Jump to content

Limits To American Power


Recommended Posts

In a lot of ways our North American media is quite one-sided in their reporting of political issues:

The British Guardian newspaper has an article today entitled:

'A Year of thwarted ambition'

by Martin Jacques,

who is a visiting fellow at the London School of Economics Asian Research Centre

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,276...1112920,00.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an American so I am definitly qualified to speak out against the slanted media.

Here most of the "Main stream" media has a decidedly liberal view and go to any length to make sure the John Qs here have that same view.

It has been a long time here that we have seen the big info giants reporting the news. Now we are slamed with the "correspondents" that analize the news. Throw in thier interpretation and do it in a way that makes sure it is your interpretation.

We do have alternatives.

Like FOX, MSNBC, internet news and lets not forget boards like this.

There is a movement to clean up media here. Its just beggining and though I doubt it, Let us hope it takes on life and cans the liars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What absolute garbage this Martin Jacques writes! What planet is he living on? To describe Schroeder and Chirac's self-serving backstabbing antics as demonstrating

courage or independence of mind and spirit to oppose the US
is laughable.

And no duh when Jacques says

Russia was of similar mind

Russia like France and Germany had a lot of money to lose if Saddam were deposed!

So sad that thugs like Mugabe and dictators like Assad don't like the USA anymore...I guess that means these folks will refuse to take US foreign aid now...NOT.

such that it is now more unpopular than it has ever been in the theatre of global opinion.

Global opinion could also mean those geniuses of journalism like Neil MacDonald, CBC, and Robert Fisk, Guardian, and Maureen Dowd, Wahington Post...yuk, yuk...

I love this:

The full repertoire of imperial responses to rebellion by a local population has been rehearsed...there has never been any admission that the guerrilla forces, motley, primitive and disorganised as they may be, enjoy popular support, bear the imprimatur of legitimacy invested in those nationalist forces who resist invading powers.

Guess Mr. Jacques hasn't heard that these "primitive and disorganized" Iraqi terrorists were funded by 5 rich Iraqi families, under the direction of Saddam.

Here's another money quote;

Iraq has already demonstrated that American public opinion does not have the stomach for a prolonged occupation, that the Bush administration cannot afford the body bags, and that therefore their Iraqi appointees will have to assume, sooner rather than later, many of the frontline responsibilities.

Oops...Mr. Jacques hasn't heard that Bush's popularity is soaring...

Then there's

There are countless stories of the way in which American troops shoot first and ask questions later. The Americans don't even bother to count the number of Iraqi dead.

Countless stories generated in the bowels of DemocracyUnderground...

And last but not least:

The Guantanamo camp is an affront to human rights worldwide. Civil rights have been rolled back in the US in the name of the fight against terror. And, of course, there are no weapons of mass destruction: truth is the first casualty of war - and imperial ambition. It is difficult to imagine the US and Britain ever enjoying the same kind of respect again in their claim to be the mantle of democracy and human rights.

Prisoners at Guantanamo have all gained weight.

What civil rights have been rolled back? Like the right to blow up innocent civilians with the help of poor airport security? Like the right to live in America illegally and use US welfare services? Amazing how Mr. Jaques would give countless gobs of time to Hans Blix and the UN crew to search for WMD, but the US/UK need to find WMD yesterday. Maybe Jacques considers Libya's call for inspectors is an example of new "disrespect" for US power?

I sincerely hope Martin Jaques is never allowed to visit America. He should be labelled "persona non grata" for his mean-spirited tripe. Let Mr. Jacques be limited to the hallowed ground of the EU for all his leisure and business travels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well Morgan, you disappoint me. Garbage? This guy is a walking Leftist Sandwichboard complete with grade 9 rhetoric.

imperial ambition.
Saddam Hussein's arrest provided a long overdue, and desperately needed, morale-booster for the American and British governments.

No, it was inevitable. We all knew it was going to happen sooner or later and were getting on with the stuff that had to be done. Satisfying for sure but nothing changed as it is still rolling along and progressing as before. The Left seems to think this is a game that has a definitive score to tell when you have won. It does not, it will take decades, Saddam and Al Queda are only blips on the screen.

Iraq has already demonstrated that American public opinion does not have the stomach for a prolonged occupation,

That is why re-enrollment in the military is at a high. That is why Bush's approval rating is at an all time high.

. The occupation of Iraq has taught the US, not to mention the world, that overweening military power is not invincible, but on the contrary, is as vulnerable as ever when it tries to occupy another people's country. Such was, and remains, the lesson of anti-colonial struggle.

No, the US has handled Iraq with Kid Gloves as it plans on returning Iraq to Iraqis. If it wanted to prove overwhelming military might I doubt there would be a building with more than two bricks stuck together.

Third, it seems possible, even probable, that further American imperial ambitions - as encapsulated in the so-called "axis of evil" - have been laid to rest, at least for the time being, in the streets of Baghdad, Samarra, Tikrit and neighbouring towns. There was much speculation in the early part of this year about which country would be next - Iran or North Korea.

Saddam was an example for Dictators to get their shit together. Iraq is an example for all Arabs what can be if they pick Democracy. Iran and NK can be dealt with in different ways.

BTW, does this guy have any qualifications to write idiocy like this?

When Bush and Blair insist that the Iraqis should determine Saddam's fate, by Iraqis they mean their own quisling Iraqi regime.

No, I think they mean a freely elected government of Iraqis like they are determined to have the 25 Memeber Council set up.

Has this Guy been in a cave for the last year I wonder?

Iraq is the first true test of that American imperial ambition and it has already served to suggest some of the limits to that power.

What are you, a moron? I write better researched tripe than this and I drive a freakin' truck all day! A war won in less time than it took Reno to kill everybody at Waco, two of the Aces killed in less time than it took Hillary to find her freakin' financial records for an inquiry for crying out loud!!! Republican Guard falls in less time than it took Teddy to call the police after drowning his date at Chapaquidick and yu talk about limits? Talk about the responsible holding back the Dogs of War you idiot!

Americans increasingly looking to China to assist with North Korea, and a clutch of other countries to defuse Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Once again this clown shows his one dimensional thinking. America has guns, money, political alliances and all sorts of means to project them. They use what is the best and they chose diplomacy. Is he saying that he would chose death for all Iranians?

What a warmonger. What a fool.

And, of course, there are no weapons of mass destruction: truth is the first casualty of war -

Summary of Hans Blix's 27 Jan 2003 Report to the UN

There are also indications that the agent was weaponizied.

Hmmm, that would mean WMD right?

Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 [metric] tons..

Hmmm, that would mean WMD right? Somewhere in the amount of 2 million pounds of it, enough to fill three or four semi trailers.

The absence of this table would appear to be deliberate as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered.

Would that be seen as 'Non Coopeeration and grounds for declaration of non complience with the two resolutions of 687 and 1441? Hmmmm

I note that the quantity of media involved would suffice to produce, for example, about 5,000 liters of concentrated anthrax.

Hmmm, that would mean WMD if dropped in one of the 6500 warheads mentioned above that they had right?

What an idiot. So typical of the Left. What did he say about truth being the first casualty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...