Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence
* G * O * A * N * E * T C * L * A * S * S * I * F * I * E * D * S * Enjoy your holiday in Goa. Stay at THE GARCA BRANCA from November to May There is no better, value for money, guest house. Confirm your bookings early or miss-out Visit http://www.garcabranca.com for details/booking/confirmation. --- Mario There is a huge amount of garbled thinking in your long post below. When I have some time, I will address every one of your points--many of which I find absolutely absurd in this and earlier posts. Cornel - Original Message - From: Mario Goveia [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994! goanet@lists.goanet.org Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence * G * O * A * N * E * T C * L * A * S * S * I * F * I * E * D * S * Enjoy your holiday in Goa. Stay at THE GARCA BRANCA from November to May There is no better, value for money, guest house. Confirm your bookings early or miss-out Visit http://www.garcabranca.com for details/booking/confirmation. --- --- cornel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would I feel insecure if I were an Iranian surrounded by nuclear powers? You bet I would. I'd want the bomb badly and especially because the West has absolute double standards on bomb possession. The West has never stopped arming itself to the teeth whilst asking all others to refrain from doing so. Mario responds: Only if one were blissfully unaware of history could one continue to make uninformed comments as shown above with no basis in context or perspective. Like being in an intellectual tunnel. To start with, who exactly was threatening Iran in recent history other than Saddam Hussain? Israel is the only country that has nuclear arms in the middle-east, and is tacitly allowed to by the US, not the West, because the US believes that Israel will only use their nukes for defensive purposes, and because it is the only country that has been officially targeted for extermination by force by all it's Arab neighbors since it was formed in 1947. The feckless UN has proven that it is incapable of protecting such a nation under siege. Since 1947 a couple of Arab states have given up on this goal, like Jordan and Egypt, while most of the others still have official policies that threaten to wipe Israel off the map. Iran is one of these states that regularly threatens the extermination of Israel as part of official government policy, which is why the entire UN, which includes Russia and China, not just the West of Cornel's nightmares, are desperately trying to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear capability. Cornel's version is that the Palestinians and other Arabs were just minding their own business in 1947, living in peace and harmony with milk and honey flowing freely and nubile virgins running around for the taking, when a bunch of Jews suddenly appeared from nowhere and started furiously attacking all their neighbors simultaneously and have not stopped ever since. On the other hand, no one is threatening Iran's survival, and neither does Iran need nuclear power for civilian purposes while floating on a sea of oil. Can anyone have a rational discussion with someone who doesn't know any of this? Cornel writes: Ideally, because I cannot want any country to have deadly nuclear weapons per se, I'd like all powers to work towards multilateral disarmament on nuclear weapons initially and then reduce other horrendous weapons gradually. Unfortunately, the West has set a bad example on this issue notwithstanding attempts to reduce weaponry by some world leaders. Regan and Gorbachev come to mind. Moreover, other nations are now getting to a stage when they can ignore what the West says. Mario replies: More comments from an intellectual tunnel with no historical context or perspective. The West first started down this road, fortunately or unfortunately, in response to the Nazi-led Axis that was threatening the entire world and working on their own nuclear program. The only use of nuclear power in war brought a brutal war where millions had died over 4 long years to a standstill in 4 days, saving continued mayhem and millions of more deaths thereafter, albeit at the expense of about 200,000 enemy lives. Thereafter, it was the secular humanists of communism, that also threatened global domination by force, that required the West to continue to develop such deadly arms to prevent
Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence
Hi Aristo Many thanks for letting us know what prompted your question on Conflict and Wars. After my quick reply, I began to feel that the reasons were greater than I had imagined but that immediate my response was better than none to your important question that affects us all. It struck me that there was another reason later alluded to by Elizabeth. A feeling of insecurity must feature strongly even though this can be exploited by some like the Israelis to their very great advantage. Would I feel insecure if I were an Iranian surrounded by nuclear powers? You bet I would. I'd want the bomb badly and especially because the West has absolute double standards on bomb possession. The West has never stopped arming itself to the teeth whilst asking all others to refrain from doing so. Ideally, because I cannot want any country to have deadly nuclear weapons per se, I'd like all powers to work towards multilateral disarmament on nuclear weapons initially and then reduce other horrendous weapons gradually. Unfortunately, the West has set a bad example on this issue notwithstanding attempts to reduce weaponry by some world leaders. Regan and Gorbachev come to mind. Moreover, other nations are now getting to a stage when they can ignore what the West says. I have a different question for you now and wonder if you might reflect on it: Are we able to detect the very first signs of the decline of American economic and political power even though, not yet, her military power? I believe that as with all great powers, a decline sets in eventually. American decline and it being superseded by China, especially in conjunction with India, is foreseeable even if this may take some time. I can see Mario absolutely foaming at the mouth over my heresy above but wonder if the rest of our very sane American friends on Goanet, in particular, and others, might reflect on this question please? My question is not linked to any wish-fulfilment. It merely reflects my observation of what is currently going on economically and politically the world over. Finally, I too have been haunted by the lyrics of Lennon's Imagine but find it difficult to accept the widely accepted view that it is the greatest tune ever written. I am inclined to believe that religion has directly or indirectly been the source of a very great deal of strife in the world. I do not accept the view, invariably presented by believers that, it is not religion that is contributory to strife but man who misreads religion. If this is so, the logic is that if there were no religion, man would not have something to misread/misunderstand and cause so much strife. Regards Cornel - Original Message - From: Aristo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Goanet goanet@lists.goanet.org Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 2:02 PM Subject: Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence Aristo enquired: I would like to know what YOU feel is the PRIMARY root-cause of War, Confict and Violence in contemporary society, and how is it in contrast with historical wars. Is it due to: 1) Fundamentalism Bigotry (Religious, Cultural, Racial, Ideological, etc) 2) Greed (for Wealth, Power Authoritarianism, Glory) that is sometimes cleverly disguised as reason # 1 3) Innate violent nature of humans, more often of men. 4) Other Cornel opines: Religious,Cultural, Racial, Ideological rationales are invariably brought into play to get the support of those who may not be interested in conflict and do not want to die in battles/wars which generally benefit the elites at the expense of the lower social orders. I would therefore put your No 2 first, and No 1 second but it is not always so. Elisabeth opines: I think human beings are at the very base of our being very animalistic with a thin veneer of civilisation. As animals, we are territorial and on a constant quest to safe-guard our resources. When you boil down all the religious wars, the cultural wars, the economic wars, it is all about safeguarding what we want to preserve. Mario opines: Would you please see where you can fit the following situation into your ruminations about the causes of war, conflict and violence: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/05/D8ILUTQ01.html Do you still think Aristo's # 2 supercedes # 1? BTW, could you provide some recent examples of # 2? Hi Cornel, Elisabeth and Mario, Thank you for your responses. Im glad to have got different perspectives - one phisophical, another scientific, and the other, well, Goveian! I personally do believe that contemporary wars and conflicts are being fought on the basis of Fundamentalism Bigotry, but are triggered off by individuals motivated by Greed in some cases. In much the same way Cornel is fearful of Evangelical activities that may cause tension in the near future. Whether the Iraq war was due to reason #1 or #2 is a matter of great contention, judging from previos posts of Mario and others (which we
Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence
--- Aristo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to know what YOU feel is the PRIMARY root-cause of War, Confict and Violence in contemporary society, and how is it in contrast with historical wars. Is it due to: 1) Fundamentalism Bigotry (Religious, Cultural, Racial, Ideological, etc) 2) Greed (for Wealth, Power Authoritarianism, Glory) that is sometimes cleverly disguised as reason # 1 3) Innate violent nature of humans, more often of men. 4) Other Whether the Iraq war was due to reason #1 or #2 is a matter of great contention, judging from previos posts of Mario and others (which we wouldn't want to get into again, I might think) Mario responds: Not so fast, Aristo. You cannot sneak by with such a false premise by others which only demonstrates their woeful unfamiliarity with the 12-year run-up to the liberation of Iraq, the involvement of the entire UN throughout that period regarding the issue of Iraq's WMD's, and the 15 - 0 UN Security Council vote to pass UN resolution 1441 which demanded that Iraq disarm, disclose what they had done with their WMD's, or face serious consequences. This followed 16 previous UN resolutions between 1991 and end-2002 that had demanded that Iraq disarm, disclose what they had done with their WMD's, or face economic sanctions. Every one of those UN resolutions were violated by Iraq. These were UN resolutions, Aristo, starting before George Bush was even Governor of Texas. The entire UN believed Iraq had WMD's, Aristo, going back to 1991. Did you and the others know that? Until 9/11 Bush had wanted nothing to do with international nation-building. He said so when he ran for President in 2000. Got everyone upset around the world because they saw this as the US becoming isolationist. Did you and the others know that? In addition you and the others need to read the Joint US Senate and House resolution of October 2002 which authorized the US to go to war to change the regime in Iraq if necessary, as well as the US Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 demanded and signed by President Bill Clinton because of Iraq's WMD's and the concern that he would provide these to suicidal jihadis that had been attacking the US throughout the 90's. I'm sure you remember President Clinton, Aristo, a favorite of lefties everywhere. Even HE thought Iraq had WMD's. Imagine that. With this as background, it would be patently absurd to blame the Iraq war on your causes No. 1 or 2, unless you can make the case that the entire UN colluded in Fundamentalism Bigotry and Greed, and only against Iraq. Aristo writes: However, I also believe that wars of the past were caused mainly due to greed, the Crusades included. Mario replies: The Crusades took place during Christianity's fascist period. What level of greed do you suppose would cause Europeans to don heavy metal armor and ride on horses across Europe to the arid deserts of the middle-east to fight in 110 degree heat? No, it had nothing to do with greed. It was all about religious bigotry and fanaticism. You may be able to make the case that WW-II was started by greed, though, compounded by a maniacal ethnic hatred. Aristo writes: Coincidently, I happened to be listening to John Lennon's Imagine the other day, and began to ponder whether if there was no religion and there were no possessions, would the world really live as one? Mario observes: While you were pondering John Lennon's musings, did you factor in the Communist Manifesto, where the stated goal was to pre-emptively dominate the world by force to live under the yoke of the Communist philosophy, in which a central tenet was atheism? The communists wanted the world to live as one alright, under their thumb, with everyone's possessions belonging to them, i.e. the state. I hope you are not one of those who only wakes up and takes umbrage when totalitarian tyrants are being opposed, as in Iraq today, and sleeps like a baby when totalitarian tyrants are on a rampage, as in Iraq under Saddam Hussain. BTW, what do you think of communist/atheist N. Korea starving it's own people to develop nukes and missiles, menace their neighbors and sabre rattle on the world stage? What fundamentalist religious bigotry do you think is involved there? The places where your Item No. 1 fits perfectly into is in Iran, Israel/Palestine, and the stated goals of Al Qaeda. Let's talk some more if you like after you have had a chance to absorb all of the above. ___ Goanet mailing list Goanet@lists.goanet.org http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence
Aristo enquired: I would like to know what YOU feel is the PRIMARY root-cause of War, Confict and Violence in contemporary society, and how is it in contrast with historical wars. Is it due to: 1) Fundamentalism Bigotry (Religious, Cultural, Racial, Ideological, etc) 2) Greed (for Wealth, Power Authoritarianism, Glory) that is sometimes cleverly disguised as reason # 1 3) Innate violent nature of humans, more often of men. 4) Other Cornel opines: Religious,Cultural, Racial, Ideological rationales are invariably brought into play to get the support of those who may not be interested in conflict and do not want to die in battles/wars which generally benefit the elites at the expense of the lower social orders. I would therefore put your No 2 first, and No 1 second but it is not always so. Elisabeth opines: I think human beings are at the very base of our being very animalistic with a thin veneer of civilisation. As animals, we are territorial and on a constant quest to safe-guard our