The Middle East

[suzer1013]

Is anyone else just plain scared about what's going on in the Middle East?

Although I don't like any war, I thought going into Afghanistan was at least understandable to root out the Taliban, who were directly responsible for the 9/11 attacks. I could at least see some rational relation to why we went there.

I am totally against the war in Iraq, for all the reasons given by most folks who are against it. There was no good reason to go in. It is Bush's folly, a grab at oil, power and dominion. I could see the signs of Bush ramping up for war in Iraq as soon as 9/11 happened. I knew we would go in and it would be a disaster. I knew civil war would result. It doesn't take a great mind to have seen all the signs -- a few days listening in my history classes as a teenager pretty much gave me the information to see what would result from our actions.

Now the rise of conflict with Iran, and the current conflict between Israel and Lebanon -- it seems like the Middle East is going to melt down. I also think we can't discount our role in that possible outcome.

I know enough about the history and politics of that area to be very afraid of what is happening. I don't know enough to take sides, and wouldn't want to take sides. Except to say that I can see the damage my own government has done, and it sickens me. And I don't know really what I can do about it. I protest and write letters, but I didn't elect these guys and don't approve of their actions.

I wish we could just put down our guns, disarm and destroy all the bombs, and everyone go home.

It has been a loooong time since I read Slaughterhouse Five, but I think there is a part in it wherein Billy Pilgrim witnesses the bombs going in reverse, everyone going back home and having dinner with their families, and the bombs being dismantled. How I wish we could live this particular part of history in reverse -- send all the bombs safely back up to the planes, the planes to their hangars, the bombs back to their factories and dismantled, while the people go home and have dinner with their children. What a dream. Bombs in reverse.

Susan

[suzer1013]

"American planes, full of holes and wounded men and corpses took off backwards from an airfield in England. Over France, a few German fighter plans flew at them backwards, sucked bullets and shell fragments from some of the planes and crewmen. They did the same for wrecked American bombers on the ground, and those planes flew up backwards to join the formation.

The formation flew backwards over a German city that was in flames. The bombers opened their bomb bay doors, exerted a miraculous magnetism which shrunk the fires, gathered them into cylindrical steel containers, and lifted the containers into the bellies of the planes. The containers were stored neatly in racks. The Germans below had miraculous devices of their own, which were long steel tubes. They used them to suck more fragments from the crewmen and planes. But there were still a few wounded Americans, though, and some of the bombers were in bad repair. Over France, though, German fighters came up again, made everything and everybody as good as new.

When the bombers got back to their base, the steel cylinders were taken from the racks and shipped back to the United States of America, where factories were operating night and day, dismantling the cylinders, separating the dangerous contents into minerals. Touchingly, it was mainly women who did this work. The minerals were then shipped to specialists in remote areas. It was their business to put them into the ground, to hide them cleverly, so they would never hurt anybody ever again.

The American fliers turned in their uniforms, became high school kids. And Hitler turned into a baby, Billy Pilgrim supposed. That wasn't in the movie. Billy was extrapolating. Everybody turned into a baby, and all humanity, without exception, conspired biologically to produce two perfect people named Adam and Eve, he supposed."

Kurt Vonnegut - Slaughterhouse Five

[SolApollo]

Scared? No, I am not. Why? Historically, the Middle East has been in constant conflict for 3,000 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continued 3,000 more years. Seriously, Ancient Mesopotamia was at war, conquered, and then re-conquered on a regular basis.

The nuclear threat. Again, its no surprise the current admin. in office hasn't invaded or attacked N. Korea & Iran. Since Iraq didn't have it, they were invaded for its oil and perhaps for strategic power in the Mid-East. It seems if a gov. actually has nuclear technology, the admin. does nothing about it. Its political hypocrisy.

Like in the 50s, MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction would be the result of a nuclear power. Thankfully, gov.'s wanting to avoid MAD has avoided nuclear war. Thats how it was, historically, in the Cold War era.

I hope a nuclear war doesn't happen, but put in context, I don't see it happening.

Peace & Blessings,
Sol

[suzer1013]

Well, I tend to be rather alarmist about these things, but perhaps I can explain my perspective a little better.

I spend alot of time thinking about and talking about gay rights, and have even done a tiny bit of "activism" on a small scale. I also spend time volunteering helping those in poverty, etc. My concern about a meltdown in the Middle East is for many reasons.

