[Home Page]
KryssTal Feedback Pages:
KryssTal Pages:
|
Readers' Feedback
Democracy
Page 4 of 6
|
|
|
[Home Page]
KryssTal Feedback Pages:
KryssTal Pages:
|
Readers' Feedback
Democracy
Page 4 of 6
|
|
Subject: KryssTal: Democracy War On Terror
Hi Kryss,
Just wanted to thank you for this well-written and very informative essay. What I would really like to see is a debate between you and Bush ;)
If only we could bring him, Rumsfeld, Sharon, Saddam, and all the rest to the ICC... And we of course cannot forget Arafat and the like...
Could you please include a link to The Independent? I really like that newspaper and I think it deserves a link. Much, much better than any local (Canadian) media, except the CBC.
This might sound like a very vague question... But is there any way I can help? I don't have money to spend on non-US products (I'm 14), so the boycott idea won't work. Or just inform people about all our terrorism? But alot of people 1) just aren't interested, 2) hate politics, 3) wouldn't believe the horrible things our governments have done (and are doing), or 4) support Bush and Co. Or maybe I should wait and become a journalist or HRW/AI investigator.
Oh yes, and could I link to your site?
Keep up the good work! :D
KryssTal Reply: Hello Robert,
Thank you for your kind comments. I don't know about me and Bush - we're on opposite sides of the Atlantic.
The best way to help is by spreading the information that you gather. A good web site that includes the best journalism from a round the world is ZNet.
This includes Robert Fisk of the Independent. On the Independent web site some essays are only available on subscription. Incidentally, I read this paper in London (UK).
I agree with you about the ICC - I would add Blair to your list. I hope you become a journalist and you can then tell the truth (if it gets published).
Thank you for writing.
Well I just stumbled across this web site and I just have to set you straight
1. I am an American and damn proud of it.
KryssTal Reply: There is nothing wrong with being proud of your country. It is responsible for many positive contributions to the world - movies, jazz, blues, technology, the internet, air and space travel, and much much more. I am proud of my country. I don't agree with everything it does - but that should be a separate issue.
2. I believe the minority in this country makes way too many of the rules now. Just because someone doesn't like the word "GOD" in the pledge of allegiance does it mean it should be taken out? The people that created this great nation of ours wanted a separation between church and state yet most of them were religious. They didn't have a problem with the word GOD so why do we. For a long time I considered myself an Atheist. The word never bothered me any.
KryssTal Reply: I have no view on whether the word GOD appears in your country's pledge. This is a matter for yourselves.
3. Why is it that all the people in the world that jump up and down and scream for peace are never able to give an answer when you ask them how they would achieve peace.
KryssTal Reply: If we talk about Iraq, much of what is happening now was predicted by many people - those against the war as well as intelligence services advising our two countries. There are many sources of information about the world and how peace can be attained.
4. If Americans acted in the 40's like they do now we'd all be speaking German or Japanese right now.
KryssTal Reply: The situation in the 1940's was very different to now. Then the powerful and
aggressive states were Japan and Germany. The rest of the world defended itself against these two. It wasn't all good vs bad, like you imply. My country, the UK, freed itself from the Nazis with help from the USA (credit where credit is due), Russia (whos contribution was not mentioned in the recent d-day celebrations), France and hundreds of thousands of colonial
soldiers (also rarely credited). What did we do with our freedom? We carried on occupying India and our other colonies.
The USA helped free many countries but controlled others indirectly by arranging coups. France once free from occupation by the Nazis, re-occupied Algeria and Vietnam. Who is good and who is bad, here?
5. We declare that Iran is part of the Axis of evil yet when they have the worst earthquake in the history of their country who is there with aid.
KryssTal Reply: The Axis of Evil is simply a list of countries NOT under USA control.
Why is Iran (which has elections) on the list but Saudi Arabia (which wouldn't know an election if one flew up and hit it) not on the list? Why is Syria (which is accused of terrorism) but not Israel which has been occupying Arab land and ethnically cleansing Palestinains, not? Why is the dictatorship of North Korea on the list but not the dictatorship of Kuwait?
