Of course, as is to be expected, the right wing and their minions are calling the president things such as "naive," "weak", and "feckless". (I swear John Bolton looks like he has little children buried away in his basement.) They want more action in places like Kiev and Syria, and they are tired of America just standing on the sidelines while the people in the Ukraine and Syria fight each other to the bitter end.
But let's not lose sight of the fact that this is what most of the American people want. They are sick and tired of wars, and unless you can show them that war is a shared sacrifice, it's going to make it hard for those in charge to convince the American people that it (war) is needed to protect them anymore.
Now I would actually take sides with my wingnut friends if they would condemn this administration for not paying enough attention to the upheaval in Nigeria or the crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo. I mean the Nigerian military is killing civilians as well. But this revolution, unlike others, will not be televised.
Right now in Nigeria there is a serious religious conflict taking place over land between Muslims and Christians, and no one in America is paying attention to it. Not the government. Not the press. Not the people.
Is it only regional conflicts and revolutions in Europe and the Middle East that should warrant our attention? Why isn't John McCain on Sunday talk shows talking about strife in Third World countries involving black people? Why isn't Peggy Noonan writing about the administration's failure to speak out about the atrocities taking place in Central Africa? Why, instead, is she telling us to choose sides between a repressive government and ultra right wing groups in Ukraine? These are rhetorical questions; I know why.
Here is what he wrote back in November:
"Last week, a heavily armed rebel militia, M23, took control of the eastern Congolese city of Goma, the economic center and capital of the country’s North Kivu province. Unfortunately, to those of us who work in eastern Congo, the only surprise in this turn of events was how little attention it received.
Two years ago, almost to the day, I wrote in The Post about the bloodiest war since World War II and its continued toll on the Congolese people. From 1998 to 2003, eight African nations fought on Congolese soil, killing millions, forcing tens of thousands of children to become soldiers and, in some areas of Congo, subjecting as many as two of every three women to rape and other forms of sexual violence. Violence continued long after combatants agreed on a cease-fire. With regional war looming once again, it is time for the United States to act."
Not going to happen, Ben. You would have a better chance of landing an Academy Award for your role in Gigli.
38 comments:
What about Venezuela? You skipped mentioning that one. The government, aided by Cuban 'advisors' has killed hundreds of protestors. Is it because this socialist paradise was set up by Obama's good buddy?
Field, you should be aware that the majority of Americans AND Canadians are from 'Europe and the Ukraine'. Hence it is understandable and expected that America AND Canada AND Europe are concerned about the Ukraine.
Africa is so far away and the people are different. Notice that I did not say they were any less, I just mean their culture and looks are not European.
My guess is America will get to Africa after the trouble in Europe and the Middle East is taken care of.
Brother Field, America must set its priories and President Obama is doing just that. For now, Africa must be placed on the back burner. We are stretched too far in the world as it is.
Besides, things will eventually work out there the way it ought to be.
The Congo was better off under the Belgians. Much better. The place has turned into an utter hell hole.
From 1996 until 2003, a staggering 5.4 million people were killed in the First Congo War and Second Congo War. The violence between the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda spilled over the eastern border into North Kivu and South Kivu and culminated in the toppling of Mobutu Sese Seko in 1997.
The Congo Wars were the most destructive conflict since the Second World War. In terms of the pure savagery of the fighting, there is nothing in Europe quite comparable to it. Even the Red Army’s sweep across Germany and Hungary wasn’t as bad. The callousness and brutality of those years has become so deeply embedded into Congolese culture that the atrocities have continued for years after the war.
Under Belgian rule, Lubumbashi used to be the prosperous city of Elisabethville, and the center of the (now destroyed) world class mining industry of Union Minière du Haut Katanga.
Now there isn't even a navigable road across the country. Almost the entire rail system has fallen apart. The riches of the country remain untapped, even as its people are some of the poorest on the planet.
I hope America stays away from all of these wars, but the Congo is about as fucked up as a situation can be.
