Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
How Super Was Our Power Anyway?
Pick up the paper any day and you'll find tiny straws in the wind (or headlines inside the fold) reflecting the seeping away of American power. The President of the planet's "sole superpower" and his top diplomats and commanders have been denouncing Iran for months as the evil hand behind American disaster in Iraq as well as Afghanistan.
So imagine, when President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan arrived in Washington a couple of weeks back and promptly described Iran as "a helper and a solution" for his country, even as President Bush insisted in his presence: "I would be very cautious about whether or not the Iranian influence in Afghanistan is a positive force." At almost the same moment, Iraq's embattled Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki paid an official visit to Iran, undoubtedly looking for support in case the U.S. turned on his government. Maliki "held hands" with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, met with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini, and called for cooperation. In response, all President Bush could do was issue a vague threat: "I will have to have a heart to heart with my friend, the prime minister, because I don't believe [the Iranians] are constructive.... My message to him is, when we catch you playing a non-constructive role, there will be a price to pay." (Later, a National Security Council spokesman had to offer a correction, insisting the threat was aimed only at Iran, not Maliki.) Then, to add insult to injury, just a week after Bush and Karzai met in Washington, Ahmadinejad headed for Kabul with a high-ranking Iranian delegation to pay his respects to the Afghan president "in open defiance of Washington's wishes." Think slap in the puss.
What made this little regional diplomatic dance all the more curious was the fact that Karzai and Maliki are such weak (and weakening) American-backed leaders -- Maliki of a government in chaos whose purview hardly extends beyond the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, and Karzai, sometimes dubbed the "mayor of Kabul," as head of a government visibly losing control over even the modest areas it had ruled. In another age, each would have been dubbed an American "puppet" and yet, here they were, defying an American president in search of support from a hated regional power on whose curbing Bush has staked what's left of his presidency.
Meanwhile, the first joint Sino-Russian "military exercise" on Russian soil (witnessed by Chinese President Hu Jintao and Russian President Vladimir Putin) had barely ended when Putin announced late last week, not from Russia but from the former Central Asian soviet socialist republic of Kazakhstan, that "regular long-range air patrols that ended after the Soviet Union collapsed" would now be resumed--and not just over Russian air space either. The planes in these patrols are nuclear-armed and "capable of striking targets deep inside the United States." Think of this as one way in which the Russian President, thoroughly irritated with the Bush administration's decision to implant elements of an American anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic, was using military symbolism to reassert his country's right to Great Power status -- a status earned in recent years, thanks to its enormous energy reserves. All a State Department official could say in response was: "If Russia feels as though they want to take some of these old aircraft out of mothballs and get them flying again, that's their decision."
Meanwhile, halfway across the globe, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's government was reportedly on the verge of announcing a new deal with Putin's Russia. Having already purchased Russian jets, helicopters, and whole plants to build Kalashnikov assault rifles (in the face of an embargo on American arms), it would now buy 5,000 advanced Dragunov sniper rifles. Again the deploring sounds from Washington were remarkably mild, though the frustration level is obviously high.
When it comes to discovering regular signs like these of the visible decline of American global power, you can actually do this exercise yourself. Just keep an eye on your daily paper--or start by checking out the latest sweeping piece, "America on the Downward Slope," by Middle Eastern expert Dilip Hiro, most recently author of Blood of the Earth, The Battle for the World's Vanishing Oil Resources. "When viewed globally and in the great stretch of history," he concludes, "the notion of American exceptionalism that drove the neoconservatives to proclaim the Project for the New American Century in the late 20th century--adopted so wholeheartedly by the Bush administration in this one--is nothing new.... No superpower in modern times has maintained its supremacy for more than several generations. And, however exceptional its leaders may have thought themselves, the United States, already clearly past its zenith, has no chance of becoming an exception to this age-old pattern of history."
In 2002, the Bush administration issued its National Security Strategy of the United States of America, a document of ultimate hubris in which its strategists essentially claimed that the U.S. was planning to remain the global superpower for an eternity. They were going to feed the Pentagon so much money that it would be bulked up into the distant future--and so, capable of suppressing any potential superpower or bloc of powers that might emerge. How long ago that seems. With the black hole of Iraq sucking all Bush administration efforts into its vortex, much of the globe has, it appears, been quietly released to enhance its power at the expense of the sole superpower, now sliding down that slippery slope.
