Re: Predictable catastrophes of human stupidity

From: Karen Rand Smigrodzki (Karen@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Sun Apr 13 2003 - 17:32:09 MDT

  • Next message: Mike Lorrey: "Re: [poliitics] Re: The first hero of the war"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin@tsoft.com>

    > Here, you evidently mean, in context, that they
    > turn out not to be friends of the U.S. The
    > decision about Libra's Qadhdhafi had to have
    > been made during the cold war; therefore it
    > becomes interesting to ponder why he turned
    > against his benefactor.

    ^^^^^^^ I apologize for my ignorance, but help me out. Why would it be
    interesting that he turned against the US? Qaddafi took power from King
    Idris in a coup carried out on Sept. 1, 1969.

    > This (if I'm correct
    > so far) could imply that there exists genuine
    > and strong anti-U.S. elements of the population,
    > one of whose main motives is to be simply anti-
    > U.S.

     ^^^^^^I think there are such groups everywhere, even here in the USA.
    Qaddafi had done a good job of breeding such ideas in the young. He was very
    anti-western, and pro-Communist. Just like little Polish kids, the Libyans
    had to learn Russian in grade school. However, Qaddafi is/was also very
    anti-technology; anti-modernization. His goal was to turn society back into
    a desert living nomadic tribal civilization, and to that end he destroyed a
    lot of buildings and roads when he took power. Now it is 15 years since I
    have had any dealings with the issues, and I don't know much about what
    people there feel now towards Americans.

    > >
    > > ^^^^Attributes of a "good" choice. Hm. Very
    > > hard question. Very hard. It is hard for me
    > > to imagine.
    >
    > Well, then, this certainly weakens your criticism
    > of the Rumsfeld choice (I've forgotten his name,
    > and don't really know anything about the situation).
    >

    ^^^^^I don't think it does. I added that I can say what would be a bad
    choice, and it was my view that Khoei would be a bad choice. I think that if
    one suggested Qaddafi for leader of Iraq then almost anyone would say that
    that is a bad choice, regardless of whether that person can name a good
    choice. A specific person or group which would be a good choice does not
    come to mind simply because I also haven't been too deeply interested in the
    topic.

    >
    > Well, hasn't Libya shown some progress? I admit
    > that all I'm thinking of is that Qadhdhafi has
    > (internationally) seemed very reasonable lately.
    > He's denounced terrorism, and has taken
    > responsibility for the downed airliner over
    > Scotland, and has recompensated the survivors.

    ^^^^^^^^^ I wouldn't call it progress. Qaddafi sees that he can profit best
    by his current moves. He is still a leader that the people do not want.

    --karen



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 17:39:18 MDT