Most of the rest of the world considers the real axis of evil as USA, UK and Israel. In terms of numbers of people killed, they are not wrong.
6. In order to defeat Terrorism we need to be equally ruthless. Terrorists don't play by rules. We shouldn't either.
KryssTal Reply: The war betwen Arabs and the West began in 1916 (not 2001) when the West
carved up the Arab lands after the end of World War I. More Arabs have died because of OUR activities than Westerners killed by "terrorism". Two other points:
Firstly, why is it terrorism for a Palestinian to resist occupation but not terrorism for an Israeli jet to fire on built up residential areas? The word is often misused.
Secondly since 2000 "terrorism" has killed less than 5000 people. More children than that die every month because of unfair trade. We are looking at the world from a very limited point of view. Most of the world's population worry about clean water, disease, and trying to live on less than $2 per day.
The other point to make is that our countries have signed treaties which we need to abide by. If we do not, then we have no more moral authority than the people we are demonising.
7. France should be added to the Axis of evil. (And this comes from someone with French heritage)
KryssTal Reply: 80% of the French population opposed the invasion of Iraq. The country's leaders followed their populations. In Spain, 80% also opposed the war but the government followed the USA. Now, are we for or against democracy? Demonising the French was part of our governments' (both our governments!) propaganda campaign to explain why a UN resolution was not forthcoming. It is not their fault that the USA had decided on a regime change several years
ago. Have you read the the Project for the New American Century? This invasion was planned ages ago.
With any conflict there are two reasons: the reason we are given and the real reason. Understanding conflicts involves seeing through the propaganda and understanding what is really happening. In that respect you in the USA are at a disadvantage because your media colludes to keep you ignorent. It's a little better in the UK. Better still in Europe.
You have obviously been conditioned to blame France for this mess we are in rather than the real culprits: the USA and UK who invaded without UN authorisation.
8. In America we don't take women into the center of a Football stadium and blow her brains out because she committed adultery.
KryssTal Reply: No you do not. I am very glad of that.
But until the mid 1960s black people could not sit on the same bus seats as whites. Mohammad Ali won the 1960 gold medal for boxing and was refused service in a pizza parlour.
Over 50,000 children in Vietnam are suffering from dioxin poisoning after the use of Agent Orange on that country. The chemical had been banned in the USA. The USA has never apologised for this chemical warfare and has never paid compensation.
Saudi Arabia, of couse, beheads women. The UK supplies over $ 350 million worth of arms to this detestible regime every year. The USA supports the regime, supplies arms and until recently had bases there.
The people who became the Taliban were originally financed by the USA, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to fight against the Russians in Afghansiatn. Shortly before the terror attacks in September 2001, Taliban representitives were offered money to allow the building of an oil pipeline through their country to carry oil from Central Asia to the coast. They refused. A few
months later they were removed (using their attitudes to women as propaganda while ignoring Saudi's similar policies). The new "government" has agreed the pipleine.
9. In America we don't force woman to cover themselves from head to toe when out in public.
KryssTal Reply: No you do not. And that also is a good thing. We do, however, see videos of
police beating people up in LA quite regularly. You also have the death penalty which is used on minors and the mentally deficient. In this you have something in common with Iran.
Many Muslim countries also do not force women to cover themselves. Our NATO ally, Turkey, forces Muslim women NOT to wear a head scarve.
10. If we pull out of Iraq a civil war will most certainly start. This is unacceptable.
KryssTal Reply: Iraq is a British invention. It is not a real country as such. Your country had a civil war - and emmerged stronger. Europe has had two "civil wars" in the 20th century.
This is really no argument. If there is any policing to do, the UN should authorise it. The reasons for invading Iraq have been changing as are the reasons for staying. In a recent poll (commissioned by the US miltary and not released) most Iraqis want us out.
11. The Liberal Media has done a fantastic job of covering up the fact that a great many people in the UN were on the take with the "Oil For Food" program. Americans are so terrible for starting this war but it's ok for Non Americans to make money off the oil that was suppose to be paying for medication and food for the people of Iraq.
