse your notion about thriving Iraq. As for human right thing, I support the human rights of every one we are talking about. What I find uncomfortable to support is the impunity to violators. If US guys are violating human rights, bring them to the court. Similarly, if Sunni terrorists are violating the human rights, they should know they will be accounted. |
| Usher | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 06:09 PM
The only way to halt this barbarity was through overwhelming show of force. Nuke em till they glow. Rest is history |
| czar | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 06:45 PM
Now somebody tell me that Powell Powell, describing the mobile labs as "the most
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46440-2004Apr2.html |
| Biswo | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 06:47 PM
czar: >At the start of the Afghan invasion, the > White House made a resolution to prevent, > as far as possible, any coverage of the events >at Andrews Air Force base is where fallen >soldiers are unloaded from air force freighters. >This is hidden from the American public view, >as if those returning were of no account. I am enticed to make a few comments about this. I believe the air force base from where bodybags of fallen soldiers are unloaded is Cover Air Force. [Not Andrews?] The decision to bar video cameras of returning bodybags were probably not White House decisions. I am too lazy to do google search now, but I think I read somewhere it has been quite some time since when such filming is banned. Otherwise, I am enjoying czar's and Nepali_angel's enlightening comments very much. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 07:38 PM
Just a brief note, Bush receives his info from the CIA. Clinton received the same intelligence. Clinton supported the war also. Can anybody deny that? However, I still stand by my claim that Colin Powell did not publicly admit that the info he received were less than reliable. Where in that article does he say he doubts what was said? Washington Post is a liberal newspaper, btw, so they will hurl everything at Bush to take him down. If you watch fox news, they have a totally different opinion. Why is it that Americans prefer fox over CNN 2:1??? Maybe because it's more fair and balanced? |
| czar | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 09:20 PM
It’s actually all Monica Lewinsky fault. Were it not for her cigar stunts, Clinton might have focused properly on the CIA reports and bombed Bin Laden to smithereens. Wait a sec, the US did launch cruise missiles at training bases in Afghanistan, didn’t they? Lies ! Fabrications ! Uh oh. Yes siree, its that Monica’s fault. Yea. And while we’re at it, lets blame her parents too. If that couple hadn’t had sex, the sodding perverts, Monica wouldn’t have been born. Drag that entire lot in front of the grand jury. As Usher advocated earlier, bomb em all. Start the bombing run over the Lewinsky residence first then move on to other targets. Yup. Pssssst: avoid North Korea at all costs. Them lot have lied, threatened the US, developed nuclear weapons, signed agreements with the US and publicly tore em up and spat on them. Yea, but fuggedaboudid, cause there’s this small matter about the Chinese PLA army and nuclear warheads ready to back up their North Korean clients, so do lets not mess with them. Just bomb the damn ‘eye-raa-keys.’ Woo yeah ! |
| czar | Posted
on 06-Apr-04 09:26 PM
Biswo, The Dover Airforce Base in Delaware has the National Mortuary labs and their experts in the area. When a situation exists for them to provide a positive ID of human remains, then the remains are flown there. Many of the Iraqi / Afghan war casualties are flown to Ramstein Air Base, Germany, en-route to east coast air bases. Andrews gets some of that traffic. However, I stand corrected in that the majority is processed out of Dover AFB, in Delaware, US. I distinctly recollect reading and watching TV reports on the present US administrations decision to maintain a media blackout of the returning fallen. Ditto about the veterans displeasure over it. Part of my work involved professional interactions with personnel of different branches of the US armed forces, including some helicopter and freighter pilots up to the present time. I have encountered both gung-ho types as well as those with reservations on the ongoing situation. It is not advertised, but quite a few of the present US army make ends meet using food stamps. These are hardworking, upright men and women, some of whom aren’t paid enough. Some are broke thanks to their profligacy, but there are quite a few of the lower ranks that are in difficult financial straits in part due to their meager paychecks. That is why some of them, when they complete their obligations to the armed forces, sign up for much higher fighting wages paid by private ‘security’ firms at times like this. Same goes for the ex-Brit Gurkhas, Marines or Navy SEALs. Some of them conduct ‘Security ops’ which is a euphemism that can describe a multitude of ‘operations.’ The prime pay they receive at times like this in Iraq/Afghanistan is not to lounge around guard posts, smoke, play poker and flip through Playboy. SAS and Navy Seal types in Iraq are reputedly paid $5000 a day. You draw your own conclusions. The US forces are starting to be stretched thin due to numerous commitments and conflicts around the globe. Hence the increasing use of ‘private security forces’ to fill in the gaps where needed. Including, but not limited to, facing hostiles where necessary. There are fat profits to be made in a war, any war, anytime. The Greeks and Romans needed chariots, horses, armor, spears etc. Somebody made money on that and lustily cheered on the generals of Olympia and Rome whilst counting their piles of gold. Nowadays its F/22 A Raptors. As the French say, plus ca change plus c’est la meme chose. Meaning, the more things change, the more they remain the same. As someone who admires your lucid writing, I am pleased to be conversing with you. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 06:05 AM
Uh, yeah, of course under Clinton, the US did launch missiles to take down Al Qaeda training grounds where Bin Laden purportedly was, according to the intelligence report the president received. A very simple thing to grasp is that presidents depend heavily on the CIA to launch their military campaigns. Of course the decision to take action lies on the president, but hey, if the pres receives faulty intelligence, then who is to be blamed? However, Bin Laden was not to be taken down so easily. The 1993 WTC bombing was also on Clinton's Watch, and during his tenure in office, we did see peace. Clinton, however was not your typical run-of-the-mill democrat. He was a moderate, and quite hawkish at times too. Serbia comes to mind instantly. Wasn't this Clinton's line: "The days of big government are over"? Blaming Monica Lewinsky huh? Sure, the repubs pounced on Clinton, for they believed his ulterior motive had to do with the Lewinsky scandal. Then again, a president isn't supposed to be swayed by personal problems when making presidential decisions. Still, even Hillary and Bill Clinton were supporting war on Iraq. Your favorite ex-president was for war on Iraq. Al Gore however flip-flopped and decided to back the biggest dove running for presidency. Anywho, what happened to Afghanistan has nothing to do with matter at hand. It was a multilateral decision anyway. In case of Iraq, however, the journalists were even allowed to embed with the troops. |
| czar | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 08:58 AM
Given your stance that most Americans are gin stills, then blame must also go to Bill and Hilary Clinton's parents. If they had stayed sober, the wouldnt had Bill or Hilary. Had either Bill or Hillary stayed sober, they wouldn't have married each other. Because they stayed off the hooch, he became guvn'er and Pres. Damn, them gin stills lost bizness and made him Prez. Somebody bomb gin stills in Arakansas. For good measure, blow up the Jack Daniels plant too. How about the factory making Coors Light? Yea. All o them are responsible for this mess. Yea, and I've this sneaking suspicion that mad cow disease in Texas has omething to do with this situation too. All o them Lone Star state people who ate steaks, especially in the guvn'ers mansion in the past ten years, may be infected. That explains them turning plumb looney. Send in a B1B with daisy cutter ordinance to bomb suspicious lookin Texas farms. By golly, gotta make em glow. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 10:51 AM
czar, I searched a page regarding DAFB and the decision not to allow the camera there. It seems the decision was made during Clinton Administratio's last days, but was enforced only on the eve of Iraq war (so bodybags from Afgan war were shown). Please see the link below: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A55816-2003Oct20¬Found=true -- I think veterans have tough time here in USA. I read a long article in New Yorker about a GI from wisconsin who lost his one leg in Iraq war. I remember reading that his salary was sth like $1900.00. This would lessen significantly once he loses his job. (The article says might be 40% or 50% of what he was getting then). When I was watching The Best Years Of Our Lives (a classic released in 1946, it deals with three veterans returning from second world war), I was very heartbroken. The soldiers who come back have primarily mastered the only skill (to fight) which has scarce opportunities inside the country. Also, somehow , it seems a lot of vagrants standing in the shoulders and asking for a ride in interstate seems to have the military connection in the past.So, I understand that everything is not about making a killing when they want to join Blackwater like companies. They may not have any other opportunity in this dreaded time.Add to this the general feeling of antipathy towards Vietnamese veterans(alot of people regard them as criminal/baby killers etc) and even Iraq war veterans(though the feeling is changing). The soldiers in these days also are more educated, and they tend to think whether the war they fought was worth it, whether the limb they lost was worth it. They feel very sad at the suggestion that the war was worthless (which means they lost their leg[s] for nothing). Some may even feel anger, but majority has this feeling of sadness of not being recognized. This is when I feel real sympathy for the GIs fighting in Iraq. May be they are fighting for