 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)dariusgriffin recycle ...and 155 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613449 Today 2 Topics 127500 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
pretty sure most of u think iraq war was for oil or to install capitalism in iraq or something i dunno. ur not alone cos pretty much everyone thinks that actually. well anyway check this out ok. naomi klein she wrote a book about 'the shock doctrine' |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ok so read did any of you really think these ideas make sense? sinister capitalist politicians plan to execute/take advantage of disasters so that they can turn the world capitalist and then somehow control everyone or like make loads of money or something? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i really think if you change your world veiw you can beat your depression here at xltronic. being anti capitalism/globalism/war on terror is a plan to control our minds/iran is better than israel. youre never going to be happy. this kind of politics will put you at odds with everything the modern world is moving towards. it will isolate you and then you will become evil ur isolated already thats why u guys are stuck about art and ideas |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
stop being depressed! figure it out! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I haven't read klein's book the US does get involved in a lot of sneaky horseshit to extend and protect its interests and the interests of its allies that documentary is one of the main reasons the republicans started howling for the blood of PBS |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
*but |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
america isnt clean. i hope i dont sound like i think it is. we know corruption exists. i hate reagan although i havnt looked enough into american (and british) foreign policy during the 70s/80s my general understanding is that it was a corrupt time. iraq in the 00s is a different subject for me. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ill watch it tomorrow. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
u'd be shocked by socialized child care ampi |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
all i read here is paranoia, you need to be far more specific. i have delved into your last few posts and you are a characture. and a boring one. nobody belivies in what you say. if you want to make a point you need to summarise and stop being an idiot. if you are genuine you need to see a doctor. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ur weird.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah i should be clear; - this thread is about how popular beliefs comes from somewhere. - 'bush/blair did iraq cos oil/money/evil' is the popular belief we are discussing here. - it seems that Naomi Klein is the thinker most responsible for popularizing this idea with her book The Shock Doctrine. - i have given you an article from 2008 that discusses the influence of Naomi Klein and The Shock Doctrine. - the article challenges the sloppy logic of The Shock Doctrine from a leftist perspective. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ok i havnt watched it yet but i did check thru my shit for some stuff. iran-contra was very naughty indeed very illegal very stupid. this is why we all hate republicans right. but from what i've been reading guatemala is probably the case that stands out. the cia and united fruit company did that shit together. even the cia website seems to this to some degree. guatemala is a case that demonstrates how nasty business men can cause conflicts in other countries (either intentionally or because they are dead stupid) while filling their pockets. it can happen. but iraq wasn't guatemala. it was a totally different situation i think |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so united fruit works with cia to fuck up Guatemala. surely iraq could just as easily be the same kind of situation.. no probably not. just sit and think. say it clear in your mind. probably not. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The distinctive thing about Klein's style was that it was very Old Left. She had a classic Marxist-materialist analysis, arguing that economic conditions, rather than bigotry or ideology, are what shape the world. Her interest in culture and in actually existing life under capitalism was somewhat derivative of the Frankfurt School, though not as intellectually sophisticated. - lol naomi is stupid Yet she managed to make the old notions feel new, and to capture the ethos of what was being called "the New New Left." And her argument reflected the conviction of the new anti-globalization activists, the children of the "cultural left," that they themselves--and not just workers in Nike factories abroad--were the victims of international corporations. - you guys feel like victims of nike? you would of back then before you convinced yourself that you were victims of bush blair imperialism. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And then came September 11. The Islamist attack on the World Trade Center may not have "changed everything," as so many Orwell-wannabes declared, but it, and the ensuing war with secular Iraq, certainly changed the orientation of the left. The locus of evil in the world, even more than during the Cold War, was once again American military power and its use beyond our borders. - so basically everyone and their dog was thinking this. Klein was intellectually unfazed. Rather than re-think the economicist premises of her recent radicalism, she set out to synthesize her old worldview with the post-9/11 world. "I felt it emotionally," she told The New York Times, "before I understood it factually." Doggedly connecting the dots, she discovered that the Iraq war was--guess what?