From: J Corbally (icorb@indigo.ie)
Date: Sun Feb 02 2003 - 15:41:04 MST
>Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 00:44:17 -0800
>From: "Michael M. Butler" <mmb@spies.com>
>Subject: FLAMEBAIT: "Much of what one hears is station identification"
Actually, I'd say he's right in many ways, although I think his analysis of
the reasons for the mistrust of some Europeans is flawed. I think the
Euro-scepticism is more complex than simply glorified jealousy, but in many
circumstances equally silly. I don't think it's a matter of weakness so
much as "just couldn't be bothered", and perhaps to some degree,
fear. Quite apart from it being laughably wrong, I find the whole "you
hate us coz we're strong" argument to be quite narcissistic.
Personally, I'm fearful of anyone who quotes god in every damn speech he
gives. I'm more fearful of a system where this seems to be a
requirement. This is something many Europeans have picked up on. As
someone who is perhaps more aware than most Europeans of the nature of
religion and Govt. in the U.S., I would have concerns about the U.S. that
just wouldn't appear on the radars of most Euros.
He's certainly right about the GMO issue, and I'll have to remember the
GMO/smoking argument :) I'm sure there's many I can catch out with that
one! (As an aside, there's a big push by Govt. here at the moment to ban
smoking in pubs and restuarants, a major change given our pub culture. I
guess they've realized that ciggy smoke doesn't pay much attention to
smoking and non-smoking sections).
I'd certainly agree with his disdain for the
anti-globalization/war/GMO/next big thing crowd, I'm not fan of them
myself. Speaking of the anti-war lobby, many of you may not know that
little ol' "neutral" Ireland has been facilitating the movement of U.S.
troops as part of the recent build-up maneuvers (I'm suspecting they're
moving more than troops through too, but that's just my opinion). There
have also been well reported (here) anti-war demonstrations outside the
airport where this has been going on, who are also suspecting there's more
being moved through than simply armed troops. I live very close to an
Irish air corps base, and my wife has been awakened by some strange sounds
coming out of it in the wee hours of the morning. I've heard such "noises"
in the past myself, typically around times of "strife" in the Middle
East/Yugoslavia. Since we have nothing more in our airforce than some old
cast-off Magisters (and I've been at a few airshows in my time) I can tell
you that, IMHO, it sounds awfully like a turbojet or two on reheat. But
hey, that's just my ignorant opinion.
I'm personally not all that bothered by the whole neutral or not argument
that's going on at the moment (let's face it, our neutrality is a joke - do
you think we'd be so obliging to Iraqi troops?). But I can tell you one
things that's bugging me. Another item probably not reported in your local
news is the recent breach of security at this airport by a member of the
supposedly "peaceful" anti-war group. She proceeded to inflict a cool half
mils worth of damage to one of the U.S. transporters. What bugs me is
that; 1) The state has to pay for this, with my money no less, and 2)
depending on the nature of the damage, she may very well have put lives at
risk.
And the kicker? RTE interviewed a spokesman for one of these groups, and
he distanced himself from her actions but never once condemned it! Instead
he gave some spiel about people being "frustrated" and such rubbish. What
crap. The only ones complaining about it are pretty much all located right
there outside the airport! The rest of us really couldn't be
bothered. We've little appetite for war, and none for your average Middle
Eastern dictator. And perhaps even less for most of the left wing tree
huggers who have little better to do than camp outside airports and make
mischief.
Am I annoyed that the U.S. (plus allies) is going to get rid of
Hussein? Not really. Beats having them financing the little bastard, I
suppose. I would be much more impressed if they'd put away the 'going in
to help the poor Iraqi people' tripe though, and stick to admitting they
want him out. They may very well in fact provide the Iraqi people with a
wonderful new chance, but no one's buying into that as a major policy driver.
Do I believe he's been a naughty boy with regard to ABC weapons? Most
likely. Do I believe that there's evidence linking him to Al-Qaida? I've
not seen it, so I can't say I'm convinced that it exists. But the more
time goes on, the fewer reasons I can think of for not nailing the Bollocks.
In summary, I think the author was right but for the wrong reason. Except
in the final paragraph. I think he was on to something there.
James...
(Married to an American and perhaps biased, but not as a result of that! )
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and
crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures
to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid."
-Q, Star Trek:TNG episode 'Q Who'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 02 2003 - 21:26:09 MST