Re: [sixties-l] SNAFU

From: Ron Jacobs (
Date: Fri Jan 25 2002 - 08:24:50 EST

  • Next message: Peter Levy: "Re: [sixties-l] Soccer mum pays for terror past [SLA] (fwd)"

    Is this an observation or wishful thinking on your part? What I find here
    is typical ranting and raving...with the usual lack of options and
    alternatives. Sometimes I get the impression that is exactly the point.
    At the same time, it gives you something to complain about, which is enough
    to get some people up in the morning. The worst possible thing that could
    happen would actually be PEACE! Geez, what would anyone have to complain
    about? Oh would just be a matter of time before fights break out
    over who is to be in charge once the peace is in place. Whew!

    I agree that bombs and killing won't bring about a more peaceful
    world...but neither will platitudes, worn-out cliches, and self-loathing
    "it's always America's fault" whining. Before there can be peace, we must
    all want it...and be in agreement on what it is and how it is to be
    achieved. That requires a coomon foundation and recognition of human
    dignity and peaceful resolution. We are a long way from that, I am afraid.
     Then again, maybe those who have it all figured out would volunteer for a
    one-on-one, face-to-face, sit down chat with al-Qaida and other
    misunderstood folks around the world. No doubt they would welcome you with
    open arms. However, it might be a good idea to let someone know how to
    reach your next-of-kin.


    Brad L. Duren
    Instructor of History
    Oklahoma Panhandle State University
    213 Hamilton Hall
    Goodwell, Oklahoma 73939
    work phone: 580-349-1498

    To respond to the non-wise-ass part of your response: I think of this as
    an observation with a bit of ranting thrown in. As for the whining, I'll
    leave that to those in the richest lands of the world who complain about
    how unfair the world is to them. As for the "it's always america's fault"
    stuff--unfortunately it is our fault all too often. Of course, accepting
    this doesn't move things too far ahead, but it does cause the more
    thoughtful among us (and not those who have knee jerk reactions like yours)
    to wonder what it is that makes our government the enemy of much of the
    world's dispossessed. It's not all envy, you know (I think you know).
    There is real oppression and poverty in the world and much of it can be
    traced back to the policies made in Washington and Wall Street and enforced
    by the US military machine. As for sitting down with Al-Quedda--I'd
    probably get just as far with Mr. Bin Laden as I would with Mr.
    Rumsfeld--both of these men have their own agenda and don't give a flying
    you-know-what about anyone else's. However, I'd bet Oklahoma's oil wells
    that if our foreign policy changed to one where the masses of the world
    actually felt we were trying to alleviate the inequalities on the planet,
    we would find that Al-Quedda and similar movements would lose much of their
    appeal. Of course, then Mr. Rumsfeld and his cohorts would get pretty
    upset since their agenda doesn't seem to include a more equal distribution
    of the world's resources or an end to military madness. PEACE--I'd love it
    as long as it came with justice and not the bomb.

    -ron jacobs

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jan 27 2002 - 17:19:56 EST