Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Where Can I Buy Laundry Soap For Laundry Mat
Before the military intervention in Libya I have, like many people, many doubts, but I have a few things clear. The first is that this intervention is not like Iraq and I think a part of the left is wrong to compare them. If we assume that the two situations are the same then we are de-legitimizing our own arguments against that intervention. Were against (at least most) of the Iraq war because it was illegal and was based on lies, not because the murderer Saddam Hussein did not deserve to be deposed and tried. If that intervention was illegal, it is legal. If the two wars are alike are giving reasons to those who supported the war to set aside the illegality of time and the very fact that her supporters could (in theory) be judged. If you do not recognize any international law then we can not demand that criminals be tried for crimes against human rights or genocide, freedom-etc. I think we should improve and extend international legal instruments and not kill them.
By declaring the two wars equal gives the impression that at least part of today who are against this military intervention is positioning itself just against everything the U.S. does or says and related powers. In that sense the position of that country which seems to mark the position of this part of the left, something like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Ethical abyss separating me from this position. The impression is that the Left has its own discourse to the popular revolts that have occurred against Arab dictatorships. Positioned "to otherwise" do not seem to give sufficient importance or sufficient support for a revolution being an example of courage and dignity. It seems that just to be in front of U.S. no matter what Gaddafi remains in power and that the rebellion is crushed. Is inexplicable to me how little emphasis that part of the left puts in supporting the riots or to criticize dictators who rivaled by Franco.
But it is also clear that there is a background context that we share everyone left and it matters. It is true that the West supports gun and, if not instigated and organized, any dictatorship or regime that suits their own economic interests, it is quite true that we are moving in a policy framework that covers completely immoral to discredit any action by U.S. and allies . The hypocrisy or immorality of Western governments is beyond doubt in this and many more cases but ... we do not support that justifies a revolutionary process that is fair? The logic seems to expose the hypocrisy and ethical behavior of the Western powers and supporting popular revolutions simultaneously. To say that this war is done to keep the Libyan oil is superfluous. Obviously, if oil had not nobody would even Libya and occupying the country would be like any other African country bled by endless wars, massacres and genocide to which nobody pays any attention. But is that our demand is precisely to pay attention to what happens in those countries and to intervene in defense of the population, regardless of whether the country has oil or not. Until a few days one of the complaints of those who now express themselves on against the intervention was, in fact, that Europe did not say anything. Then it was said that nothing was done because it supported the dictators, who were "ours" and may be true but ... what now?
should be recalled that the Libyan oil and was "ours" and that Gaddafi has supported almost to the end. Gaddafi was until yesterday partner of choice and even friends with most European leaders. Rather than forget it and make him a martyr of anti-Americanism, which would have to do is teach your photos with Western leaders and remember that you have protected, supported, armed and defended their system until the end. I think I would touch on that in the past behavior of the western powers and not now give any value to this murderous clown. It seems clear that the U.S. and Europe that Qaddafi would have preferred to continue there as quiet and that there was no riot at all. In fact you might think (I have this suspicion) that the bombing is occurring now is purely to meet the record and spend a few weapons. The reluctance among allies is evident, no one wants to send, nobody wants to be there and not really know what they want.
Within a few days there will be a demonstration in solidarity with the Libyan people What people? How Gaddafi's army or those who have taken? "In asking the UN to intervene to stop the killing or defeat? Do we want to leave Gaddafi, that is, the triumph of revolution, which is defeated? Do we want to do nothing or do we demand? Do not we would have liked in the English civil war powers Franco had bombed positions? Have not we spent years regretting that they did not? Do not we wish that the UN would have intervened to stop genocide in Rwanda, for example, the eternal war in Ivory Coast? Finally, the fact that distrust of the intentions of the European and U.S. governments "forces us to always support the absolute inaction leaving people who rise up against dictatorships stranded? For now support the intervention in this case provided that it complies strictly with the UN resolution. I do not trust in the goodness of the reasons for that are attacking but I think sometimes the wrong reasons, can go better situations for people and nations martyred. Criticism of Western behavior, their lack of ethics, hypocrisy etc. we do every day, we must continue making them and should take lessons from these riots to demand ethical policies, control over arms sales, international relations etc fair.
Finally, it is possible that the reasons are not Clear and how not even know what they want the Western powers in Libya (whether to leave or remove Gaddafi) the result of all is that everything remains the same, with Qaddafi in power, and above bombed. The Arab riots there that support them, have to fight the dictators, in this case must be fought to prevent the slaughter Gaddafi and his people, the slow response of the West is to criticize its lack of clarity about their ultimate goal also is suspicious, and above all must deplore the continuing Western hypocrisy regarding various dictatorships, wars and injustices that populate the world and are supported or not as diverse circumstances that have nothing to do with justice. But I still believe that hypocrisy can not determine our position on this and other cases because then we would fall into the same hypocrisy that we denounce. Having said all that I still have doubts and tomorrow, when I leave this article, I may have changed his mind. But I have to think fast because now comes Yemen and later hopefully also fall dictatorships of the Gulf, precisely those who have been friends, "our", ie of them.