Tom Engelhardt, who runs the Nation Institute's Tomdispatch.com ("a regular antidote to the mainstream media"), is the co-founder of the American Empire Project and, most recently, the author of Mission Unaccomplished: Tomdispatch Interviews with American Iconoclasts and Dissenters (Nation Books), the first collection of Tomdispatch interviews.
© 2007 The Nation
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


31 Comments so far
Show All'How Super Was Our Power Anyway?'
Similar to that of a teenage thug beating the crap out of a third grader.
You won't be missed. Bye bye now.
Imperial over-reach is an ugly thing, isn't it, kids?
Here's the response i posted to the Dilip Hiro piece, equally relevant to Engelhardt's:
This back-story - about the obvious and inevitable decline of "the sole superpower" - has been clear to honest policy analysts in the CIA for a long time. It has been clear to the neo-con cabal as well, as one can understand when you actually read their documents. They see this point in history as a moment when the United States can stave off this inevitable decline, and create a world in which no rival can even begin to rise.
This opportunity is due to the United States having an overwhelming military dominance over the entire world.
This overwhelming military dominance is due to our massive investment in nuclear and high-tech weapons. The plan is (you can look it up) to expand this nuclear and high-tech dominance into outer space, from where the United States will be able to permanently and unopposably dominate the Earth militarily.
Since this perceived opportunity to create permanent dominance is based on our current overwhelming advantage in nuclear and high-tech weaponry, if push comes to shove as we assert our right to dominate the globe (as there will inevitably be resistance) this scenario only works if the leaders are actually willing to use the nuclear and high-tech military advantage.
This is the reason the current gang in the White House, led by Cheney, is moving toward nuking Iran, escalating global war against potential rivals in Russia and China. They are gamblers, and this is their only chance to win the entire pot, clear the table, and rule everything forever.
United States policy throughout the nuclear age has included the attempt to create the perception of a "credible threat" to use nuclear weapons. The current gang in the White House plans to carry through to the end point of this game. Since, as the above article demonstrates, otherwise, the United States faces a decline into a multi-polar world of shared power and diplomacy among rival powers, these gamblers are - and long have been, you can still look up their documents on the Internet - planning to push for global war. They are convinced the United States will "win" this war, and emerge even more globally dominant than after WWII.
Anyone attempting to understand US policy under this gang in the White House needs to understand this basic truth. They are playing for keeps, for their dream of permanent global domination. You can look it up.
Google "Space 2020″, "High Frontier", PNAC, and go to the site of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Get their documentary "Arsenal of Hypocrisy".
The decline that we are witnessing is directly related to the growing disparity of wealth in America which has blessed us with a myopic and incompetent elite. This economic caste system has been expanding for several decades beginning with the Reagan "trickle down" revolution. Government and "public" policy have been increasingly skewed to serve corporations and the super-rich. And there is very little difference between the two political parties with populism all but forgotten. "Globalization" has destroyed the traditional American manufacturing middle class. I doubt that another Clinton in the Whitehouse will help. The symptoms of a sick system are obvious with an enormous prison population, no national health care, declining higher education opportunities and the most outrageous "defense" budget on earth, not to mention the trade and federal deficits. The piggy people have actually been stealing from an empty treasury that is running on borrowed money with the rest of us paying off the debt over time.
The Iraq invasion is the most recent drain on the nation being engineered by narrow special interest groups with financial interests in both oil and the military complex. A $Trillion in public money has been diverted. This is nothing more than a wealth transfer from the many to the few via war. Our "poverty draft" supplies the grunts and win or loose the corporate warmongers walk away with profits. Unfortunately, the architects of the Iraq war crimes resemble inbred British royalty having lost their minds a few generations ago and no longer functioning competently yet holding power and privilege.
Unfortunately the criminal "leaders" that our media treats with royal respect may very well ride off into the sunset with their short term profits. They will then live off invested capital very much like the British imperial upper class after the empire imploded. Unless we have a equalitarian political restructuring, including such things as a revised tax code and the elimination of campaign donations and lobbyists, the majority of Americans have some hard times to look forward to. Anyone up for a Bastille Day?
I wonder if the gang in the WH really thinks they can win, because personally, I don't the the world is going to let us. It's never the weapons that win, it's the brains and motivation of those using the weapons. I guess no one ever told them that, or more likely, they didn't listen.
JConrad,
The Republican policies fit together better than most will admit. Poorly educated people without good jobs cannot afford principles (according to Maslow's hierarchy) and are more likely to support wars for empire and rapacious corporations and also are more likely to enlist to fight for those interests.