First, and most basically, the amount of lives being lost is appalling. I try to think about the friends and families of the victims (of both sides) and I see no sense in what is happening there. Second, I see an escalation that could be very, very dangerous for our country. We are not just killing people, we are creating more terrorists, more people to hate our government even more vehemently than they already do. I am concerned that more middle-of-the-road Muslims will begin to see the Islamo-facists as having the right idea. As hatred against America grows and festers, another 9/11 is, I am sure, in the works.

If (or when) another 9/11 happens, I think there is a great possibility of martial law being declared, and any further elections being postponed or cancelled altogether. I think there are people in power right now who will do anything to hold onto it. I'm concerned about our economy going down the tubes along with everything else.

Should martial law be declared, we can pretty much kiss our gay rights activism goodbye -- it will not only do no good to try to make the strides we are making now, it will probably be against the law. The Constitution will be rendered null and void (some of it already has been), and all we have worked for will be gone. And it will take decades to recover. And our great social causes, such as poverty relief, will be pushed even further on the back burner than they are now.

That's why I'm scared. Scared of the repurcussions down the road. Scared of the violence that can only come from the violence being perpetrated.

We are blessed in this country to be able to have a group like Soulforce, and to have these boards to come to and express our views. I'm concerned that, should the conflict become more serious and more global than it already is, that groups like Soulforce will no longer exist, and gay rights and gay marriage will only have been a silly dream.

I dunno. I just see the possibilities of catastrophe as enormous, frighteningly so. And I'm surprised more folks don't see that as well.

Susan

(catastrophizing alarmist that I am -- maybe I just have too much imagination? or maybe I just want to be prepared for anything)

[suzer1013]

Does anyone else see the connection between what is happening in the world, and the possible repurcussions on our activism? I'm trying to see the big picture here, and realize that our activism and nonviolence efforts should not remain insulated within the gay rights area, but we also need to keep a larger world view. I know that we can't fight every cause in the world, but I'm just wondering -- aren't there other folks out there who are worried about how the situation in the Middle East could affect our futures -- our lives in general, and our lives as activists? I took part in a nonviolent peace march a while back regarding the Iraq war -- I think our nonviolence needs to cross all spectrums, and will make our nonviolent activism to end spiritual violence against GLBT people all the more powerful.

Maybe I'm not making much sense, I don't know. Is no one else worried about the impact of world events on our cause?

Susan

[SolApollo]

Yes, we should be concerned and active if a Orwellian situation occured.
However, the neo-conservatives in power seem to enjoy causing fear among Americans in order to win more votes and power. A Machivellian and Orwellian concept too. We need to protect and help our LGBT community, but, personally, I feel we cannot be frightened by neocons - thus allowing them an edge in power. 2008 isn't too far away - maybe progressives will get elected soon & a Democrat as president (hopefully).

Edited to add:
Indeed, Machievelli himself said, "it doesn't matter as long as they like you - its if they fear you" (paraphrased from his book The Prince). This seems to be the neocon agenda.

[LGBT FLIGHT ATTENDANT]

Was it Will Rogers who said that he didn't belong to any organized political party, that he was a Democrat? He spoke in a time when the FDR coalition was in place. The Southern Dixiecrat Democrat, the Democratic conservative Farm Labour coalition in the Midwest, and the Northeastern liberal Democrat who held power in the administrative branch while the Dixiecrat held it in Congress.

Okay, musical chairs right ? The Dixiecrat took the shell of a Southern black GOP and made it theirs. The white Southern Democrats merged en masse and in sure and increasing numbers for the last three or four decades. The Northeast liberal has no power, and is a shadow of its former power and glory.

Clinton and Lieberman and other Southern Democrat moderates decided to create a spineless, "progressive if polls approve", and centrist party. It agreed with the neocons about the definition of liberal, and sought to marginalize their strength, and effectiveness in the donkey party.

Congressman Gene Taylor of Mississippi is someone I have known. He is a "Democrat" who did not switch. Yet, why should he? He votes with the neocons 99% of the time, and when the symbolic vote for speaker occurs at the beginning of each congress, he votes for the Republican. Does he represent the Democratic South? Or is it Zig Zag Zell Miller or other DLC'ers like Lieberman?

First, in my small opinion, we have to resurrect the term liberal from the neocons who defiled it. Name me a neocon who would have given Social Security, Medicare, or are now not willing to unravel the social compact that saved our nation from chaos by liberals.