Cheney's Halliburton cause. Or may be the theory that neocons in Washington want us to believe (that US is there to establish democracy in Iraq and spread it throughout, even more , lessen the dependence on Soudi Arabia). The removal of Saddam is a commendable cause. We need to understand that he was a monster who killed people mercilessly, who gassed his own people, who drained Tygris's sorrounding swamplands and who was the chief black marketeer in Iraq. Bush was a stupid to sideline all these things and use WMD pretext.Bush was also wrong to go to Iraq. But the war has some merits. I think it is important to recognize merits just as much as it is important to recognize demerits. I also think it is important to differentiate good and gullible people(in this case the GIs) from those who make them function(Bush and co.). |
| suva chintak | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 12:13 PM
Let me begin this with an ode to the great Toadie to the tyrant running from hisotry to hypocrite! Bisow jyu, I think you either entirely misinterpreted my posting, or you just did not dare to address the main points in my argument. Instead, you chose to cover your tracks with righteous personal abuse again. I sometimes feel that trying to hold a rational discussion with you is like tying to make the mullah see reason and logic...the clergy is always going to try to drown the other in the santimonious verbiage of 'I am holier than thou, so nothing you say counts since I have Allah on my side.' Let me try to make this clear, if you did not get what I mean here. All I said was that it is a moral and a logical contradiction for people to support military aggression and occupations of imperial proportions while claiming to be democrats and human right champions. I did not name you in person, it was a general comment. Instead of addressing this question, what do you do? Like a puffed up fundamentalist of the democratic variety, you get on to your soap box and spill filth at me: "The problem is somehow it happens that whichever country we talk about, you just seem to support the tyrrants, and I seem to oppose the tyrant." What is a tyrant? Could you care to define? Would your definition include one who goes around the world taking over countries, using brute military force, and setting up puppet regimes? If you agree to this, would feel that actually you are the one who is supporting the tyrant? An honest answer please, not rhetorical. And again, you engage in a vile chestthumping dance: "Its funny you just love to be on the wrong side of history. I respect your right to be on the wrong side of history and judgement, but ke garne, you have very wrong arguments to support your position." You are the all-knowing one, but I would also like to ask you to define your understanding of history. If you ask a lay person like me, history is noting more than the victor's version. Whoever wins, writes; the losers are erased. But remember, what is right or just does not always win....otherwise the Red Indians would still roaming the prairies and Carthage would continue to shine from Africa. So yes, you are definitely trying to toady up to the power when you claim to be on the right side of history. As for me, I am happy being on the wrong side of power. Please answer this,please! Although you order a tandoori pit worker to and read in the library, I suspect it is you who makes up his worldview on the basis of 'USA Today' and O'Reilley's talk show: "In Iraq, you somehow find Iraq under Saddam 'thriving'. Hello? Just go to the library, and read about Iraq under Saddam, specially since 78. That may help you to disabuse your notion about thriving Iraq." So if you were to READ your library books (rather than using them to decorate your shelf and to scare us ignoramuses), you would see that Iraq had one of the best health system in the Middle East, one of the best education system, very skilled and technical manpower, one of the most liberal environment for women in the whole of Middle East, women did not have to wear the hijab and many worked in modern professions, Iraq had one of the most equitable distribution of national wealth among its people (the gap between the richest and the poorest segments was less) in the whole of Middle East. Before the Western alliance started attacking Iraq, the national per capita was around $4000. By comparision, India and China's figure at present is less than $ 500.I come from a poor third world country where the percapita is less than $250. Iraq seems like a thriving example to me. And finally, the human right humbug: "As for human right thing, I support the human rights of every one we are talking about. What I find uncomfortable to support is the impunity to violators. If US guys are violating human rights, bring them to the court. Similarly, if Sunni terrorists are violating the human rights, they should know they will be accounted." I think the whole idea of human rights gets a bad name when one of its self-appointed votary openly calls for carpet bombing a whole city just because four mercenaries were lynched by an angry mob. If this is the standard for human rights, Hitler would qualify for the human rights award and the war criminals from Bosnia and Rawanda ought to be given peace prizes, not prison terms. If one German soldier was killed by the French resistance, Gestapo would execute 500 people from the nearby villages. The whole idea of collective punishment evolved in this manner...and is being propagated here in Sajha as well. It is a relief that even the most conservative elements within the Peantagon are not as crazy blood thirsty wackos as some of us here to call for a carpet bombing Falluja . Lord be praised, again. By the way, who is going to bring the US to court for human rights violations? The internatioanl court does not accept any charges against US personnel. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 02:20 PM
