Fog of war

[billydkid]

This has probably been discussed, but this movie is on now. I have to say listening to Robert McNamara is beyond chilling. The expression "the banality of evil" comes to mind. The people who run the world - they are a scarey bunch. The shear hubris inherent in assuming you are qualified or entitled to run the world - that you are adequate to assume the responsibility of running the world - staggering. The notion of an illuminati - comical though it might be coming from the mouths of conspiracy buffs - is more reflective of reality than we even know. Myself, I don't feel qualified to control the course of a single other person's life. These people feel qualified to determine the fates of hundreds of millions. One might argue "Somebody has to do it.", but, no, nobody has to do it. We can allow people to determine the course of their own lives. It has always been that the powerless are called upon to sacrifice their lives at the behest of the powerful - however we might cloak it. No man should be in a position to call for the sacrifice of another let alone hundreds of thousands of others.

 

[WildCat]

Why McNamara is considered an expert in warfare is beyond me. He bungled Vietnam so badly it's classic "what not to do" in warfare. For example, he forbid US aircraft from attacking SAM sites while they were under construction, only after they were operational and shooting down aircraft (!) was the USAF allowed to destroy them. If you're going to fight a war, fight the damn thing. Halfway fighting it is a sure way to failure. "Rolling Thunder" anyone? Pfffft.

I'm not saying that Vietnam was winnable or not, but McNamara certainly stacked the deck against the troops.

 

[RandFan]

This has probably been discussed, but this movie is on now. I have to say listening to Robert McNamara is beyond chilling. The expression "the banality of evil" comes to mind. The people who run the world - they are a scarey bunch.

Who are these people? Tri Lateral Commission, the Jews?

The shear hubris inherent in assuming you are qualified or entitled to run the world - that you are adequate to assume the responsibility of running the world - staggering.

And these people would be....?

The notion of an illuminati - comical though it might be coming from the mouths of conspiracy buffs - is more reflective of reality than we even know.

Classical and priceless? I'll note this in the "What Logical Fallacy Pisses You Off Most?" thread. Why do you consider the notion of an illuminati "comical"? You are trying to have your cake and eat it to. If you agree with conspiracy theorists then simply state so. If you don't then state so. Don't attack them and then embrace them. What is your position? Do you have a position?

Myself, I don't feel qualified to control the course of a single other person's life. These people feel qualified to determine the fates of hundreds of millions.

I'm just dying to know, who are "these people"? There are lots and lots of sovereign nations composed of member states and municipalities all headed by some leader or leaders, are you suggesting these people should not be there or are you really drinking the Kool-Aid?

One might argue "Somebody has to do it.", but, no, nobody has to do it. We can allow people to determine the course of their own lives.

Can we really? How do we allow the people under theocratic governments to determine the course of their own lives? How do you let a young girl in a poor patriarchal society determine the course of her own life?

Hey, as pie in the sky goes it is good rhetoric and I accept it as an ideal but I'm not really sure what you are getting at?

It has always been that the powerless are called upon to sacrifice their lives at the behest of the powerful - however we might cloak it.

Oversimplification. How would you describe WWII? Was that an incident where the powerless were called upon to sacrifice their lives at the behest of the powerful? What ideal would have worked against Hitler, Italy and Japan?

No man should be in a position to call for the sacrifice of another let alone hundreds of thousands of others.

There should only be love and hugs in the world, give peace a chance. We should hand out puppies, rainbows and those little red candy valentines, you know the cinnamon flavored ones.

 

[billydkid]

Re: Re: Fog of war

Who are these people? Tri Lateral Commission, the Jews?

And these people would be....?

Classical and priceless? I'll note this in the "What Logical Fallacy Pisses You Off Most?" thread. Why do you consider the notion of an illuminati "comical"? You are trying to have your cake and eat it to. If you agree with conspiracy theorists then simply state so. If you don't then state so. Don't attack them and then embrace them. What is your position? Do you have a position?

