In this edition: Oil And War In Iraq - How I see 9/11 - Re: David Miller Online. What Came of September 11? - Whining Wankers - The Tauiwi's Whakataukii, "Think Globally Act Locally"
Scoop welcomes reader feedback, please send to email@example.com
Oil And War In Iraq
I think your analysis here is too simplistic.
I suspect that some of the right-wing doves (e.g. James Baker) actually represent the views of the oil interests that have bankrolled Bush all the way through his political career.
Big oil is nervous about the prospect of war. They like the way that Saddam's access to the oil market is effectively in the hands of the US and Britain. They are worried that a big spike in prices will cut demand and drive people towards newly emerging alternative energy sources.
The status quo in the Middle East -- represented by the corrupt oligarchies of Arab leaderships and poorly-educated, economically disadvantaged masses -- is something that Big Oil wants to preserve. They are terrified of the example of Iran and the possibility that other revolutions could be possible in the region.
The Hawkish clique around Cheney and Rumsfeld etc, represent the interests of the defence industry and the "military industrial complex". These interests are not exactly congruent with those of Big Oil.
The defence industry was a driving force behind the first Gulf War too. As talk about a "peace dividend" began to echo round the corridors of Washington another war became essential for the defence industry's ongoing receipt of taxpayers' trillions. The Gulf War was really just an exhibition tournament to demonstrate to the world the supremacy of the US military machine and to show Congress where all the money was going. It also enabled them to roadtest new technologies in the field.
The same thing is happening this time around. Big Oil is quite happy with the policy of containment and the control that the US wields over Saddam's oil exports. You must look to the defence industry to see where the real business interests driving this war are coming from.
How I see 9/11
I share the sorrow and pain with Americans; whom brothers, sisters, mothers and children died on 9/11 in New York
I expect the Americans will share the pain and sorrow with those; whom brothers, sisters, mothers and children died in Japan, Vietnam, Palestine and Ira
qI condemn with Americans the act of terror exposed on 9/11 in New York …
I expect Americans will condemn the act of terror being shown in Palestine, Afghanistan, Chechnya and Kashmir
I denounce with Americans the weapons of mass destruction being developed by Iraq, Iran, and North Korea …
I expect Americans will denounce the weapons of mass destruction piled-up by Americans.
I feel, today, with Americans the fear and fright they are passing through …
I expect Americans will feel the fear and fright people are passing through in Palestine, Afghanistan, Kashmir and Ira
qI raise voice with Americans against the human rights abuses in the world …
I expect Americans will raise voice against the human rights abuses in Guantanamo Bay
I respect with Americans their freedom and sovereignty …
I expect Americans will respect the freedom and sovereignty of others
I pray for peace, harmony, equality, fairness and freedom … But I know, these can not be delivered by terror and terror can not be eliminated by terror
By Syed Atiq ul
Hassan, Sydney, Australia
(The writer is a freelance journalist & a writer)
Re: David Miller Online. What Came of September 11?
Nonsense. Let me take a moment and share with you precisely what has become of September 11th, 2001, and the bitter harvest that will result from that attack. People residing outside of the United States have no idea what the impact of this attack has been on this country and your column reflects that fundamental misunderstanding. For many of us, it still seems as if the attacks happened yesterday.
If you seriously believe that we can not defend ourselves against the actions of a handful of men from shadowy terrorist movements, you have not been paying attention. Ask the Afghans what this last year has been like. This war has just begun and, like the Second World War in the spring of 1942, our momentum is just beginning to build. If you think that the lasting legacy of this attack is really “the feeling of insecurity that was inflicted onto the American government, military and people” then you have only to sit back and wait to discover just how wrong you are. The prudent defensive measures you describe reflect neither fear nor cowardice.
I find myself now, with deep regret, supporting our Homeland Security effort full-time and, if it were up to me, the twin towers would be rebuilt to appear on the outside EXACTLY as they looked prior to the attack on September 11th. They would also be significantly hardened on the inside. I have three teenage daughters and all three may well be wearing our nation's uniform, and die in her defense, before this war is over. I may well also be recalled to active service, out of retirement, and share their fate.