Shuva Chintakjyu, I know you will go to an extra length to defend a tyrant, may be any tyrant. I like the way you compared Iraq's economy under Saddam (Iraq has reportedly world's second largest oil reserve) with that of China's and India's. As they say, if you want to praise even Bir Shamsher, you will find things like "He opened a hospital in KTM where there was none before..." In any case, you can argue endlessly about how thriving Iraq was under Saddam, [Do you also think first Gulf War was mistake and that Saddam should have occupied Kuwait?], and reasonable people will adjuge themselves how seriously to take your other arguments. >I did not name you in person, it was >a general comment. Yes, it was a 'general'comment. Unfortunately, you quoted my words verbatim, and in sajha, with or without name, once you quote someone's word, it is upto him to react the way he fits it proper. Rest assured that I have no desire to verbally joust with you any more than you may have such desire to joust with me. Finally, just to quench your curiosity: this advocate of Human Right and Democracy normally doesn't watch TV, because he doesn't own one and he doesn't go to other's apartment to watch TV. My favorite newspaper: New York Times (not USA Today). |
| suva chintak | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 03:26 PM
Biswo jyu, But you did not answer any of the questions I raised about your previous posting?! Come on, Sir! With your towering intellectual capacity, it is too much to ask of you to define a tyrant and history? Let me give you an example of a civil and intellecutally honest debate: You have now asked me to defend if I still think Iraq was "thriving" before the Western attacks. For the reasons I listed above, absolutely! By all socio-economic indicators, it had crossed the third world company and was moving up as a second world nation with all round development. And that development, as you are correct to point out, was no doubt helped by the large oil resource at their command. Your other question: Do I support Iraq's occupation of Kuwait and the First Gulf War to oust Iraq from Kuwait. I thought you would know that by now. I am a strong defender of the rights of small, poor, vulnerable nations to their autonomy and sovereignty...If you haven't figured that out yet! So condemned the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait; and later welcomed the liberation of Kuwait. By applying the same standards of national sovereignty, I now oppose the occupation of Iraq. I wish you could be as consistent in your views; while you oppose the Iraq's occupation of Kuwait, you welcome US occupation of Iraq. Imperial bias? You seem to be bothered by the China and India comparion. Let me explain why I made that comparision, it was only to give a sense of proportion in describing my idea of thriving. Your foray into Bir Shumsher again reveals your one sided, fundamentalist, intolerant attitude. Just because Bir Shumsher was a autocrat does not mean that we refuse to acknowledge what he did in other fields. Everything has multiple sides, qualities. We have to accpet and judge both positive and negative characters of everyone. If one person does one thing right, it does not mean that we can say that his whole life was full of righteousness. Sappir dudh le matri dhuyoko ta tapain ko Bush maharaj pani hunu hunna ni, haina ta? Try to get away from this dichotomous world of evil and good; civilized and barbarians; us vs. them, and "with us or against us" philosophy of King George and try to see the grey zone. I know it is a little difficult task, but it is far more rewarding. So when I gave you the example of Iraq, I fully recognize the tension between the Baath Party's autocracy and the reality of socio-economic development under that very regime. If you are to take a comparative lense, you will see that the Baathist rule was no more sinister and draconian than what we have in China, Kashmir, and Saudi Arabia. Yet, the political reality in these places does not seem to perturb your Imperial Majesty George in any way...and his running dogs. I am glad you read the NYT: but in order to have a more nuanced and balanced world view, you will have to do more than that. At the end of the day NYT is also a US newpaper and it also gives out the dominant American view on the world. So you got to access more critical, plural views on the emerging global power relations. And finally about supporting tyrrany. I just can't imagine a greater supporter of tyrrany than a the one who calls for "carpet bombing" a city in which four mercenaries were butchered by an angry mob. During the WW II, a few Japanese soldiers occupying China were ambushed by the resistance fighters. The Japanese decided to teach the Chinese a lession by a massive collective punishement...children, women, old, young everyone. Some 147,000 were killed in just under a week in Nanjing...the rape of Nanjing. You prescribe that kind of justice and still blow your trumpet as a democrat? As the right side of history guy? As the human rights guy? How about joining the KKK? Lots of spots there for this kind of psychos. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 04:25 PM