KryssTal Reply: The USA has awarded all the reconstruction contracts to itself. It has privatised the economy (in violation of the Hague Convention) and inserted clauses in the new Iraqi constitution to stop the new government from reversing any economic changes made by the USA.
12. Why hasn't anyone asked John Kerry what he would have done after 9/11? I'm sure he would have responded in a similar way enviably
KryssTal Reply: I cannot comment on this - this is internal USA politics and it is up the the American people to elect their next leader. In a similar way, it should be up to Iraqis to elect their leaders and run their economies.
13. Terrorists are counting on people to protest and create the same situation that made Vietnam such a tragedy. By chanting in the streets your not bringing the boys home any faster. All your doing is putting pressure on the government who in turn puts pressure on the military to do things a certain way. This in turn makes for sloppy operations and many more Americans coming home in Body bags. Get behind the President and the armed forces and let's get this over and done with.
KryssTal Reply: The President is not my leader so I cannot get behind him.
Vietnam and Iraq are not the only times that the USA has interfered in other countries. Check out what happened in Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973) and this year Haiti (2004). Most of the media in the USA is owned by large corporations which are profiting from the war. Check out this site for news:
It features investigative journalists' articals from around the world.
14. We still have Syria & Iran to deal with. Yes they are our enemies and that will never change. They train their kids to hate us in their mosques. America is the enemy. Where do you think the bodies and weapons are coming from for this insurrection in Iraq?
KryssTal Reply: This is more propaganda, I'm afraid.
Syria and Iraq are really the same people. It's like if someone had cut the USA into three bits. You would have family in the other bits and they would speak the same langague and eat the same food as you. The border between Syria and Iraq was created by France and the UK. It is artificial. Read my War on Terror essay to find out why the USA is hated.
In 1986, I travelled with an American journalist through Syria (a very friendly and hospitable country, incidently). He was very worried about being there. All the locals we met and talked to welcomed us and assured him that their feelings for him as an individual were different to their feelings for the USA government for its policies. It's a pity Americans believe all the anti-Arab propaganda they hear and demonise whole populations. The type of hatred you indicate in your statement above is sad and unworthy of a citizen of such a great country.
15. Without Terrorism most of these psychopaths would have nothing to do. It's all they know. The only way to stop this is to eliminate them. There is no way to rehabilitate them.
KryssTal Reply: All that these people want is to run their own affairs without interference from the West. They want exactly what we want.
How would you feel if your government was financed and supported by an Arab country? How would you feel if there were Iranian warships patrolling off the coast of the USA? How would you feel about Jordanian military bases in Kansas, Washington and outside New York? How would you feel if you could only sell your raw materials to Egypt but your manufactured goods were not allowed into Egypt because of tariffs? How would you feel if you had to abide by UN resolutions but France, Russia and Spain didn't? How would you feel if 90% of the music and movies available to you were from Italy?
If these feelings make you angry (and they should), it is exactly the type of things that annoy people in other parts of the world. It is far more complex than the propaganda we are told.
16. I don't trust Ghaddafi.
KryssTal Reply: Ghaddafi is a great example of how it all works - as soon as he obeyed the West, he was accepted back in, his human rights violations forgotten.
Saddam was once our boy. We financed him when he invaded Iran. Reagan's envoy to him (Donald Rumsfeld) shook his hand while he gassed the Kurds in 1988. As soon as he disobeyed us, he became "the Butcher of Baghdad".
17. If you think for a minute that bringing our troops home from all the hotspots in the world will solve all our problems then you are living in a dream world.
KryssTal Reply: The USA thinks it is the world's police man. Most of the world see the USA as a vigilante. There are over 400 US military bases around the world. They are there to look after US business interests not to look after the world. Much of the world knows this.
18. If the UN and the rest of the World had backed us in Iraq things would be better right now. America once again is the only country in the world that will stand up to petty dictators who abuse their people. Thank god we don't roll over like France does. Without the might of the US, warlords, dictators & terrorists would rule the world. The constant threat of US retaliation is the only thing that keeps the animals at bay.