I'm just dying to know, who are "these people"? There are lots and lots of sovereign nations composed of member states and municipalities all headed by some leader or leaders, are you suggesting these people should not be there or are you really drinking the Kool-Aid?

Can we really? How do we allow the people under theocratic governments to determine the course of their own lives? How do you let a young girl in a poor patriarchal society determine the course of her own life?

Hey, as pie in the sky goes it is good rhetoric and I accept it as an ideal but I'm not really sure what you are getting at?

Oversimplification. How would you describe WWII? Was that an incident where the powerless were called upon to sacrifice their lives at the behest of the powerful? What ideal would have worked against Hitler, Italy and Japan?


There should only be love and hugs in the world, give peace a chance. We should hand out puppies, rainbows and those little red candy valentines, you know the cinnamon flavored ones.

There have always been power wielding classes - those who make the decisions which ultimately determine the course of the lives of ordinary people. That comment or "question" - ".....jews?" was nothing but a cheap shot. I never remotely suggested anything like that. The fact that there is not actually a secret society which has run the world from the beginning hardly addresses the issue of who it is that is running the world. It is always some people - and not you and I or anybody you know - making all the significant decisions that determine course of civilization.

I am saying it might as well be an illuminati since the practical outcome is the same - 99% of the people being governed by the other 1%. You are, apparently, of the opinion that the common folk are not up to task of actually governing themselves and that, ultimately (inspite of the charade of democracy) we need wise overseers to make the really important decisions. Of course, I would ever suggest that those overseers might have an agenda of their own when making these decisions or they might ever seek to profit from the positions they hold.

You want somebody like Robert McNammara pointing his fickle finger and deciding that this person and that person, that you or your children should have the privilege of sacrificing your lives for the good of the state? You want Dick Cheney and Haliburton and people in the board rooms of arms manufacterers deciding this part of the world or that part of the world and all the people in it are to be decimated in or to serve the greater good? I'm not the one interested in cinniman sticks and valentines. Leave that to those people who swallow down the the pablum fed to us like infants that we are a free nation and that we govern ourselves and that we are making the world safe for democracy in Iraq.

 

[billydkid]

I hope

I really hope you are not going to suggest that the world has not always been run by the rich and powerful and that very little ever happens in it without their say so. I forget who said that the genius of the American political system lay in its ability to get its citizens to vote consistently against their own best interests. No, I don't believe there is a world wide conspiracy, but there might as well be. There is a tacit understanding among the mighty about how the world works and an assumption that they are entitled to run it. Had Bush, mediocrite that he is, not been born into powerful family he was born into there is not a chance in hell he would ever have even been dog catcher.

In every war, forever, it has always been the powerless dying for the sake of the powerful. With gobalization and the development of global cooperation between the powerful those in power can only consolidate their power. I am a libertarian and I believe in a free market and the freedom to get rich and the reality that everyone can not be rich. But it is the linkage between business and government - the automatic, no bid Haliburton contracts and the like - that is wrong and frightening. It is sweetheart deals for friends of GW. I have no problem with big business. It is big business as an arm of government that is terrifying.

 

[RandFan]

Re: Re: Re: Fog of war

There have always been power wielding classes - those who make the decisions which ultimately determine the course of the lives of ordinary people.

Grossly oversimplified and problematic.

The notion that there is "power wielding classes" lumps every system of government together and paints a very distorted picture. The 1% in North Korea is very different from the 1% in America. In some nations the "people in power" are often at odds. In America we have Democrats versus Republican vs. Liberals vs. Conservatives vs. Communists vs. Fascists.... Do some people have more power? Yeah, that isn't going to be eliminated (see several thousand years of history). The best we can do is limit the power of people and work to keep the majority from oppressing the minority and ensure that there is a free press, free speech, redress and justice (to name a few important concepts).

I never remotely suggested anything like that. The fact that there is not actually a secret society which has run the world from the beginning hardly addresses the issue of who it is that is running the world.