--part of the same economic tissue that connected Nike and the World Trade Organization. - yup The left-wing labor economist Kim Phillips-Fein has written admiringly about Klein's role in seamlessly transforming the anti-globalization movement into the anti-imperialist movement: "In the wave of panicked reaction that followed the disaster, suddenly it seemed that the movement might disappear once more.... Almost alone among political journalists, Klein has devoted herself to writing about the war against Iraq as a political project driven by neoliberal ideology and economic interest--a natural extension of the corporate dominance of the 1990s, instead of a radical break." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The left is fucking stupid - thats all you need to know. Capitalism has made my life so much better, bitches! Oh yeah, and even if Bush/Blair invaded Iraq because of oil, so fucking what? Fuck your morals, lefties! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Not at all, my point is that the US has a long and well documented history of military and covert intervention in other countries when resources are at stake - and Iraq is part of that historical continuum, even if resources weren't the primary motivation behind the 2003 invasion and occupation. Even if you take the most "innocent" possible interpretation of the occupation of Iraq, it's still a mop-up operation to clear up the mistakes of earlier interventions. Why? Because Saddam was supported by the US in the first place, as leverage against Iran, before he "went bad". Why did the US need Saddam as leverage against Iran? Watch the PBS documentary, learn about . The US and Europe have had a long history of meddling, intervention, supporting dictatorial "strong men" etc. in the middle east because of oil. And of course now the problem is ISIS, the blowback from meddling and interventions in Syria and Iraq, which is going to require... guess what... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nicely put. It might confuse AMPI though. There are so many happy coincidences everywhere, regarding everything. ISIS see Hamas as apostates. Oh gosh I don't even want to go there because it's troll food. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah ok look. u can look at americas past and SUSPECT there were evil motives for iraq invasion and no one would blame u. political heavyweights would tell us all that suspicions mean shit. naomi klein is a kind of political heavyweight and she has tried to make an empirical case. It looks like it dosnt stand up. pretty much every argument against the iraq intervention implies an imperial agenda and its done so by pointing at americas record but never at any real information. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
whoa there russel im no expert lol... but everybody knows that america backed saddam. overthrow of mosaddegh? latin america? everybody knows that stuff. theres no confusion at all. this is popular knowledge. you might be confused but....none of that information makes any kind of case against the 2003 invasion. ur confused right? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"You might be confused" Where do you see that? "Ur confused right?" No, not really. So I say you're confused, and you respond by saying I'm confused. Is this what this is? :) Just let me know what I'm confused about please! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You aren't reading my posts. Here's an analogy. Let's say you descend into a ravine to rescue a family trapped at the bottom. Let's say you completely mess up and step on the baby, burn their luggage and drop the survivors when you've hauled them halfway up, killing half of them. But you had good intentions, right? But what if you're the one who pushed them into the ravine in the first place? That's the importance of context. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh my god russel u started it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no i did read it check what i put about hitchens in that video he said what my argument is on that. it wasnt a very good link hes made the same argument before in better words. its something that comes up a lot for him 'earlier crimes and blunders give u an extra responsibility. they mean you have to do something to repair the crimes and blunders that youve made...its a responsibility we've inherited' and u did link to iran to emphasize oil intentions in the middle east right? which was completely fair. anyway i dunno how i feel about the context |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
right so the context is america has caused this shit (saddam) by supporting him against iran which america wouldn't have to deal with if it weren't for the coup in the 50's? ur tying a lot together but maybe i agree ok. does that mean the world just had to wait for someone with cleaner hands to do something about iraq? or not do anything at all? i guess we could have waited to see if the arab spring went ok for them but iraq was fortified against uprisings like in syria so no. so we should hav just left em. maybe it would have kept a lid on isis. sounds really depressing guys. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its totally depressing but anyway who knows what to do huh. context will tie the wests hands forever if we say it must. i dont know what good it will do tho. us sitting around being all depressed saying we r too corrupt to be trusted dosnt sound like the 2014 party i thinking of. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
