[eDebate] Never ending War

tcram tcram
Sat Apr 11 12:57:33 CDT 2009


27.5


-----Original Message-----
From: edebate-bounces at www.ndtceda.com on behalf of bandana martin
Sent: Sat 4/11/2009 12:28 PM
To: Clay Webb
Cc: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
Subject: Re: [eDebate] Never ending War
 
post of the year

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Clay Webb <webb767 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Never ending wars huh! Let me begin with the second hit on google when you
> search for "number of wars"
>
> http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/wars/articles/20050923.aspx
>
> *Ever since the end of the Cold War, the number of wars has been
> declining.* Perhaps more importantly, the number of wars between countries
> has declined even more. There have only been four since 1991; Ethiopia
> versus Eritrea (1998-2000), India versus Pakistan (low level, in Kashmir,
> since 1990), Iraq versus Kuwait (1991), and Iraq versus Coalition (2003).
> There are 15-20 wars going on right now. The uncertain count comes from the
> fact that there is a fuzzy line separating wars from civil disorder. The
> good news is that's about 40 percent fewer conflicts than were going on in
> 1991, when the Cold War ended. All the conflicts going on now are civil wars
> of one kind or another. The worst of the lot are in Africa (Sudan, Congo),
> with the number three position being filled by Iraq. Afghanistan has been in
> a state of civil war for over two decades. Some Afghan historians would
> insist that there's never been a time when some group or another was not
> fighting inside what we call Afghanistan. Even the overthrow of the Taliban
> in 2001 was not an "invasion" by the United States, but rather U.S. forces
> joining in an ongoing civil war between the Taliban (and their al Qaeda
> allies), against the Northern Alliance. A few hundred American commandoes
> and other specialists, a few dozen bombers, were all that was sent to the
> Northern Alliance, and that was all that was needed to overthrow the
> increasingly unpopular Taliban. *Why the decline in wars? *Part of it has
> to do with the fact that so many of the wars of the past few decades were
> the rough edges of decolonialization, and the after-effects of World War II
> (and World War I, which led to the breakup of the Ottoman empire.) When
> empires fall apart, they rarely do so quietly. The demise of the Russian
> empire in 1991 has led to fighting in Chechnya, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia
> and a few other places you hardly ever hear about. And then there was the
> competition between the two superpowers. *The Soviet Union was, after all,
> technically dedicated to world wide revolution and the triumph of communism.
> The United States was opposed to that*. Both superpowers ended up
> supporting numerous rebel organizations, or the governments that fought
> them. With the end of the Cold War, all that stopped.  The end of the Cold
> War, and several decades of economic and political experimentation by many
> countries, made it clear that democracy, and market economies, were the road
> to prosperity. That meant the rule of the people, and the law, began to
> replace tyrants and centrally controlled economies. Rebels now had a more
> difficult time getting any traction. *Most of the wars going on now are
> based on long time ethnic or religious disputes*. The Islamic terrorists
> get a lot of attention, but they are very small change compared to the
> threats encountered in the past century. Islamic terrorists don't even have
> a country to base their operations in, and are constantly on the run. But
> the Islamic terrorists are part of many of the ethnic and religious
> conflicts that form the basis for so many existing wars.
>
>
>
> The article is a little rough admittedly, but I think the most important
> point is pretty clear. Which begs an interesting question Jackie.What planet
> do you live on? Seriously?
>
> This article is just about the number of wars since the cold war. Nevermind
> that the bloodiest conflict in history was fought before we had the bomb.and
> then. abra kadabra.superpowers don't want to fight each other anymore.
> Realism is a failed ideology?!?!?!
>
> Yeah I have got a better idea, lets all sit around and read Nietzsche all
> day and see where that gets us. Perhaps we can structure the international
> order around the ubermensch or we can sit around and think about our
> feelings (ontology.etc.) all day.. I wonder where we would be
> then.hmmm..wait.that's right.Nazi Germany. You like to scoff at the
> old..wft..Heidegger was a Nazi argument.and yeah.its pretty crappy.but
> seriously..
>
> What is more is that the only reason any of us get to participate in this
> activity, fly all over the country, stay in nice hotels, etc. Is because we
> live in the wealthiest country on earth.period. We generate the excess
> wealth necessary. We pay the big bad government taxes, and they give it to
> the university that employs you Massey. Yes, other countries have debate. It
> is not like NDT/CEDA debate. Nobody does it like we do it.and its because
> of..aircraft carriers, capitalism, and the pharmaceutical companies.  Capitalism
> makes it possible baby!!! You call it exceptionalism..I call it.reality.
> There is not a better place to live, and there is no where any of us would
> rather be. If you do want to leave.you can.because.wait.that right.you are
> free to.
>
> Perhaps I have been brainwashed. Maybe debate has twisted my mind in ways I
> can't understand, and I will probably never recover. Andy Casey once told me
> I was an automaton.some sort of robot that worships the bomb.true. Despite
> this, I am confident that most signs point to, and the preponderance of peer
> reviewed work in almost every field would suggest, things aren't that bad.
> (peer reviewed as in.no.not Ward Churchill). This is not the Soviet Union.
> Yes recession, yes Iraq, yes poverty, yes hunger...there are plenty of
> problems to concern ourselves with. All the more reason to.I dunno.talk
> about them.
>
> "Re arm ourselves" "No more realism". "new files" . but then where would
> you be Jackie. I mean, if no one researches the topic, where are you going
> to get your link. What would you do without people like me.  Jackie, we
> live in a world that has walls and those walls need to be guarded by men
> with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? Russell? The automatons of this community
> have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You wine about
> our ontology and your curse our ethics; you have that luxury. You have the
> luxury of not knowing what we know: that nuclear weapons, while awesome,
> also probably saves lives and that their existence, while grotesque and
> incomprehensible to you, save lives. You need people like me Jackie. You
> don't want to talk about the topic because deep down in places you don't
> talk about at cocktail parties you want me on that wall, you need me on that
> wall. We use cards from Mearsheimer, Mead, and Khalilzad. We use them as the
> backbone of a life trying to defend something. The damned resolution. To you
> its little more than a punch line. I have neither the time nor the
> inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the
> blanket of the very freedom God provides (his capitalism) and then questions
> the manner in which he provides it. I would rather you just said "thank you"
> and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you just ...well...read the same
> argument again next year. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think we
> need.
>
> Oh.and you have the UQ..You.have the UQ..that's cute. Look Jackie I don't
> blame you for having no Idea where the UQ is. You lost the UQ a long time
> ago my friend. You just didn't notice because while you and the other
> hippies were busy playing with your ontologies.me and the other neocons
> stole it out from under your nose. This world isn't changing Jackie. And if
> those walls come down we are bringing the rest of you down with them. The
> oceans will boil, the mountains will tremble, and the masses will live in
> fear. We will nuke the land, pave it, and put a giant American flag above
> the shopping mall. That's the world we live in. That's the world you live in
> Jackie. Ignore it if you want.it will just make it that much easier.
>
> War
>
> Clay
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>




More information about the Mailman mailing list