By declaring the two wars equal gives the impression that at least part of today who are against this military intervention is positioning itself just against everything the U.S. does or says and related powers. In that sense the position of that country which seems to mark the position of this part of the left, something like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Ethical abyss separating me from this position. The impression is that the Left has its own discourse to the popular revolts that have occurred against Arab dictatorships. Positioned "to otherwise" do not seem to give sufficient importance or sufficient support for a revolution being an example of courage and dignity. It seems that just to be in front of U.S. no matter what Gaddafi remains in power and that the rebellion is crushed. Is inexplicable to me how little emphasis that part of the left puts in supporting the riots or to criticize dictators who rivaled by Franco.
But it is also clear that there is a background context that we share everyone left and it matters. It is true that the West supports gun and, if not instigated and organized, any dictatorship or regime that suits their own economic interests, it is quite true that we are moving in a policy framework that covers completely immoral to discredit any action by U.S. and allies . The hypocrisy or immorality of Western governments is beyond doubt in this and many more cases but ... we do not support that justifies a revolutionary process that is fair? The logic seems to expose the hypocrisy and ethical behavior of the Western powers and supporting popular revolutions simultaneously. To say that this war is done to keep the Libyan oil is superfluous. Obviously, if oil had not nobody would even Libya and occupying the country would be like any other African country bled by endless wars, massacres and genocide to which nobody pays any attention. But is that our demand is precisely to pay attention to what happens in those countries and to intervene in defense of the population, regardless of whether the country has oil or not. Until a few days one of the complaints of those who now express themselves on against the intervention was, in fact, that Europe did not say anything. Then it was said that nothing was done because it supported the dictators, who were "ours" and may be true but ... what now?
should be recalled that the Libyan oil and was "ours" and that Gaddafi has supported almost to the end. Gaddafi was until yesterday partner of choice and even friends with most European leaders. Rather than forget it and make him a martyr of anti-Americanism, which would have to do is teach your photos with Western leaders and remember that you have protected, supported, armed and defended their system until the end. I think I would touch on that in the past behavior of the western powers and not now give any value to this murderous clown. It seems clear that the U.S. and Europe that Qaddafi would have preferred to continue there as quiet and that there was no riot at all. In fact you might think (I have this suspicion) that the bombing is occurring now is purely to meet the record and spend a few weapons. The reluctance among allies is evident, no one wants to send, nobody wants to be there and not really know what they want.
Within a few days there will be a demonstration in solidarity with the Libyan people What people? How Gaddafi's army or those who have taken? "In asking the UN to intervene to stop the killing or defeat? Do we want to leave Gaddafi, that is, the triumph of revolution, which is defeated? Do we want to do nothing or do we demand? Do not we would have liked in the English civil war powers Franco had bombed positions? Have not we spent years regretting that they did not? Do not we wish that the UN would have intervened to stop genocide in Rwanda, for example, the eternal war in Ivory Coast? Finally, the fact that distrust of the intentions of the European and U.S. governments "forces us to always support the absolute inaction leaving people who rise up against dictatorships stranded? For now support the intervention in this case provided that it complies strictly with the UN resolution. I do not trust in the goodness of the reasons for that are attacking but I think sometimes the wrong reasons, can go better situations for people and nations martyred. Criticism of Western behavior, their lack of ethics, hypocrisy etc. we do every day, we must continue making them and should take lessons from these riots to demand ethical policies, control over arms sales, international relations etc fair.
Finally, it is possible that the reasons are not Clear and how not even know what they want the Western powers in Libya (whether to leave or remove Gaddafi) the result of all is that everything remains the same, with Qaddafi in power, and above bombed. The Arab riots there that support them, have to fight the dictators, in this case must be fought to prevent the slaughter Gaddafi and his people, the slow response of the West is to criticize its lack of clarity about their ultimate goal also is suspicious, and above all must deplore the continuing Western hypocrisy regarding various dictatorships, wars and injustices that populate the world and are supported or not as diverse circumstances that have nothing to do with justice. But I still believe that hypocrisy can not determine our position on this and other cases because then we would fall into the same hypocrisy that we denounce. Having said all that I still have doubts and tomorrow, when I leave this article, I may have changed his mind. But I have to think fast because now comes Yemen and later hopefully also fall dictatorships of the Gulf, precisely those who have been friends, "our", ie of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)