Dear webwalk: Great commentary, but I think there is some room for discussion on the real "power" of the American military. As you stated:
"This opportunity is due to the United States having an overwhelming military dominance over the entire world.
This overwhelming military dominance is due to our massive investment in nuclear and high-tech weapons. The plan is (you can look it up) to expand this nuclear and high-tech dominance into outer space, from where the United States will be able to permanently and unopposably dominate the Earth militarily."
The "domination" that is spoken of so often is little more than a fantasy. Now there's a thought, Donald Rumsfled in drag as a dominatrix !
Thus far we have attacked two low-tech countries without air defenses and now find ourselves completely "tied up" on the ground. The imperial prize of Iraq's oil looks very remote as well as any viable trans-Afghan pipelines. Our great militaristic empire of over 700 bases around the world is more like a Wizard of Oz performance with no real strength behind the fireworks. In fact this is a non-productive imperial presence that costs more to maintain than profits acquired.The "Great Game" has been lost in Afghanistan before and Iraq has a long history of weaing down and driving our invaders.
A curious example of low-tech taking out high tech is that a $100 Iraqi IED can cripple one of the new $1 Million dollar per unit armored troop transports they are building and sending to Iraq. Brain damaged or mutilated sodliers also become a lifetime liability. The economics just don't compute although there are some short term profiteers (compassionate conservatives perhaps) involved in war commerce.
Another perspective on guerilla insurgencies was give to by Bin Laden who said something to the effect that "for every dollar we spend, you will spend a million fighting us". Thus, if those we have offended plan to drain the empire, we have taken the bait. We were defeated in Nam with inferior weaponry after dropping more bombs than during WWII.
Perhaps at some point in the next century someone will discover diplomacy and international cooperation, but that might require sharing the wealth. ETC.
superpower my ass. we were the appointed " winner " of WWII, because the world powers liked putting our blank canvass of a country in that spot, knowing with our gun happy redneck paradigm we'd be happy to play at, or appear to be playing at, being world cop.
But as far as " superpower " is concerned, the only thing the world ever LIKED about us was the vernacular music of black jazzers and the white outcasts who loved them, maybe some of our movie stars, and of course, our beautiful geography, most of which we're busy despoiling every day.
In other words, the only things the world liked about our " flavor " were the bohemian, status quo bucking elements and/or things that had nothing to do with our people. Cause let's face it. we're the fat bullies who couldn't hang in europe.
One of our biggest strengths used to be keeping the world confused about exactly what cards we were holding. Thanks to Cheneybushrove, our hand has been laid out on the table and the other players are adjusting accordingly.
frank1569:
can't resist
should you be a bridge player
you know
tis the 'dummy'
ken
What difference does it make if the US or any other country is a super power? It never benefits the citizens.
JConrad,
i know, it's late now, no one is still posting here, but...
Excellent analysis. The danger, of course, is that the gang in the White House still believe they can double-down their losing bet and win the whole pot, if they just have the fortitude to push the nuclear button.
Of course we know it's still a losing bet, for everyone and the Earth itself, but having watched them operate for so long, i think they really still do think their "ace in the hole" nuclear arsenal will win this game.
"I will have to have a heart to heart with my friend, the prime minister, because I don't believe [the Iranians] are constructive…. My message to him is, when we catch you playing a non-constructive role, there will be a price to pay."
Someone once said: "People should only be allowed to play the violin only after they have mastered it".
We could have been "super" if we held the ideas expressed in the Declaration of Independence as belonging to all people and not just to ourselves. To quote -
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
These ideas still seem worthwhile.
JCONRAD: Excellent postings! A caller on Cspan (Sunday) made the point that for all our bloated military, what good did it do to prevent 911... of course many on CD presume (as I do) it was a false flag event, i.e. inside job... after all, the pieces for the neocon wet dream of global dominance via control of US 4 (counting bought and paid for press) branches was nearly in place, and thanks to Clinton, the budget in relatively good shape. Enter the frat boy and his wrecking team who never met a potential battle field they didn't covet. And look at how far we've come... to ruin, 700 plus bases, and all. No power can save us from our selves if those governing are bent on destruction. "We the people" seems like an opiated dream at present, given the powers of our new surveillance state, big brother has resurrected and in the 21st century, will find his efforts aided and abetted by major new high tech toys and weapons.
Too bad the citizens of this country forgot they are the boss. They thought the party would last forever with no accounting.
All this pipsqueak whining that is on this story is sickening. You all had your chances to prevent this but did absolutley nothing real except blow smoke from the anonymity of your keyboards.