The answer, quite simply, is that it is no one person or group! Many, many, many different people with different ideals and ideologies to varying different success.

It is always some people - and not you and I or anybody you know - making all the significant decisions that determine course of civilization.

I live in a democracy, for 8 years Bill Clinton together with other elected officials made decisions. Before that it was George H. W. Bush and now it is George W. Bush. The people decided who would represent them, it is called representative democracy. The decisions made changed because the people changed. If what you said was true then those things would not change. There would not be moratoriums on cutting down trees because industry want to cut the trees and many people are willing to pay to use those trees but they are prevented by people in power. So some people in power want to cut down the trees while others don't. The people in power that don't want to cut down the trees call the shots at the moment.

I am saying it might as well be an illuminati since the practical outcome is the same...

Really? Odd, since the outcome in America is very different than the outcome in North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Russia, Somalia, Nigeria, Brazil...

99% of the people being governed by the other 1%.

Perhaps but this is misleading. The governments of Europe and America are very different than many governments throughout the world and America is quite different from Europe. That those who rule are in the minority does not prove your thesis. Further those who live in a representative democracy choose who will lead them and therefore direct the direction of that leadership. In America we had a significant election recently and the people voted to keep Bush. They threw his father out of office and that was after he won the Gulf War, there is a problem with your argument in there somewhere.

You are, apparently, of the opinion that the common folk are not up to task of actually governing themselves and that...

What? Where on earth did you come up with this? It is a non-sequitur as well as a straw man. Do me a favor and don't tell me what I think.

...ultimately (inspite of the charade of democracy) we need wise overseers to make the really important decisions. Of course, I would ever suggest that those overseers might have an agenda of their own when making these decisions or they might ever seek to profit from the positions they hold.

Billy, I hate to be patronizing but civilization has been experimenting with government for thousands of years. There is no perfect system. Pure democracy would allow the majority to rule the minority. There will always be different opinions of how to govern. Whose opinion do we use? Yours?

Hey, I have an idea, why not let the people choose? But what about the inevitable problems of consolidation of power? Hey lets split power between 3 branches of government. But how do we decide who will make lead these branches and how do we choose the representatives? Perhaps we could choose people by vote?

You want somebody like Robert McNammara pointing his fickle finger and deciding that this person and that person, that you or your children should have the privilege of sacrificing your lives for the good of the state? You want Dick Cheney and Haliburton and people in the board rooms of arms manufacterers deciding this part of the world or that part of the world and all the people in it are to be decimated in or to serve the greater good?

You assume facts not in evidence.

I'm not the one interested in cinniman sticks and valentines.

You point to problems and suggest that we should do something that doesn't have these problems. That system only exists in fantasy land.

Leave that to those people who swallow down the the pablum fed to us like infants that we are a free nation and that we govern ourselves and that we are making the world safe for democracy in Iraq.

I won't excuse the BS defecated from the right but that doesn't solve the problem with your complaint. What are your solutions?

 

[Rob Lister]

Re: I hope

I really hope you are not going to suggest that the world has not always been run by the rich and powerful and that very little ever happens in it without their say so.

What an intersting statement. It is, of course, self-evident, in and of itself. What kind of person would a pennyless and weak person have to first become in order to lead the most powerful collective on earth? Might I suggest rich and powerful? It is, by it's very definition, a position of vast power.

But more interestingly, it appears to be part of an argument that attemps to cast representative democracy in a very negative light. "The people should rule themselves without leaders," seems to be the implied argument. But, in the very next line we get . . .

I forget who said that the genius of the American political system lay in its ability to get its citizens to vote consistently against their own best interests.

Which, ironically enough, casts the intellect of these same people in an even worse light. Having your cake and eating it too. The people are either smart enough to govern themselves without leaders or they are not. Can't have it both ways. Representative democracy is what the people have chosen. Those stupid people should govern themselves! appears to be the very ironic conclusion.