The USA and it's Allies won't get involved in any conflict unless they can take over the country's resources in the end. Our involvement anywhere is all about money.
"From 1996 until 2003, a staggering 5.4 million people were killed in the First Congo War and Second Congo War. The violence between the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda spilled over the eastern border into North Kivu and South Kivu and culminated in the toppling of Mobutu Sese Seko in 1997.
The Congo Wars were the most destructive conflict since the Second World War. In terms of the pure savagery of the fighting, there is nothing in Europe quite comparable to it. Even the Red Army’s sweep across Germany and Hungary wasn’t as bad. The callousness and brutality of those years has become so deeply embedded into Congolese culture that the atrocities have continued for years after the war."
Sounds like Satan has a major foothold on Africa. Complete and total victory there. Africa is the devil's playground....
Where is God there?
Wesley R said...
The USA and it's Allies won't get involved in any conflict unless they can take over the country's resources in the end. Our involvement anywhere is all about money.
-----
I sure as fuck hope so.
Please, sir/madam, visit a library to fill in the gaps of your knowledge of Africa and the colonial era. Preferably, become proficient in a language other than English. This may also help with your understanding of what the Nazis did in Europe to those populations which did not acquiesce to Hitler's demands and actively resisted. Then you will learn "in terms of pure savagery" the Nazis were quite worse, especially when they viewed themselves as clean, cultured, and educated.
I find Field's post a bit simplistic. He does not address the geopolitical and economic significance of the ME and Black Sea areas. Again, to understand these fully one must be familiar with the histories of the Mediterranean basin and of Central Asia, particularly the Mughal and Ottoman Empires. The radicalized descendants of the last two (Turkic/Mongolian ppls, which include groups like the Chechens, Azeris, and the native populations of the -stan countries, as well as Persians) have not fully accepted the loss of their empires. Ukraine is a major energy hub and sits betwixt East and West. Syria also is a gateway to the East, though that conflict began over water rights between Syria and Turkey.
I am not saying racism does not influence the content and the emphasis of media coverage. It certainly plays a part in what is included in textbooks. But there is more to the story than that, though I do agree that the lack of attention on Africa is deeply disturbing, and is somewhat tied also to monolingual arrogance.
AAs keep wanting Whites to love Blacks but that isn't the way the world and the races work. Blacks and Whites should know that by now.
The Congo is a hell hole and there isn't an ounce of civility there.
"Hell is a place where there is no love."
That 'hell' is the Congo. It's run by the 'dark side' in more ways than one.
Kiev will come back. But the Congo? never. Different kind of mind and heart running things there.
The US was involved in the Congo. The CIA conspired to kill the democratically elected leadership and helped install a ruthless dictator. The US helped to create turmoil in the Congo thus maybe we should help soothe tensions.
Of course America is to blame for the fact the inhabitants of the Congo are completely incapable of maintaining any semblance of nationhood or civilization.
Of course it's our fault, PilotX, of course. What shall we do, send over 100 million EBT cards? Sign the whole country up for Obamacare? Perhaps airlift in some Obamaphones and Diversity Consultants.
I'm sure the President can fix the Congo as ably as he has fixed America. Where can I sign up to volunteer?
this post...
these racist whipcracka woefully ignorant comments...
on 2nd thought, i have nothing to add.
lol.
leaving folks just the way i found them- happily ignint as only americans can so proudly be.
no wonder the world HATES ignint americans. when foreign troop boots visibly start stomping through america- i can't even try to feel to bad, at this point.
quite a few americans covet their ignorance too much to ever loose it in favor of being human + informed about the role america plays in the human suffering around the world.
;(
Shabbath Shalom, anyway folk.
Brother Field... Malcolm X was assassinated 49 years ago. The courageous human rights activist is slowly being respected for the influence he had on the Black youth of my times. One year later was the birth of the Panthers. We had to have Brother Malcolm to show a revolution was possible.