I didn't see you out there by the millions protesting any actions of this adnministration as a few who have the courage to do so.
Each of us needs to look in the mirror and admit that he/she is looking at one pf the persons directly responsible for this mess. We need to admit that we were and still are more concerned about all the reality TV (such as American Idol) instead of paying attention to the policies of this country that are KILLING many innocent people all around the world - not just Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.
Think about it !
How often does the bully on the playground come out ahead in the end? Our country is facing the same result if we cannot turn it around 180 degrees from Bushism. We have to live with what we have done, but it is imperative that we begin to treat other people in the world with respect if our country is to regain it`s former credibility. Our founders must be turning over in their graves for the wrecking of America.
P.S.
You won't see this happening ion the good ol' US of A!
Today in:
OTTAWA - A meeting of US, Canada and Mexico leaders on Monday and Tuesday has attracted "an eclectic group" of demonstrators united in opposition to further integration of North America.
Hundreds of anti-globalization protestors, environmentalists, peaceniks, and civil rights groups joined to taunt Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper, US President George W. Bush, and Mexico's President Felipe Calderon.
"A curious example of low-tech taking out high tech is that a $100 Iraqi IED can cripple one of the new $1 Million dollar per unit armored troop transports they are building and sending to Iraq."
Good point, JConrad!
That's the rule of obsolescence. When your enemy can render your equipment worthless with something that costs less and can be more easily deployed.
Or occasionally, with a weapon that costs more, but is vastly more capable - the HMS Dreadnought being the case in point. It cost more than most other battleships of the time, but with its all-heavy-gun armament and steam turbines, it could outcruise most fast cruisers, and outshoot most heavy battleships. It made all other fleets obsolete by being launched.
That was the reason for a certain Robert Jastrow's lamentable book titled "Making nuclear weapons obsolete" - of course, the rejoinder was that the entire weapons system could be made obsolete itself by a small group armed with wirecutters ...
"All a State Department official could say in response was: "If Russia feels as though they want to take some of these old aircraft out of mothballs and get them flying again, that's their decision."
Gee, what a wonderful opportunity for the Bush Crime Family to sell modern high tech Stealth B-2 bombers to Russia. At two billion a pop, Boeing, Lockead, Martin, Grummin, and the military/industrial complex can made a killing.
Never mind that the Russian may use them against the USA. The Bush Crime Family does not care.
webwalk makes a good point. the danger for a psychopath when their false reality begins to crumble in confrontation w/real reality is that they will self-destruct. "history? in the end we are all dead" as that brilliant philosopher king dumbya opined. the nihilism of our ruling elite is profound, and the cheney admin is just the most extreme expression. they are already talking about nukes b/c of their losses in iraq.
the only way to achieve full spectrum dominance is to kill everything.
the US wowed the world w/its whiz bang light show in panama, iraq, & kosovo, but iraq two and afghanistan showed us as the paper tigers we are (not downplaying the death & suffering caused by our delusions.)
we already know from the war that millions of people protesting in the street solves nothing. how about millions of naked people occupying the halls of congress
Thanks to all readers and responders. This website is a fantastic breath of fresh air. We can exchange and bounce ideas through cyber space creating multiple reactions. I learn something every day here by reading and interacting. Old Tom Paine started a revolution with words and ideas. And give the divine Arundhati Roy a read if you want to experience vibrate, enlightened and intelligent rebellion….Shiva and Mother Teresa rolled into one with a genius for expression, both poetic and brutally honest. "Bring On The Spanners" there is an imbecile in the White House with access to weapons !
In case you have not read this one: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Arundhati_Roy/Mesopotamia_Babylon.html
And let us not forget perhaps the greatest of American contributions to the global pool of cultures, that of the jazz tradition with all participants free to improvise while working together for a common dream. We are all to a degree enslaved which means we must improvise to be free. Guerrilla warfare is creative improvisation whether we are talking physical conflicts or the war for hearts and minds. Goliath tends to be very structured and one-dimmensional.
Sorry to fall back on old clichés, but All Power To The People still says more than enough. Above all the elite fear that true power is in the hands of the masses. For them to sustain their babylon vampire schemes they must create the illusion of absolute power and that it is hopeless to resist. Many Americans have given up, plain and simple. The black panther Power To The People movement was such a threat to the status quo that they were systematically killed off or imprisoned. Dr. King had a similar psychological approach of freedom as a state of mind, yet with spiritual self-empowerment, although he rejected the use of physical force even in self-defense. So they shot him too. But the ideas live on.