Next, by use of the Democratic Primary, we have to purge the Democratic incumbencies of men and women who should migrate into the GOP neocon party where they vote. When real Democrats with spines and liberal beliefs again are incumbents and represent the Party, then we will have the disenfranchised liberal voter repatriated once again.

[SolApollo]

LGBT Flight Attendent: Great response & I agree w/ you. I just think if the Democrats were in power - the US wouldn't have invaded Iraq and would try to make peace between Israel and Palestine like during the Clinton admin. I may be wrong on that point thought.

Yes, Liberal Progressives need to regain power & not fit into the neocon definition. Progressive Christianity represents the "social gospel," and we need to be a large voice in demanding reform and change in the government.

[Jamie McDaniel]

I was wondering if anyone would post this news. Since I didn't see it anywhere, I decided to put it in this thread since LGBT FLIGHT ATTENDANT mentioned him.

Internet, activists help topple prominent Democrat (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060809/wr_nm/connecticut_activists_dc_5)

I am quite excited about this outcome because of the anti-Iraq war sentiment that played such a huge role.

The Senate's second-ranking Republican, Mitch McConnell from Kentucky (sigh), stated this election was a problem for Democrats long-term.

"The McGovern wing of the Democrat party seems to have forgotten that we've been on offense for the last five years and that's why we haven't been attacked here at home."

(McConnell was referring to George McGovern (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_McGovern).)

Again, we have a leading Republican erroneously connecting September 11th with the invasion of Iraq.

[Daniel]

I was wondering if anyone would post this news. Since I didn't see it anywhere, I decided to put it in this thread since LGBT FLIGHT ATTENDANT mentioned him.

Internet, activists help topple prominent Democrat (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060809/wr_nm/connecticut_activists_dc_5)

Again, we have a leading Republican erroneously connecting September 11th with the invasion of Iraq.

And I heard the defeated Lieberman making these same kind of connections on PBS tonight. It's interesting that internet blogging has been credited with helping Lamont win. Though, to this listener, the winning candiate is very well-spoken. He also, btw, supports gay rights, which Lieberman did not.

Is there much to be fearful of? Yes. I've had a hard time staying away from CNN et al. Addictive in the worst sense. However, after watching other news outlets like BBC, one gets the sense that what we see here is only half of the picture. (Israel is not held in the same esteem in Europe as it is here. And efforts for peace seem to be made by our government for photo-ops only. Just this weekend, Condi was criticized for spending too much face time with Networks and not enough with the participants in the conflict.)

I agree with Flight Attendant: we must rescue the word Liberal from being a prejorative.

[Zerbie]

Suze, I'm sorry I didn't respond to this a lot sooner. Thing is, this subject does scare me, a great deal, like - pull the covers over my head, much. I also do not believe I understand what is going on thoroughly enough to provide any valuable commentary.

Certainly, nothing exists in a vacuum, and your worst-case scenario is within the realm of the possible, but I don't think it's all too likely. What I think scares you is what scares me: the pieces are there. Increasing executive power, expansion of police power, more governmental intrustion into the lives of law-abiding citizens. . .that is frightening in itself. Combine it with martial law, sure our activism would be seriously thwarted,and then we'd suddenly have bigger issues to deal with than marriage equality. But I don't expect the worst- case scenario to happen. I read, contact my legislators, and am variously getting involved in the process more than ever before in my life. The democratic process requires that we the people get involved and stay involved. If we do that, I think all the worst-case scenarios can be averted.

What bothers me most now about the Middle East is the sheer slaughter.

[NonLemming]

I agree with Flight Attendant: we must rescue the word Liberal from being a prejorative.

I agree whole-heartedly with you, Daniel. The GOP has done an excellent job at demonizing the word "liberal" and we must find a way to rescue it without sinking to the same level. Just as every Republican is not a neocon, every liberal is not an anarchist running naked and hugging trees.

And I do wish that Condi was spending more time with both sides of this conflict, too. In fact, I wish she and the entire Bush team had looked into creating a legitimate Palestine before now.

[Dash]

...every liberal is not an anarchist running naked and hugging trees.

I know!!! I am NOT an anarchist!!!!;)

[picks the bark out of his chest hair]

[NonLemming]

I know!!! I am NOT an anarchist!!!!;)

[picks the bark out of his chest hair]


LOL. Touche. LOL