KryssTal Reply: This is a fantasy.
In the UK we used to be told that we were civilising the countries that we invaded. You have just repeated the USA propaganda. The rest of the world did not believe that Iraq was athreat to anyone after 10 years of sanctions. Insulting France does not put the USA in a good light. But don't just believe me, after all, I am a nobody. Let me quote former CIA operative
William Blum:
"From 1945 to the end of the [20th] century, the USA attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes. In the process, the USA caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair".
Or Amnesty International, from a 1996 report called "Human Rights and USA Security Assistance":
"Throughout the world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely to be displaced, tortured, killed or 'disappeared', at the hands of governments or armed political groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame."
19. America is to blame for a lot of things in the world but not everything. America doesn't wage war just for the hell of it. There may not have been WMD's in Iraq but the bottom line is that one more ruthless dictator is missing from the world spotlight. He may be replaced by another but we'll just have to wait and see.
KryssTal Reply: The USA supported many worse dictaors in Central America in the 1980s. The USA has removed many democratically elected governments, the latest earlier this year in Haiti when the preseident was removed at gunpoint. Why is the USA so resented?
20. It's beautiful that we can shout out our views like this in this great country of ours. They can even do it in Iraq now.
KryssTal Reply: Wasn't the uprising in Fallujah the result of the US military closing a newspaper? And how many journalists has the USA killed. The USA has also bombed media outlets not under its control. This does not play well in many countries.
21. I could go on and on but I just don't have the time right now. If you're for peace then that is great. But you need to back it up with some kind of plan. What is your plan? Ignoring evil dictators and terrorist won't make the problem go away, and if you think all we need to do is try to understand these animals and try to negotiate with them, you will be one of the easy targets that they laugh about as they are about to behead you.
KryssTal Reply: I am not ignoring terrorism. It's just that I think that the USA (and its loyal poodle, the UK; and its surrogate, Israel) are responsible for much of it.
22. I'm sure most of you have seen the Sci-Fi film Independence day with Will Smith. There is a part in the movie where the President asks one of the captured aliens what it is that they want. The response that the alien gives is we want you to die!
This is more or less the same thinking that these bastards have for Americans. So wake up and come to the reality that we must either fight this evil scum of the Earth or they will kill us all! I am sure most of us if we were being beat up by some bully, at some point we would All have our natural instinct for survival kick in and we would try to fight back. Are you going to tell me you would just lie there and let yourself be beaten to death? Unless you have a death wish to begin with, every one of you would fight back, well guess what that bully has Already punch the crap out of you, and you have a choice right now. You can either punch him back as hard as you can, and like most bully's he will see that you are not weak and will usually go look for an easier victim, or you can do nothing and let this guy beat the crap out of you every damn day!
This personally happened to me when I was about 13 years old. The first time it happened I was to shocked and a bit scared to do anything about it. But the next time it happened I hit the A-hole right in the nose as hard as I could before he could hit me. His nose exploded like a tomato hitting a brick wall. There was blood splattered everywhere and he ran off. Do you know what happen after that day? That's right the boy never FU*Ked with me again. As a matter of fact years later he would grow up and become a friend, not a best friend, but a friend nonetheless.
Does this remind you of another situation that happened in the 1940's Think about it, and quit tucking your balls between your legs because some spineless moron tells you should, because it's the people that are for peace at any cost that these Terrorists are looking for. You are soft and therefore make easy targets for them. In case you didn't notice they stay the hell away from the boys with the guns and tanks when they are looking for someone to behead. That's because a US solider would fight to the death before he would give these guy the ultimate humiliation. Wake up peacenik's before it's too late!
KryssTal Reply: Well that's quite a rant. Unfortunatley, most of the world sees the USA as the bully.