I've read this phrase twice now, about how the USA "assert(s) our right to dominate the globe"
Since when does any nation have the "right" to dominate the globe? What about collaboration and cooperation among all the nations of the world as an ideal to strive for?
It's this Imperial Hubris that's gotten us into the mess we are into today. What's so terrible about attempting to live like friendly neighbours for once? Or settle disagreements diplomatically?
It's amazing that some people think the USA - or any other nation - has any right to dominate the world. We might like to dominate the world but I just have to ask myself - why?
Let's take care of our own and help to heal this planet instead of making more and more enemies around the globe.
Yes, maybe I'm naive, but it just seems better to make friends rather than enemies.
And another post mentions China and how it is supporting repressive regimes. Doesn't the USA to exactly the same thing? We've installed or supported almost countless repressive regimes and more so today, I believe, than in the past.
Why are so many of us stuck in the mindset of might makes right?
Please grill me on this, because it just doesn't make any sense to me.
Hyrid: I am not sure I am up to a grilling as I too have wondered about power trips since I first began to observe political behavior in as a younger man. It still looks strange.
Yet on the most primitive level, and I mean primitive as in ignorant, the desire to rule or dominate other people or nations is the stuff of history and usually motivated by material acquisition. Land, people as labor or slaves, resources, trade, etc. This all translates into material wealth for those in power who manage to dominate for awhile.
No one has the "right" to do that but they will try. Hence the need for the martial arts so to speak, as in self defense.
There is also power for the sake of power which is little harder to understand. This is a true psychotic addiction as it can become irrational and lead the power freak into a trap or ultimate downfall. Hitler was absolutely crazed to invade in multiple directions as he did. Napoleon lost his marbles at a certain point as have many others. "W" is just dunce exercising privilege.
The other pathological element are those who have great wealth who desire even more wealth. Again the best explanation is addiction in a very nasty way, as like many addicts, the people on that path usually hurt all sorts of other people. Mr. Bush is certainly in that category acting as the chairman of the board of greedy sociopathic white boys in expensive suits. He will personally benefit from inheritance, but he also represents a whole diseased cult of super-rich people. He is not original or unique. They are after the black gold of Iraq right now, as in the near future, oil will be more valuable than our currency. Obviously they feel no shame or guilt about killing and lying and stealing. That is often a given or accepted aspect of their class consciousness. A wealthy Brit I met in Hong Kong years ago said, "That's where good living comes in, at the expense of other people". Cold and true from his viewpoint.
One more dimension on a more psychological level is EGO. When humans are focused only on "self" they tend to walk all over others. Despite the sick spin about "conservative compassion" the true meaning of compassion is the genuine wish that others be free from suffering mixed with a degree of empathy or putting yourself into the shoes of another. Selfless altruistic behavior is perhaps the highest level of human development.
But, the real world can be tough and competitive and cruel and not everyone responds to kindness. Got to keep your guard up when in dangerous territory.
However, you have provided one viable answer to your own question. Many animal and human societies have discovered that they have a better chance for survival through cooperation rather than conflict. If the whole world would agree to that as a game plan we would all be better off and we could stop wasting so much money on weapons. At this point in human evolution we are lucky to find relatively cooperative nation states. Amerika is mainly a capitalistic oligarchy of individuals out for themselves, although "they" do cooperate in limited groups as economic sharks feeding on whatever they can sink their teeth into. And when there is blood in the water they go into a frenzy of restrained amoral mayhem. Some say wealth is an aphrodisiac or somewhat erotic in a very retentive way.
No ultimate wisdom here, just some observations. However, developing some kind of personal internal peace of mind will go a long way to weathering the storms of human folly. And of course, mean people suck. Etc.
Since Common Dreams began this excellent idea of discussions on the various aticles printed here, I have noticed it descend fom the original group of people posting their thoughts and responding to one another in a courteous, thoughtful manner, to shouting matches in many cases. It now seems to be nothing like it was just 4 months ago where mostly fiendly disagreements and thought out responses were made by the vast majority. In fact, this site gave one a sense of many people of variing opinions a chance to have some good debates.
What has happened? There was a "Common Dream" only a short time ago. Now it is a battle zone following many articles.
Hybrid: Lovely morning here !
Grilling (definition) 5. (informal) to question severely and persistently.
I am not sure if your "thoughtful manner" response was a response to my limited discussion of power, but if so, a few thoughts are bouncing around my old brain pan.
You stated, "maybe I am naive", and so I took the time to share few ideas. Discussion and debate should be totally open short of pointless personal attacks.
