Thanks Dan,
That was a very thoughtful post. I'm quite impressed with what you had to say, and delighted that you'd take the discussion to a level beyond the reactionary shoot 'em up nonsense that motivates most of our foreign policy.
I read this passage with particular interest:
Violent domination and destruction of non-believers, is the well-known goal of the crazed enemy leaders, and should these leaders begin to win territory, the Muslim masses might well follow along.
From all I've been able to sort out of King George II's public pronouncements versus his true motivations and goals, I'd say that he's counting on subjugating the great bulk of Muslims who will go along with his scheme to actually pay something for all the Caspian booty he hopes to steal. This is part of human nature. Every political leader counts on a large grouping of individuals who willingly pay obeisance to whoever the satrap happens to be at the moment.
That is what is so much of a conundrum to me. The American public, by and large, are so ill-educated that they're willing to go along with whatever fear-mongering comes out of the Bushista Permanent Reign of Terror (Copyright, Joe Stalin, 1930) and now you suggest that the Muslim masses are equally willing to be obsequious. How convenient for a cunning dictator like Tzar George with his eye on the Turkmenbashi prize. Don't you agree?
You may not always be impressed by our history as you view it, but we do deserve to live as, What? The masters of the Caspian Petroleum Prize? That is, in the end, what all the folderol since the 911 incident is all about.
Should we squander the U.S. Treasury, leading to penury for our children and grandchildren for the sake of a handful of U.S. oil conglomerates? That's what we're doing here. Think about it. It's not a great future for 98% of Americans. But the Bush family and their buddies like Kenny Boy and Jeff Skilling mean to make a killing. Wanna die for them, sucker?
-Ray |
