Skip to main content

View Diary: The whole world is watching (316 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What heppened after India won (0+ / 0-)

    It freedom was NOT hyperbole.

    It was a civil war in which :

    An estimated 10 million Hindus and Sikhs living in West Punjab, NWFP, Baluchistan, East Bengal and Sind migrated to India in fear of domination and suppression in Muslim Pakistan.

    Communal violence killed an estimated 1 million Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs, and gravely destabilized both Dominions along their Punjab and Bengal boundaries, and the cities of Calcutta, Delhi and Lahore.

    It amazes me how much of the ACTUAL past is forgotten by those who were not there in order to try to make a point that can only be made by taking a very distant view of events.

    Rather odd that people can get all head up over a few hundred dead in Lebanon and totally ignore a policy that resulted in a million dead on the Indian subcontinent.

    Part of Gandhi's call for Indepenence totally neglected the years of mistrust and oppression of one minority over another in the various Indian States.

    Much of todays myopic policies about waht went on in the MIddle Easts in 1940 suffer from the same lack of closeness to events, or even efforts to try to find out about them.

    The problem with quoting Gandhi on this is that it can just as well be applied to Hitler or Stalin.

    Both were kind of laughed at in their own attempts to gain power.

    •  No offense (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      But you seriously misinterpreted everything I was trying to say.  It's okay though - we are all on the same side . . . . . peace.

      Honesty had been the single trait most closely associated with Bush, but in the current survey "incompetent" is the descriptor used most frequently.

      by Progressive Liberaltarian on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 02:30:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hmmm (0+ / 0-)

        you know what they save about the path to hell and good intention, dont yah...

        And even about the idea of pulling all troops out of Iraq immediately.

        The idea that we have done enough and now it is time for Iraq to step up to the plate just doesnt wash, at least if you seriously examine the situation and international law.

        The one and only thing Colin Powell was correct about was his little statement about the pottery barn.

        The United Nations Charter quite firmly opposes the Bush Administrations policy of "pre-emtive war"

        But it just as equally opposes te idea of starting a war, overthrowing a government, destroying an infrastructure, and then deciding to pull out if things just start running a lot different than you expected.

        From the standpoint of the Geneva,Nuremberg,and Hague Conventions, leaving Iraq in the political and civil condition is it NOW in is in fact WORSE than the original invasion.

        Bush entered with the position that he would be creating a democracy in Iraq, by overthrowing a tyrant who was known to be a tyrant and who had numerous resolutions voted against him for being a tyrant by the United Nations. This does not justify the "pre-emtive war" of George W. Bush, but Bush's war was based on principals far more inline with international law than pulling out is simply because the war has gotten a lot more hairy that anticipated and more U.S> troops are dying than anticipated.

        The Iraqi people did NOT ask us invade, Iraq, or to get rid of Saddam's tyranny, thugh they state they are gald he is gone.

        THey did NOT aske America to destroy its infrastructure, to allow sectarian strife to run rampant, nor allow extremists to crossthe borders and attampt to establish a fundamentalist Islamic state.

        We broke it, as nation. We are obliged to fix it as one.

        There lies the problem.

        REpublicans violated international law by invading.

        Democrats are now insisting on violating international lw by leaving Iraq in the broken state we created.

        We are obliged to at least leave Iraq as we found it, even if that means leaving it a stable dictatorship under another tyrant.

        •  What if it can't be fixed? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          thered1, occams hatchet

          Nobody ever answers that question. How long do we give it?  How many lives in collateral damage are acceptable?  We need a set of benchmarks here.  Let somebody tell us when we finally give up and how many dead U.S. soldiers, dead Iraqi civilians and wasted U.S. dollars are we talking about here.  I'm a financial person.  I look at inputs and outputs and measure success based on that ratio.  We're not even at breakeven right now.  If this were a company, I'll tell it to liquidate its losses and run.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site