Today it pains me to see the Black State of Affairs. I was not going to comment tonight until I saw a commercial telling "television land" a new show is coming next month. It will be about youth African American YOUNG.. YES, YOUNG girls dancing n a pure sexual manner. Oh yea. these will not be mixed nor white girls. How can my people expect other race of people see us self portrayed as sluts. Maybe I have gotten too old for the imagery that African Americans display.
Please Mr. Obama.. no more wars. we can't take care of the veterans that you sent to beat down the designated(Iraq and Afghanistan). The VA in Hampton needs a liver specialist, a podiatrist, a renal doctor and many more internist. I know the chicken hawks who send people to war have excellent care.
As far as African, the US will ALWAYS be in these countries covertly. These countries have all these resources and can not defend themselves. Other countries provide one side guns and weapons and the other side basic goods to insure the people can always be in contention. Every warring country in Africa has been "touched" by a white hand. That is just the way it is on our "their" world.
FP, "leaving folks just the way i found them- happily ignint as only americans can so proudly be."
Please say something about this post. We need a voice of truth. No one knows the truth anymore.
Truth is truth. America had its hand in the internal affairs of the Congo. It did destabilize the nation. So as Gen. Powell said "if you break it".
There is no fixing black people.
Freedom has failed.
Many foreign/European investors benefit from the war in the Congo. Its a mineral rich state, and the money flowing out in enormous. To expose who those investors are may be hugely embarrassing for those 'investors'
Quotes Nazi-Boi
”1. I'll let Adolph take this one: " "There is no license any more, no private sphere where the individual belongs to himself. That is socialism, not such trivial matters as the possibility of privately owning the means of production. Such things mean nothing if I subject people to a kind of discipline they can't escape...What need have we to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings"”
Errrr yes. Thank you for making my point for me.
**
”2. A mere fraction of the capitalists he slaughtered.”
Really? I have seen no evidence that he slaughtered a single capitalist. Let alone tens of thousands. Maybe you know something I don’t – or maybe you’re full of shit. Anyway, you still haven’t explained why he would murder 400,000 socialists communists and trade unionists.
**
” 3. Same reason Roosevelt did - the war.”
Really? Who was Germany at war with in 1934?
**
”4. Marx said that, but Marxism is Statism, therefore the state never withers away in a socialist country, it always increases its control.”
Wait….What?
Are you saying that Karl Marx was not a Marxist?????
**
”5. So that he could be the head socialist.”
This is a Lulu. You appear to be suggesting that sending Socialist soldiers to the firing squad would make him a more popular Socialist! I don’t think so, buddy.
**
” 6. Because the one thing they didn;t want to lose was their lives.”
Several things wrong with this one. The Capitalists and far-Right politicians supported Hitler LONG BEFORE he came to power, long before he had control over life and death. Without the political support of far-Right nationalists like Bismarck and Luddendorff, and the financial support of capitalists like The Krupps, Hitler would never have achieved power at all. The reason they supported Hitler is that he promised to destroy the working class infrastructure and increase their profits. Which he did.
**
”7. They did not. Hitler considered the rival socialist ideology of Jewish communism to be 'evil'.”
Now you see, this can’t make sense even to you. Marx and Trotsky were Jews and neither of them were communists. Neither was Rosa Luxembourg for that matter. Marx was the father of socialist thinking, and he was very much a Jew.
**
”8. They brought it under state control, which is what socialism always does.”
Not true. The Nazis were very careful about how they manipulated and influenced the direction of private enterprise, but they did not take worker control.
**
”9. See answers to Nos. 1 and 3 above.”
Which were wrong above, as I have demonstrated.
**
”10. Because statist control served his purposes. Jews invented ethno-nationalism. Americans invented light bulbs; Hitler used those too. ”
All systems of government that are not anarchist are statist. Without statism you would not have an army, or fire and police departments. To suggest that anyone who is not an anarchist must support all other forms of government, is dim-witted even by your lamentable standards.
Let this be a lesson to you. Of you had no answers to my question you should have shut up or walked away. As it is you have made yourself look ridiculous.
The Congo was not better off under Belgian rule because the people were not free.
