A combination of reading and documentary-watching is best. I have found that both corroborate each other. Indeed the books I have read corroborate themselves. There is nothing that controversial about the Americans using torture. I mean, you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to think they did and do. It's documented all over the shop. The 3 Alex Gibney films, which you can get from Amazon are: Taxi to the Dark Side - about the Americans arresting, torturing, maiming and eventually killing an innocent Afghan taxi driver. Examines torture at Bagram and Abu Graib and the Bush torture policy. We Steal Secrets - The Story of Wikileaks. Essentially about Assange, but also about Bradley Manning, the American army whistleblower. Casino Jack and the United States of Money - examines bribery and corruption in Congress. All these films are eye-opening, informative and gripping. For books you can do a lot worse than read: Dirty Wars - The World is a Battlefield by Jeremy Scahill. Examines the War on Terror, extraordinary rendition, black ops, American torture, assassination. Angler - The Cheney Vice Presidency by Baron Gellman. Goes into a lot of detail about the use of torture by the CIA and how this was "legally sanctioned" by Cheney's office, making "torture" whatever Bush decided it was or wasn't. Europe's Angry Muslims by Robert S Leiken. Compares Muslims in the UK, France and Germany. Where they came from, how they have or haven't been integrated. Very interesting and told me a lot about Pakistani immigration to the UK, particularly, that I didn't know. The various Bob Woodward books on Bush are good too. The one on Obama a lot less interesting. The Bush administration makes fascinating reading for various reasons: 1. It had to deal with 9/11 2. It started the war in Iraq and the "War on Terror". 3. The principals all disliked each other and were totally dysfunctional as a team - Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell. 4. Cheney and Rumsfeld at any rate were extremely unpleasant - great villainous characters who make superb reading. 5. They shaped the world we are living in now. You can trace the Paris atrocities back to decisions they made. The Woodward books read a bit like a soap opera. Only problem is there is a monster cast of characters and sometimes you lose track of who is who. There should really be a dramatis personae included but sadly there isn't. Looking at and reading this stuff you become a lot better informed than just reading the paper. The papers don't give you the back story and the analysis because there just isn't room, but to form any valid opinion about world events you have to read around the subject, in my view. Hope this helps.
shit... thats alot to get through! i do agree that watching AND reading helps to take stuff on board.. for me if there is a large cast i have no hope! unfortunately its not something that is improving with age! but im gunna track down some of those books and give it a bash
not wasted.. well yes wasted... we are just not doing funny on this thread. some coz its just to serious, most cos they just aint funny.. no i think there must be humor maintained or at least some sort of normality. reluctant to say "other wise they win" as it is such a cliche. but i do believe to carry on like the attempts at disrupting our way of life has little effect is the best course (failing a better idea).
Thanks for this constructive post. The Americans did not introduce arresting, torturing, maiming, and killing innocent people into Afghanistan or Iraq - there was plenty of that going on before. It was endemic. The point is that the Americans could have introduced decent, civilised standards into those countries and thereby gained the moral high ground. But they didn't. They descended to the level of their opponents, thus undermining their ethical case for intervention in the first place. There are always some who are eager to descend to the same level as the people they affect to despise; there have been some in this forum thread.
this or thus? not trying to pic on ya grammar here but im trying to learn and am now confused... i didnt pic up from glidds that america were the first to introduce tourture at all. more what you are saying. think you are arguing the same side of the coin here (think that is the expression)
I do find it interesting to compare how the Americans acted in WW2 compared to now. The Germans were desperate to surrender to the Allies (Americans included) compared to Russians because they knew they would be treated decently. The Russians on the other hand were going to treat them pretty much as they had been treated by the Nazis - which was just horrifically. It was largely how the Allies treated the Germans at the end of the war that allowed Europe to get over it and for Germany to become the place it is today. Had they descended to the level of the Nazis, things would have taken far longer to heal. That is the lesson that the Bush administration completely failed to learn.
Here's an idea......(tongue in cheek, of course) Worldwide ban on the manufacture and sale of prayer mats........... Nobody would think of producing bootleg items.......... ......(think about it)
no offense mate but you sound like a complete and utter prick using those sort of terms but im sure i dont have to tell you that
Alternatively stop bombing/invading countries for the sake of a few barrels of oil and creating enemies for ourselves. You’ll never get rid of religion so why bother trying? Why not be nice to people and you never know it might be reciprocated. It doesn’t seem that long ago that we rid ourselves of the scourge of Al-Quaeda. Now its ISIS. And there’ll be someone along after them the way we go about things currently and if the attitude of a few ignorant twats on here are anything to go by .
Absolutely. During WWII the allies, and especially the British authorities, put a great deal of thought and effort into considering what was to be done with occupied Germany once the Nazis were defeated. There were debates about it. Reports were written, plans were prepared. Everyone was anxious to avoid the foolish mistakes made after WWI. In 1945 the scheme was put into place, and it worked remarkably well at least in the West. By 1950 German infrastructure was fixed, industry was working, national and local governments were in place, society was peaceful, and there was a viable economy with a stable currency. The de-Nazification process was pursued effectively but not vindictively for a few years, then dropped. Former low-level Nazis were allowed to turn their lives around and become good democrats. Austria was separated from Germany. "Arbeit macht Frei" was converted from a Nazi lie into a democratic truth. In Iraq, Saddam's ghastly regime was duly removed. There was a de-Baathification process which was poorly planned and chaotically executed. Mistakes were made. Insufficient study and unrealistic assumptions abounded. The Bush administration had completely failed to learn from either the mistakes after WWI or the successes after WWII.
I expect most of us on here do hate racist pricks. But I am not aware that there have been any racist posts in this thread. If you say there have been, @Red899 , perhaps you would state which posts you have in mind, and indicate whatever you say is racist about them. If you cannot do that, you could simply hold your peace.
you dont think "ragheads" is in any way a bit racist? fair enough, will walk away from the thread and leave you all to it thanks
I don't agree with it, but I wouldn't personally call it racist myself pal. I think people are very quick to throw the racial card out there. However I would agree that terms like "raghead" do tend to be the vocab of a certain type of narrow minded person/ignorant person. As said previously, the media have an awful lot to answer for.
You cant be racist against a religion . Islam, which is what we are concerned with here, spans many races. Some people will say that Islamaphobia should be a crime but to me that has two glaring problems :- You cant help what you are scared of be it spiders, drowning, open spaces, Islamic fundamentalists trying to kill you or whatever. Making it illegal doesn't help. It seems to me to be entirely sensible to be scared of Islamic fundamentalists trying to kill you. I don't think many of us are too scared of being blown up or shot by followers of Hare Krishna, Jehova, Judaism. Bhuddism, Jesus etc etc. In fact all western governments are suffering from Islamaphobia but many seem reluctant to admit it and instead say how marvellous multiculturalism is (Corbyn) or that Islam is a religion of peace (Cameron) Phuquing delusional the lot of them.
I feel confident that "ragheads" call "us" a great deal worse. Whilst it is not a term I would use myself I do not consider it racist or lose any sleep over it.