SC, Tks for your long response. I feel honored when intellectuals like you dedicate at least some of your precious time for me. >I am glad you read the NYT: but in order >to have a more nuanced and balanced >world view, you will have to do more than >that. I read Nepal News too. I am sorry I don't read the newspaper once published by sons of Iraq's ruler Saddam to get even ideas. I guess you probably do. With the wealth of information found in Internet and Harvard library, a lot things are really possible. My remarks about Carpet bombing: I said it was conditioned on the death of Nepalese and their postmortem desecration comparable to that of Faluja. I also added my second thought on that immediately. If that makes you to think I am greater supporter of tyranny than the supporter of Saddam Hussain, well, I guess that is fine with me. |
| suva chintak | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 05:55 PM
Biswo jyu, As far as the carpet bombing is concerned, it does not matter whether you are talking for the Gurkhas, GIs, or the Blackwater mercenaries. Their nationality is a moot point here when we are talking about humanity. What is really at stake is the idea of overwhelming collective punishment for the crime of a few. Carpet bombing is ethically and legally wrong, no matter how heinous the provocation. That is a position you have chosen freely, and it is not my business to decide whether you should support Uncle Sam or Saddam Chacha. But whatever your choice, you will be secure in the thought that you are on the "right side of history." So my hats off to you, Sir! On the issue of Saddam's son's newspapers, I don't know much about that. If I had come across such a paper, I would have definitely given a read. You see, I don't judge people's arguments by the color of their skin, caste, their religion, or their other identities. I don't dismiss what they have to say just because they are less holy than I am. I try to listen to/ hear/ watch as many sources as I can and try to come up with my own view point, which is always provisional. I do not prejudge views, events, and persons just because the current political climate deems them to be untouchables. I look forward to our next repartee under similarly civil environs. Until then, Yours truly Suva Chintak |
| thugged out | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 08:06 PM
Clinton Vs. Bush BJ, blow job vs blown job. I prefer the former. |
| qqest | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 08:47 PM
The Final Results of All American Heavy-Weight Boxing Championship 1. Czar Vs Nepali Angel Czar completely dismanttled his opponent Nepali-Angel. She tried to stayed in the game till round 4, but considering her feather-weight trying to make some wannabe ripples in the Heavy-Weight division, She didn't stand a chance against the mercurial Czar. Final Result: Czar won by KO verdict 2. Biswo Vs SC SC comepletely man-handled Biswo. SC you need to spare your opponent when they are down and out. In the end, Biswo was looking for some graceful exit like earlier the feather weight Nepali-Angel was, but to no avail. Final Result: SC won by KO verdict. To be precise, a no contest. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Apr-04 10:03 PM
qqest: Did I see you before in sajha? It seems like you are an avid reader of my postings. Tks for the time spent on me. If you introduce yourself to me more properly, I will know the intellectual capacity of our self-appointed judge. Won't it be wonderful to know who is judging me? Masked judges traditionally exist in autocratic societies, not in the societies I admire. |
| nepali_angel | Posted
on 08-Apr-04 02:11 PM
Don't bother Biswo, communicating with trolls is like communicating with bricks. Re: Czar's last response, guess what, I don't see anything to argue about. What should I say, that Bill and Hillary were sober when they got married? Pfffffffffft. |
| suva chintak | Posted
on 08-Apr-04 04:45 PM
Terribly sorry! I thought Biswo jyu and I had concluded this thread amicably. But qquest jyu's later posting suggests that our exchange might have been taken in a very different light by our esteemed Sajha members. Looking back over my postings, I agree with qqest jyu's assessment that my comments at times have been insensitive and incosiderate. I would like to tender my most sincere apologies to Biswo jyu for my petty outbursts...I am ashamed. In the future I hope I can practice what I try to preach: the civil engagement with ideas people bring to the table rather than prejudging the person's background, caste, race, gender, nationality, or even class. qqest jyu, thank you for pointing out my flaw so that I can try to correct myself in the future. In error, SC : ( |