I find the dialogue at Common Dreams to be very civil and alive with a variety of intelligent views. I happen to enjoy the blunt comments as well as the clever and poetic. Intellectual diversity is fantastic. If you found my statements in poor taste or part of the "descend" that you feel is true, I can only say that any viable forum must be open to even begin to approach the "truth."
What you may be noticing is a higher level of energy about the Iraq war crimes and our overall national dilemma. We just put the Demos in office to end the carnage and they are doing nothing. Huge disappointment. I lived through the Vietnam era, and as the horrors continued the national debate intensified before the killing ended.
Unfortunately, the Vietnam debate more of less vanished when we pulled out and to this day the nation has not come to terms with why we killed perhaps two million Vietnamese as well as the illegal bombing of Laos and Cambodia. I also recall the "state" beating and even killing non-violent student protestors with impunity. I can still see the Life Magazine picture of a Vietnamese child running down a dirt road with her body completely burned with napalm.
Put simply, the people in power are very sick and greedy. You are quite right that, "it just seems better to make friends rather than enemies.' The problem is that those in power do not want to share global wealth, but prefer to kill and steal for personal gain. Money is their bottom line. Torture, murder, theft and endless lies are not a problem for them. Would it surprise you to know that Rumsfeld was getting daily periodic reports on the Abu Ghraib torture sessions?
There is a very ugly war going on out there in Iraq and within America. My perception is that most people are suspended a bubble of denial or lack awareness of the gravity of the situation. A little creative shouting might be an effective wake up call ? I actually think that I understated that reality of the situation on the effects and nature of our delusional and deadly "global power" obsessions and the minds behind the madness. Some of them actually want to bring out the nukes.
However, I do respect your opinion, and have a nice day.
Dear readers:
sorry about the typos...old brain bad typist
"debate more or less vanished "
"suspended in a bubble of denial "
"I understated the reality "
JConrad. No, I was appreciative of your comments and wasn't referring to you at all. I was just making an observation that since this became a site where readers could comment on the articles printed here, the tone of the debate has changed and there are more Ad Hominum attacks than thoughtful discourse than before.
I too love to hear a variety of opinions because it broadens my pespective and understanding. I'm suprised that you would immediately assume that I was in any way addressing your reply to me.
Perhaps if I had begun with something like, "Thanks for you input..." you wouldn't have immediately assumed that I was talking about you. I was simply making an observation.
I don't know if this string has ended but I just need to say , on a personal level, JConad, we just started with a simple misunderstanding. I share your thoughts and I just want you to know that I wasn't directing my words at you.
It is a rainy night here in Vietnam, where I live. I have been living here for three years and find the people of this country to be some of the kindest I've met in my life - especailly after what we did to them during the "American War," which is how the Vietnamese refer to the conflict between our countries. And they are friendly all - young and old - even after all that we tried to do to them.
Of course movies that we have seen about this time of war show much inhuman and terrible things done by the North and South Vietnamese as well as those done by the American forces. The "Deer Hunter" is a good example.
War is the ultimate crime. It changes caring, decent people into killers who do the most horrible things imaginable. If it weren't for war, these poor soldiers wouldn't have to live with the psychological damage done to them when they had to survive in a war-time situation.
War turns many into monsters. And if they survive physically, mentally they must live with that part of their life when they did things which they never would have imagined themselves doing.
The same is true next door in Cambodia. Gentle, caring people who would share their last bowl of rice with you.
Of course there are also bad people here. They aren't all so kind and loving, but in a general the people of Southeast Asia are a kind and gentle people. We could learn a lot from these cultures in this part of the world.
I am leaving political systems out of this post, because they could be better, in my view. I'm just talking about the people. As I go about my day, the polital is not even noticed. I feel no less nor more free here than in any of the other countries I've lived in.
It's war and all that it drags along with it that detroys nations and people. The present wars the USA is involved in are benefiting a small number of people while millions are being crushed in a vice. War is pure evil. And those who advocate war either don't know what they are talking about or should be locked away.
Hyrbid: Thanks for the respones. What a wonderful surpirse that you are writing from a Buddhist culture. And yes, it is quite amazing how they have fogiven us in Nam, in general, after all that we did. I spent nearly a year among the Tibetan refugees of N. India and have also been to Thailand. I was spared the war experience in Nam, other than seeing the suffering through friends and media although I spent a little time in Thailand. I am not sure if America will ever change as the economic and cultural foundations for war run deep. With Metta....JC