RE: Predictable catastrophes of human stupidity

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Apr 12 2003 - 10:31:04 MDT

  • Next message: Damien Sullivan: "Re: [ECON] US wealth, and envy"

    Karen writes

    > I want also to point out that the Shiite cleric Khoei who was murdered
    > by Iraqi's, and whom the USA backed (according to the news), was not a
    > friend to the USA. The USA has a history of supporting and empowering new
    > leadership (e.g. Qadhdhafi of Libya) over their predecessors and having
    > these new leaders turn out to be very poor choices. I am afraid that the USA
    > is going to make such a mistake again in Iraq. The USA support of Khoei is
    > fueling my fears.

    What would be the attributes of a "good" choice, and why
    do you think that it's possible for any choice to create
    a situation in Iraq that would meet with our hopes?

    > I saw or read in the news a few days ago that Khoei supported the USA.
    > That is just not true. Khoei, according to information from the same news
    > sources, simply told his followers not to interfere. However, this is in
    > keeping with very strict Muslim tradition. He would not support the USA by
    > asking his followers to kill other Muslims; most especially not to fight on
    > the side of the satanic USA. I believe, based on my many years of
    > experience with the Muslim community, that if Khoei had been in power in
    > place of Hussein, then we would find that he was as anywhere from as open
    > and loving as Ayatollah Khamenei to as sweet and charitable as Bin Laden.

    Is there anyone you know of, or any group, that you hope
    gains power there?

    Andrew writes

    > My point is that Japan's stable democracy and freedom are not
    > a factor of our leaders being particularly intelligent about
    > the occupation, but happened dispute such things heavy-handed
    > censorship and price-control-induced food shortages.

    Yes, it could have been better. But historically they should
    be given credit, IMO, because all earlier occupations that I
    know of would have been much harsher. This is all the more
    remarkable since by 1946, the cold war wasn't really in full
    swing, and none of the liberality of the occupation can be
    attributed---as so much was to be just a few years hence---
    to fighting the U.S.S.R.

    Lee



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 12 2003 - 10:40:07 MDT