Re: [pf] Why?

At 07:54 13/9/2001 -0500, Jill wrote:
>... What is the reason that those who did such a thing would give?
>This is an issue that I don't hear discussed in any depth ... I hear such
words as "fanatical", "evil", "cowardly" (that one I don't buy for a
minute!), etc. ... Perhaps some of them apply - but if so, do they apply in
all situations?  Or only those where US citizens are hurt? 
> ... I see a chasm between people's awareness of this situation, and the
reality of what is going on in the rest of the world, and the actions of
the US.  Most people don't have a clue.
>
>My hope ... is that people will examine why this happened.
>
>                                                            Jill
>
· Putting trust in one's leaders is very old, pre-historic.

· A big reason why people choose to have governments, and to give such a
lot of power to them, is so you don't have to worry about thieves,
highwaymen, and invasions. This is why most Americans are quite happy to
vote for governments who say they'll be "strong on defence, and law and
order", even when that costs quite a bit.

· I'm commenting on Jill's “... such words as "evil" ... don't they apply
in all situations?  Or only those where US citizens are hurt?” I can
remember when the attitude of the British was just like this about
travelling to "The Continent": “Aren't you taking a big risk? They aren't
as good as us!” Now Britain is part of the EU, connected to it by the
Channel Tunnel, they're much more worldly-wise, in general.

· I myself had to deal with just this fear of "the raging hordes of the
unwashed" while deciding to take my family to first Malaysia then India, in
1988.

· Welcome to the world! It's more uncertain than secluded Americans wish.
Though this "hitting back at the oppressor (the USA)" (which I'm guessing
is the _reason_ Jill was asking about) _can_ be controlled and the chance
minimised; see my post ("Brain Food - two major articles"):
http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/pfvs/2001III/msg01287.html , leading to my:
http://davd.tripod.ca/USA-s_control_not_accepted.html#top , with first
article by Patrick J. Buchanan (1999) which includes: "Eland's argument:
Americans are the principal targets of terrorists because of our constant
meddling in foreign wars. If we do not abandon our compulsive
interventionism, we will one day be subjected to an act of cataclysmic
terror."
 And the other bits I included in my PF post above.

· I'm very glad several hundred million people are having their eyes
opened, but extremely sorry it has required terrorism on the home ground
(Timothy McVeigh/Oklahoma and now WTC-Pentagon) to do it.
  With a slower-paced (time for thinking), less-materialistic, more widely
informed lifestyle, it should have been possible IMO for Americans to
really see what they were doing to the rest of the world, and restrain
their government and commercial sectors from expecting to have things their
own way - what I call the Imperial attitude.
· Without terrorism, because the impulse to that would have been defused.

David.
David MacClement [davd @ ihug.co.nz] (remove spaces)
http://davd.tripod.com/GrRR-010907_titles.html#top
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
***********************************************

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.aVEN4x
Or send an email To: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: csf@moscow.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================