| Poonte | Posted
on 14-Apr-04 01:27 AM
Looking at the events in Iraq the past few weeks, I am so tempted to yell, "KHUCHING!!!" to all those who called for and/or supported this meaningless war to begin with. But I won't. Human life -- be it of a 19-year-old American kid ordered to fight; or of an innocent Iraqi man, woman or child; or even of those brainwashed, gun-trotting Islamic militants -- is too precious. I would only render myself a heartless monster if I called for a celebration at a loss of ANY human life. I am sure the US administration of the "war-mongering-trio" is now finding itself more and more in a situation that they can't seem to figure out how to resolve -- it's a classic case of "damed if you do, and damned if you don't." Get out now, they would not only be called loosers, but they surely would create an anarchic Iraq; and stay, they face a real danger of increasing American casualties, which would inevitably increase the difficulty of justifying their war based on lies. I don't know how they can maneuver the situation to make it better now, but I sure hope that the world, particularly those who supported the war, has learned/is learning some important lessons from all this: 1. The blanket and coersive imposition [in the name of "democratization"] of Western values and ideals on a country which is completely alien to them, sooner or later, will ALWAYS lead to a confusion of massive proportion even to those who think they are "civilized" and know better. 2. Unilateral wars fought on the basis of lies and deceptions, especially when they are fought without the support of the much of the world (let alone even of some of the closest allies), is sure NOT to be a cake walk, if not impossible to win. Few experts had warned (Alas, only if their calls were heeded!) that an invasion of an Arab/Muslim country by a Western, Christian, and, most importantly, obviously notoriously pro-Israel country would create more problems than it would solve. Yes, many were happy to see Saddam fall -- after all, he was perhaps, no doubt, the most brutal dictator in power in the 21st century. However, now that the initial euphoria among the ordinary Iraqis on the fall of Saddam is dissipating, we are now seeing more and more resentment of the Americans among those very people who the Bushy-heads thought they would like to liberate. Finally, I don't think that this so-called "War on Terror" can be won by liberating Iraq, or by introducing "democracy" in Afghanistan -- they only need to take a closer look at themselves and re-think some of the policies that both ends of the Pennsylvania Avenue have so adamantly stuck to. The real victory against the terrorists can only come from the realization that the US can no longer be blatantly biased in favor of the Israelis in the Palestinian conflict. I know that the task of resolving this historical conflict between the Arabs and the Jews is behemothly daunting, and may take generations to bring peace to that region. However, if the US only tried and seemed genuinely unbiased, I am sure it would go a long, long way towards allayng the anxiety of Islamic fundamentalists, which would only herald more peacful relations between the Americans and the Arabs. It would be much, much cheaper than invading and occupying a country full of people who simply hate the Americans, specially now that the latter is increasing seen as "Crusaders." |
| Poonte | Posted
on 23-Apr-04 11:23 AM
As part of my leisure readings, I had picked up a book on Ho Chi Minh's biography by Charles Fenn. Needless to say, the book is very captivating -- along with Uncle Ho's life, the author gives the reader an excellent simultaneous glimpse into Vietnamese political history, which, of course, includes the infamous Vietnam War. At one point, while writing about the events leading upto the start of a full-scale war in Vietnam, the author quotes an American writer, William J. Lederer: "The United States have three enemies. One is the Vietcong, one is the South Vietnamese; but their biggest enemy is themselves -- their dedication to a lie, a swindle. A deceived nation cannot win wars." It's quite amusing to ponder if what someone said 30+ years earlier might be true with regards to the war in Iraq today! |
| GIJane | Posted
on 23-Apr-04 11:42 AM
hear hear poonte. i am with you bro. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 23-Apr-04 03:40 PM
Poonte, Nice quotation. But as we all know war is not only about philosophy. There is no doubt that Vietnam war was wrong. It is often cited as a war where a side can win all battles, but lose the war. Apparently, Americans won in almost all fronts where they fought, but they lost the war. While we are at it, I recall my discussion with one professor who also happened to be the professor of Tariq Aziz , the former PM of Saddam, when Aziz was a student at Wisconsin, Madison. He, Dr Digoberto Brito, is a famous defense economist of our era. I asked him what the future of Iraqi insurgency will be. He told me that his research about guerilla warfare( he has made economic models of these things) shows that no guirilla movement succeeds if it doesn't have outside support.[The only partial exception was 1959 Cuba.] Applying this reason, the American policymakers now believe that sealing off Iran and Syria border with Iraq to prevent them from smuggling weapons into Iraq is their biggest priority. Destroying Faluja's hidden cache of weapons and concentration of terrorist diehards was another necessity to exhaust the dwindling resources of the terrorist Ba'athists. We will see how far they will succeed. So long nothing is surprising, everything is as scripted in the books on insurgency. |