I could get into the evils of colonialism and how it destroyed countries and made others prosper but that would take weeks of blog posts.
But some of the comments above have been rather illuminating.
It's good that Ben Affleck is concerned about the Congo because we all knows that black entertainers and athletes these days rarely, if ever, speak out about anything important.
The black male entertainers and athletes nowadays are only interested in their contracts and how much free booty they can get (or take).
Now see, you were making sense until your "free booty"comments.
Now u are exposed for the racist that u are.
The Purple Cow said...
"As it is you have made yourself look ridiculous."
----
I'm not sure anyone else is following this debate enough to pass judgement on what I have replied, but the fact is your responses above, indeed the questions themselves, rely on a skewed and inaccurate interpretation of historical realities.
All of the anti-capitalist political movements between the world wars were related. All were collectivist oligarchical responses to democratic fee market systems. All were founded by coups were a small elite appropriated all decision making power unto itself. The fact that their collective identities and foci of their resentments differed slightly mattered only to the particular groups affected. In the end, they were all Leftist systems that perpetrated monstrous crimes in the name of social justice.
Hitler absolutely was a socialist.
Living in Britain, you cannot plead ignorance of the intellectual bankruptcy of socialism.
Here to explain is your great Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, on the floor of the House of Commons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okHGCz6xxiw&feature=player_embedded
Simply brilliant. What a woman.
A little OT but I have been given permission for such. The new anti-gay, oh sorry religious freedom, bill in AZ. How exactly will they determine who is gay and who isn't? Does this bill make sense to anyone? I mean other than insane Republicans. These folks are quite special.
And Field, how quickly will this law get shot down by a federal court? My Repubs like to waste our time and tax money.
field negro said...
The Congo was not better off under Belgian rule because the people were not free.
----
Absolute freedom is not for everyone. We don't let toddlers drive. You, as a Statist, would not allow free men to own guns.
African colonialism under Europeans often started out quite brutally, but by mid-century many African countries were on their way to being quite wealthy and their people were increasingly better off. Elisabethville was a modern, clean, functioning city whose black residents had good jobs and universal quality education. Today it is called Lubumbashi and is mostly in ruins.
Had Europe stayed out of Africa completely it would today be a very sparsely populated wilderness, with the population kept low by limited resources and a very high disease load. European contact has caused the problems modern Africa faces. An exploding population, poverty, starvation, endless war. Had Europeans not colonized Africa, but had shared modern farming, medicine, and technology, we'd see the same problems. No society can go from a tribal village system to a modern developed state in a few generations.
My ancestors in Europe couldn't have done it. When they had the chance, they sacked Rome and set civilization back 1,000 years. It takes a long time for a people to adapt to the modern system of life. Twenty or thirty generations perhaps.
The necessary cultural underpinnings of self-rule are both wide and deep. Churches, trade associations, industry groups, clubs, and philanthropic organizations all contribute to the kind of social structure that exists outside of government that is needed to temper the excesses of the state. These institutions took centuries to develop in Europe.
It may not just be cultural, but biological as well. From the Middle Ages to the 1700's, when the modern state arose, England executed a tremendous number of people. Those who were unable to live under the rule of law needed for a modern state to function were eliminated form the population. Europeans were perhaps in a sense domesticated. Africans living in European societies sure exhibit a lot of difficulties living under the cultural norms of the larger society.
Africans do not yet have the kind of social capital needed to effectively manage a modern state. It is becoming increasingly obvious that leaving these countries to their own results in little but chaos and horror. Haiti has been an independent nation for over 200 years, located on a tremendously rich piece of property, yet still cannot function on the most basic level.
South African apartheid was not justifiable on a moral basis, yet blacks were better off materially and were more secure under white rule. It certainly is inconceivable that we would see a return to a colonial system at this point, but we may get there in a generation or two. Today, many Chinese mineral operations operate as quasi-sovereign enclaves within African countries. The world wants African resources and the world will get them. It should be done in a way that helps alleviate the problems tormenting Africa today.