resources. When you boil down all the religious wars, the cultural wars, the economic wars, it is all about safeguarding what we want to preserve. Mario opines: Would you please see where you can fit the following situation into your ruminations about the causes of war, conflict and violence: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/05/D8ILUTQ01.html Do you still think Aristo's # 2 supercedes # 1? BTW, could you provide some recent examples of # 2? Hi Cornel, Elisabeth and Mario, Thank you for your responses. Im glad to have got different perspectives - one phisophical, another scientific, and the other, well, Goveian! I personally do believe that contemporary wars and conflicts are being fought on the basis of Fundamentalism Bigotry, but are triggered off by individuals motivated by Greed in some cases. In much the same way Cornel is fearful of Evangelical activities that may cause tension in the near future. Whether the Iraq war was due to reason #1 or #2 is a matter of great contention, judging from previos posts of Mario and others (which we wouldn't want to get into again, I might think) However, I also believe that wars of the past were caused mainly due to greed, the Crusades included. Cornel, about the reason for asking this fairly broad question: well for starters, it helps to take a step back sometimes and look at the big picture. It puts things in perspective!! But actually, I am currently reading Amartya Sen's Identity and Violence, which from the title, it is evident that it elaborates on reason #1. However, in the third chapter, he states that Civilizational Clash, while being a popular and glamorous theory, is NOT necessarily the real root cause, but it may be something more mundane, without specifying what exactly he meant, in his esoteric style of writing. Coincidently, I happened to be listening to John Lennon's Imagine the other day, and began to ponder whether if there was no religion and there were no possessions, would the world really live as one? Regards, Aristo. ___ Goanet mailing list Goanet@lists.goanet.org http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
Re: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence
Hi Aristo There is so much written about the causes of conflict between peoples. Sometimes these become wars. History texts are always supplying us with the causes of endless wars. My limited understanding of this enormous topic is that historically, the root cause is often greed and wanting what someone else has got. Rationales (often bogus) are then generated such as they have more than we have, we have been treated unfairly previously, they do not deserve to have what they have got etc. Religious,Cultural, Racial, Ideological rationales are invariably brought into play to get the support of those who may not be interested in conflict and do not want to die in battles/wars which generally benefit the elites at the expense of the lower social orders. I would therefore put your No 2 first, and No 1 second but it is not always so. As to the violent nature of humans and more often of men, I am inclined to think that alongside these, there is much that is also peaceful about humans. The idea of co-operation rather than competition also prevails in the animal world but there are inevitable breakdowns as history illustrates. Somehow, an international police force, however problematic in theory and practice, is perhaps a worthwhile consideration for us all. In sum, I don't think the causes of tensions, conflicts, and wars have changed historically but we are rather slow to learn from history and the important need to address issues diplomatically as far as possible. I am curious to know what prompted you to ask this fairly broad question! Regards Cornel - Original Message - From: Aristo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: goanet@goanet.org Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:15 AM Subject: [Goanet] Cause of War, Confict and Violence I am not sure whether this has been debated on Goanet before (no search results on the archives showed), but I am aware that this is an already thoroughly debated topic in academic circles (as are most other topics on goanet). However, I would like to know goanetters point of view of the topic. I would like to know what YOU feel is the PRIMARY root-cause of War, Confict and Violence in contemporary society, and how is it in contrast with historical wars. Is it due to: 1) Fundamentalism Bigotry (Religious, Cultural, Racial, Ideological, etc) 2) Greed (for Wealth, Power Authoritarianism, Glory) that is sometimes cleverly disguised as reason # 1 3) Innate violent nature of humans, more often of men. 4) Other Regards, Aristo. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/attachments/20060705/1174dd09/attachment.html ___ Goanet mailing list Goanet@lists.goanet.org http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org ___ Goanet mailing list Goanet@lists.goanet.org http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