| Poonte | Posted
on 26-Apr-04 12:09 PM
Biswo, When a beautifully-worded prediction/admonition turns into a reality, I believe it becomes much more than just a "quotation" or a mere "philosophy" -- it becomes wise words of wisdom. Such is the case with above quote by Lederer. As for the viability of insurgency in Iraq, if that is all that your professor told you, then I am afraid he is only partially right. I can think of two other (there could be more) equally vital aspects that can be used to ascertain the sustainability of insurgencies: resilience (on the part of the insurgents) and local support. Allow me first to ponder the aspect that your professor mentioned vis-a-vis Iraq. EXTERNAL HELP: First of all, completely sealing off the hundreds of miles of Iraqi borders with Iran and Syria is simply impossible. Secondly, I am sure that both Iran and Syria are well aware of the fact that if the American forces get a firm grip on Iraq, which I personally doubt they ever will, then it's quite possible that the next map on the table in the War Room in the Pentagon would be either of their's -- after all, both Iran and Syria are blacklisted by the US as state sponsors of terrorism. They should also know that driving the American forces out of Iraq to ensure the safety of their own respective futures is a far-fetched dream. Therefore, if I was making decisions in either Tehran or Demascus, then I would do anything possible to make sure that the Yanks are kept "busy" in Iraq, so that the American military, which we all know is already strecthed very thin, would have neither the time, nor the energy, to make plans to attack me. The bottom line is, it sure is in the vested interest of both Iran and Syria to support the Iraqi insurgents in whatever way they can; and when their is a will, there will surely be ways to do so. Furthermore, why only talk about Iran and Syria when we think of "external help" to the Iraqi insurgents? Why not Saudi Arabia? Saudis share the longest border with Iraq, and even if the Saudi government may not endorse any help to the Iraqi insurgents, I am sure there are plenty of Saudi private nationals who have the means (particularly financially), and a deep-rooted interest in defeating the American military. RESILIENCE: If there is one thing on earth that I would not dare to question, it is the resilience of the Islamic/Arabic fundamentalists. From the times of the Crusaders to the modern times (in their quest for freedom and independence for the Palestinians), the Arab fundamentalists have shown a remarkable determination that can be matched by no other. Whatever we may say/think of the suicide bombers, for example, just a thought of young men and women who are willing to blow themselves up for what they believe is right, for me, for better or for worse, is a display of unimaginable determination. Therefore, I, for one, sure have absolutely no doubts whatsoever about the resilience of the Iraqi insurgents. LOCAL SUPPORT: As I had mentioned in my earlier posting, we are now witnessing the initial euphoria among the ordinary Iraqis on the fall of Saddam rapidly dissipate; and their original hatred of the Americans, mainly due to the Arab-Israeli conflict, is quickly seeping back into the minds of the Iraqis. Moreover, the mounting civillian casualties on the hands of the American military, coupled with the increasingly repressive methods that the Americans are resorting to in governing the "new" Iraq is, for sure, further fueling the Iraqis' anger against the Americans. Instead of further dividing the Shiates and Sunnis of Iraq, as the Americans might have hoped, for the purposes of making their task of governing Iraq much easier, we have already seen the once unfathomable unity between the two groups in the fight against the coalition forces. Even if the locals may not directly support or help the insurgents, their muted hatred and anger against the Americans suffice to be counted as an added bonus for the insurgents. I could very well be wrong on any or all of the above, but as far as my knowledge of international affairs and global conflicts serves me well, I can see that with enough external help, unquetionable resilience, and ample local support, the Iraqi insurgents are surely capable of prolonging their war against the Americans. And if history is any indication, PROLONGED engagement ALWAYS helps the insurgents in guerilla warfare. One thing I am sure of is that we have yet to see an end to the crisis in Iraq any time soon; and when that end comes, I can only imagine the frustrated Americans going [TAUKO MA HAAT RAKHERA], "HEY BHAGWAAN, KE AAILAGYAA HAAMI MAATHI YESTO?" Then all of us who opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning gleefully yell back in unison, "KINA ROIS MANGALE, AAFNAI DHANGALE!" |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 28-Apr-04 10:25 AM