Freedom certainly is a right for everyone, but it's not always the best thing to jump right into. I may wish to be free to pilot a commercial airliner, but no one should let me until I have shown that I know how. When you look at Africa today, it is hard to say that freedom is the most important thing.
"All of the anti-capitalist political movements between the world wars were related. All were collectivist oligarchical responses to democratic fee market systems. All were founded by coups were a small elite appropriated all decision making power unto itself. The fact that their collective identities and foci of their resentments differed slightly mattered only to the particular groups affected. In the end, they were all Leftist systems that perpetrated monstrous crimes in the name of social justice."
Your full of shit. You know you are wrong but you are too pig-headed to admit it.
The February revolution was a mass workers' revolution, that led to the establishment of Soviets from Siberia to the Suomi border, in response to regime that exported grain while it's own people starved to death. It was the greatest mass uprising the world has ever seen.
Hitler absolutely was a fascist, he despised socialism. Mussolini's concept of fascism (later endorsed by Hitler) was of all classes working together to serve the race and the political elite. This was designed to be the exact opposite of the Jewish/Socialist conspiracy. By replacing class with race, and the dictatorship of the proletariat with the dictatorship of the leader, Fascism and Nazism reversed the goals of Socialism.
Don't just take my word for it. Richard Evans, author of the definitive three-volume history of Nazi Germany said this:
"it would be wrong to see Nazism as a form of, or an outgrowth of, socialism.” (The Coming of the Third Reich, Evans, p. 173). Not only was Hitler not a socialist himself, nor a communist, but he actually hated these ideologies and did his utmost to eradicate them. At first this involved organizing bands of thugs to attack socialists in the street, but grew into invading Russia, in part to enslave the population and earn ‘living ‘ room for Germans, and in part to wipe out communism and ‘Bolshevism’."
You can argue that black is white, and 2+2=7 till you are blue in the face, but the fact is you have not submitted one iota of evidence to back up your idiotic claim.
Oh and I've got better things to do than spend two minutes on a Saturday wasting time listening to that evil degenerate old cunt Margaret Thatcher. Some people who never lived under her despotic rule seem to love her, but it's no coincidence that here in the UK she is the most hated political figure of all time.
We had street parties here when she died, and the song 'Ding Dong The Which is Dead' went to number 1.
Thatcher destroyed entire sections of British society in order to make her wealthy friends even richer, while simultaneously proclaiming that society does not exist. It will take decades to undo the damage that she has caused to my country.
The Purple Cow said...
You can argue that black is white, and 2+2=7 till you are blue in the face, but the fact is you have not submitted one iota of evidence to back up your idiotic claim.
-----
Looks like you are the one getting blue in the face, or at least purple.
I have provided plenty of evidence, you just refuse to acknowledge it. To be a socialist, you have live on fantasy, as you aptly illustrate. Without Thatcherism you would likely not have a recognizable country from which to stamp your feet and act like a child. Dancing like munchkins in celebration of the death of the first female prime minister of the UK, the woman who brought the country back from the depths of socialist induced pauperism, is a stark indicator of how socialism is based purely on resentment and hate.
When you hand over your nice house and tidy savings to the poor huddled masses, I'll listen to you. Until then, I'll consider your illogical agitprop a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
And btw it's "you're", a contraction of "you are", as in you are full of shit. Quite full, actually.
You're correct, Hitler was a fascist, and since fascism is a socialist ideology, Hitler was a socialist
Thanks for playing.
Nazi boi, I see you've given up debating, and have taken to vapid generalisations and nitpicking typos. I will take as an admission of abject defeat on your part.
But before you slink off, where was this "plenty of evidence" you allegedly supplied me?
The Purple Cow said...
Nazi boi, I see you've given up debating, and have taken to vapid generalisations and nitpicking typos. I will take as an admission of abject defeat on your part.
---
Like I said, fantasy is the foundation of your life.
Go back and re-read the content of my comments from the past two days. Then type up a two page essay (double spaced) titled "Why I now believe it is accurate to describe Hitler as a socialist". It will be incredibly freeing for you, I promise. Either you will be able to walk away from your delusions or wind up embracing your inner Hitler.