Normally, you would be correct in your assessment that “What terrorism does is tell a government and a people that no matter the size of their armed forces, the size and strike power of their weaponry or even the number of nuclear weapons they hold, the military and law enforcement cannot protect them.” That assessment is not the case, however, for the United States in the prosecution of this war. A terrible anger has been unleashed and it will bring horrible suffering in it's wake to both the innocent and the guilty. We will hunt these mad dogs to ground, and kill as many of them as possible, until that percentage of their society that is willing to commit suicide is generously afforded the opportunity to do so. We will be very accommodating - and to as many as volunteer to take us up on our offer.
We will do whatever it takes, spend whatever it costs, absorb whatever damage we must, to win this war. If that includes the complete destruction of a city, we will do it. If it means the complete destruction of a country and it's entire population, we will do it. And if it means the complete destruction of a culture, a religion, or an entire region of this planet, we will do that also. We will do whatever is necessary, using whatever weaponry is required, to win this war. If this sounds extreme to you, then you still fail to understand just how serious we are.
The Japanese, in 1941, awoke a sleeping giant with their attack on Pearl Harbor and they also thought that they had a justifiable list of objections to United States foreign policy at the time. This current crop of sub-human terrorist monsters have no idea just what they are dealing with. We are in deadly earnest and it would be best if the rest of the world understand that now. Join us, or not, as you see fit, but we are determined to wipe terrorism off the face of this planet and we will do whatever it takes to make that happen. We are now past the point of negotiation and were past that point with the attack on the first tower. It is killing time now. Sadly, neither we, you in New Zealand, nor the world, will ever be the same again as we all were on the 10th of September, 2001.
Haha...I just read the latest diatribe to come out of the Libertarianz, " Debut Of The New Green Muppet" by Tim Wikiriwhi
Apart from their extremist views there's one overriding reason these people are likely never to gain mainstream credibility in the political arena: they're so incredibly adept at making themselves sound like a pack of whining wankers.
I mean, "Random Trollop... Fruit-loop Maori radical"? They not even original when it comes to calling people names? Just dimwitted and nasty.
All for the best I guess.
Christiaan Briggs London/Napier expat
The Tauiwi's Whakataukii, "Think Globally Act Locally"
Uproar as Powell backs NZ on Mugabe
Mr Powell mounted only the second serious attack on the regime of President Robert Mugabe - after NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark had been unsupported for two days.
Until yesterday, Helen Clark had been alone in using her address to the summit to list her objections to Mr Mugabe's regime. On Monday, she told more than 100 world leaders that famine in Zimbabwe had been worsened by "deliberate and cynical Government policies". New Zealand is bitterly opposed to Mr Mugabe's policy of evicting white farmers from their land, a process he yesterday called "agrarian reform".
I was born Waitaha, Waipango ki Murihiku, raised and educated under the Tikanga and Kawa o Waitaha, my tipuna help defend this country and Wikitoria's in two wars in their miss guided belief that under the "Treaty" the Crown would protect their Whanau/Hapü/ Iwi O Waitaha. Yet when the Treaty Claims Industry commenced, the "Protector" with their own and Küpapa crown educated Mäori proceeded under the Ngäi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998, to legislate all of Waitaha into a new Waka named Ngäi Tahu Whänui. The "Protector's" have failed to listen to our words that wë spoke at their Parliament Select Committee Hearings, and of the Court Actions Waitaha have undertaken. Hansard their own records of their debate in their Whare, records that Waitaha is an Iwi in it's own right, have their own Waka, their own Histories.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, Has not our Protector's, "deliberate and cynical policies". under the guise of "Treaty Settlement", evicted Waitaha from their Lands? Caused famine because they cannot fish for Kai,?
The Tauiwi's whakataukii, "Think Globally act Locally", fit's comfortably within my mind, or maybe it is a case of the "Pot calling the Kettle Black"