Poonte bro, I didn't read the post that you were referring to as I have become increasingly selective these days. But, here's some of my own points on some of your points: 1. Yes, I completely support your first argument. Its in Iran's and Syria's best interests to support the Iraqi insurgents (if we can call them insurgents). John Herz wrote an excellent essay on this, "Terretorial State Revisited..". In that essay, he makes the same argument, and I see no reason either to not to believe him or you. I say, India is using the same method to achieve its interests through the Maoists and the political parties in Nepal. 2. On Resilience: Yes, the Arabs have a proud history and the culture and whole persoanl dealings is directed by "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" principle. If you take it in a positive light, they repay your favors. If you take it in a negative sense, well, you get what you deserve- no liniency! (sp?). American support of Israel is one of the major causes of anti-Americanism in the Middle East. And I believe that the recent killings by Israel has somehow contributed to this increased "violence" in Iraq. 3. Local Support: Yes, no single group can carry guerilla warfare without the locals' help. Whether its in Mexico, Peru, Nepal or Iraq, the locals whether by their own free will or by force, are supoortive of the guerilla soldiers. This makes it very hard for the "legitimate" group to win or even control the situation, unless they resort to killing everyone, and this the legitimate fighting forces cannot do due to all the conventions and what not. The best way is to win the locals' support and infiltrate the "gureilla" organization. America made a mistake in Iraq. Instead of winning the locals' support, it went on to terrify them. And the result: More unexpected attacks. I don't think any sensible Iraqi opposed the US ousting of Saddam, but they did and they are still opposing the way the US is acting in their country. Bush did a good thing by ousting Saddam, and we should give him an A for that, however, he didn't have a good forward moving plan after Saddam's removal and for this, he deserves a F-. I think to avoid more casualties, teh US should sart building the trust and convince the people there that they are not going to stay there for long, and confine the soldiers to certain areas of the city or have a joint Iraqi-American patrols. Also, not everyone cheering on the US casualties is a terrorist. The US has to understand this very clearly, and the sooner it realizes, the better. They are the people who think that they are/were wronged by the US and the US casualties, as they see it, is the God's punishment to the Americans. So, the Amricans need to correct some of the mistakes vis-a-vis middle east policy soon. Perhaps, the policy makers would benifit from the Current History essay, "Nasty Bruitish and Long: Amreca's War on Terror". ** Interestingly, no disagreements with poonte this time. :-) |
| Poonte | Posted
on 29-Apr-04 11:16 AM
:-) Seriously, isn't it nice to have something that we can agree on sometimes, IF? Having said that, I must say it has been a pleasure to even disagree with you on many occasions before -- RESPECTFUL disagreements are always healthy for progress! ;) On that note, 10 (yes, 10 as in T-E-N "TEN"!) more US Marines were KIA in Iraq yesterday, and NOT in Faluja! The casualty figures from the 3 days of intense fighting in Faluja is yet to be published/confirmed by the Pentagon, they say. So far, the number of dead US soldiers in the month of April has already exceeded the number killed during the entire invasion of Iraq last year, bringing the total number of American "jawans" killed in this "mislead war" to at least 736. I suspect it won't be too long before the American public opinion will be lopsided against this never-should-have-happened war. Last evening on CBS' 60 Minutes, they featured a story of gross humans rights violations of Iraqi PRISONERS at the hands of the American soldiers guarding one particular prison just outside Baghdad. It was quite disturbing to know that the prisoners were stripped naked and forced to pose as if they were having sex (oral and anal) while the American Army General (a female) gleefully took their pictures. In one incedent, one of the male prisoner was even forced to rape another male prisoner, at gun point! One of the pictures also featured a brutally beaten up dead body of one of the prisoners. Various other forms of immense torture, including electricution of testicles, they said, were common in that prison. Pathetic, indeed! What is more troublesome is that such stories never made headlines in the prime time news in the US. The story of that one particular prison came to light because the US soldiers who committed those crimes were foolish (or, wise) enough to take pictures, providing documented evidences to their crimes. I suspect such brutality must be going on in other prisons as well, unnoticed. These monsterous acts will surely add to the already high degree of immense hatred of the Americans that exists in the Arab world, including the "liberated" Iraqis. I wonder if it has been aired in Arabic news channels, particularly by al-Zazeera. So much for winning the hearts and minds of ordinary Iraqis. |