I am a small government conservative-libertarian. My ideology is the antithesis of Statist systems like fascism/socialism/communism. A Statist is a Statist in my book, no matter what the flavor.
Government is a necessary evil. Anarchy is untenable, but wherever you have government, you have people like you who want to use it to gain control over everybody else. Learn to live your own life, and respect the choices of others to live theirs. Then feel the hate and resentment fade away.
Kiev is ablaze. Syria is a killing field. Venezuela is collapsing. The Iranian mullahs aren’t giving up their nuclear weapons capability, and other regimes in the Middle East are preparing to acquire their own. Al Qaeda is making gains and is probably stronger than ever. China and Russia throw their weight around, while our allies shudder and squabble.
Why is this happening? Because the United States is in retreat. What is the Obama administration’s response to these events? Further retreat.
GM is alive, Bin Laden is dead, and our Secretary of State is fighting ... "climate change". We're in the best of hands, folks. The best.
Marcus Jeter
Besides the police and police unions, why would anyone be against cops wearing cameras?
Quote Nazi boi
"I am a small government conservative-libertarian. "
Yep, that's what fascists call themselves these days.
Every system of government that is not anarchy is statist.
Army's are statist
Air Forces are statist
Navies are statist.
Police forces are statist
Fire departments are statist.
Socialised médecine is statist.
The welfare state is statist.
I for one would not feel happy living without those things.
...and Hitler was not a Socialist...
It's getting harder and harder to be poor and white.
Dr. King tried to tell y'all to wake up, but you and you'rn refused to listen. He spoke to freedom, justice and equality. I guess you thought it's better to just go along to get along. But it sure looks like now that, that time is running out you want to change the rules. Unfortunately for you, that nonsense is coming back around.
Personally, I think we should let them sort it out themselves. If nothing else let the architects of the wars now wreaking havoc in Africa, arm the folks over there in Kiev and close the door on the way out.
Well at least they can't blame this on us.
By the way, where's the NRA?
The Army, Navy and Air force should be as small as circumstances warrant. Police and Fire departments should only be as powerful and prevalent as needed. Healthcare should be between me and my doctor. Welfare should be temporary and not be for the able-bodied.
You and Hitler would both love for these institutions to be as bloated and oppressive as possible. That's because you are both socialists.
It IS YOUR. Just ask BiB.
Dear Field,
I have to agree with you on the Ukraine. The readership needs to keep in mind it is not because POTUS is an idiot, ineffectual, half-white or whatever. HE has no realistic means to bring force to bear on Ukraine without getting as all killed in a thermonuclear disaster (man made, of course).
You further mention other hell holes, like Nigeria. We are not involved there why? Because all it takes is for a half wit to look at a map, look at infrastructure and forces available... then come up with a coherent mission statement. What is the end state?
Now, if the end state were to establish a 21st Century homeland to have all niggers sent back so that they could live free amongst their own kind, I'd be all for it.
You are right that there are no good choices of who to back in Ukraine... so the choice is NONE of them.
Keep in mind that the secular saint Lincoln was working on a plan to return all freed slaves back to Africa when he was tragically shot in the head at Ford's theater. Damn Republicans.
Dear Field,
Here is a link to some of the story about recolonization of stray freed negroes by Lincoln.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/9/book-lincoln-sought-to-deport-freed-slaves/?page=all
I am looking for the "back to Africa" documents, this will have to suffice in the meantime. Even that house negro frederic douglass was part of it, tangentially.
Hey, I expect the current Regime to deport me so it's all good in the hood. They'd be doing me a favor.
Personally, I don't want to send troops to Congo or Kiev. Unless we know we can actually do some good, I think we should stay away from humanitarian interventions.
There have been exceptions -- we almost certainly could have done some good in the Rwandan massacre -- but generally, I think it's best we mind our own business and concentrate on fixing our own effed-up country.
Post a Comment