All the rest of the world wants is:
Fair trade that is really fair and not biased towards the rich countries. Dumping subsidised goods on poor countries puts their farmers out of business, causes poverty and resentment. All countries having to obey international laws, treaties and conventions
(including the USA's friends). Justice for occupied peoples (including the Palestinians, the Chechens, the Kashniris, etc). Less support for the occupiers. Equality and dignity for all human beings. This includes our allies like Turkey (who have oppressed the Kurds), Saudi Arabia (who oppress women and other religions). Bans on all weapons of mass destruction, not just those of our enemies. Military forces to be used only for defence (like the Swiss).
Thank you for writing.
I have enjoyed reading your website - it is truely fascinating.
I am not convinced by the 'Invade Iraq for Oil' argument. I am not particularly knowledgeable on this subject, but I apply skepticism to any argument I encounter. Please don't think that I am pro Republican or pro american. Certainly not ! I totally object to the invasion of Iraq. I only wish I was entitled to vote in the US elections. Unfortunately Australians are not entitled to vote, although we do almost anything the US president wants.
There are a few things to look at here. Lets break it up into oil reserves, strategic control and corporate profits.
http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/oil/
Can I suggest that you expand the section of your website estimating world oil supply ? Quoting BP (and not giving an exact reference to the source of the figures) may not be enough to really settle upon the facts on oil reserves. In fact, you may be reinforcing BP's view of the world, or agendas - who knows ? I can't comment on the exact meaning of the BP estimates without reading the article from which you obtained them. Is there an internet link that I can access to find out more ?
Perhaps what we need is a definition of strategic control over oil ?
One definition might be: "Able to buy it at world prices". Surely the US is capable of doing that no matter who is digging it up, or whoever (however nasty they might be) is in political power of the particular country in which the black gold is found. I know no effort of any oil producing nation to place a trade embargo on the US, preventing it from buying oil. I do know that the US was so sure it didn't need to buy iraq oil that it placed an embargo on it !!!
Another definition might be: "Able to control world prices". This argument might be that the US economy is dependant on oil prices being below a certain level. For this argument to hold sway, it is required to demonstrate what (approximately) this price might be, and to show that world oil prices have risen above this level. The other problem with this argument is that american oil companies might make less money if world oil prices go down ! The other question is, what is the connection with a US led invasion of Iraq and control of oil prices ? Iraq is a member of OPEC (www.opec.org). Yes, the US often grumbles about the way OPEC sometimes cuts supply and pushes up prices, but I don't see how invading Iraq is going to affect Opec policy.
Another definition might be: "Able to get oil for below world prices". This suggests that the USA will pump the oil out of Iraq and take it home as loot - the spoils of war. I cannot see this happening, or how it might be implemented. How would the cheap oil be distributed ?
As you point out, the US government has lots of extroadinary links with the oil industry. I am curious to know where you get your information on the shareholdings of members of the US government ? The trick now is to make links between the companies the US government has association with, and with actual business deals in the petrochemical industry in Iraq. If we find the companies who are getting into the oil, we must find the answer as to who is pulling the strings ?
The deals below look perfectly legitimate, and there is no evidence that US companies are getting special treatment. Actually, it seems that the big companies like Exxon and Mobil are not interested in Basra Crude.
http://www.planetsave.com/ViewStory.asp?ID=4149
companies listed: BP, Shell, ChevronTexaco, Petrobras of Brazil and Switzerland's Vitol.
http://www.tajanews.com/noqnews/nnqview.php?ArtID=2710
companies listed: Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd, Bharat Petroleum Corp Ltd, Reliance Industries Ltd.
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1001731/posts
companies listed: ChevronTexaco, Conoco Philips.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1210-07.htm
companies listed: Halliburton's massive repair contract ( though dwarfed by the cost of war itself).
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for writing.
Since you wrote I have updated that page and added other reasons like military bases. We can see now how the USA wants to run things. Put your collaborators in place and pull the strings from afar. there is also the case for controlling the oil supply of Europe and Asia (that gives you a veto over their actions.
Dear Webmaster:
Your very biased one sided pro-Palestinian rant while completely ignoring the murder of Israelis during this same time period makes your entire site suspect and therefore worthless.
Not that you care, but I will NOT be including it on my Website nor will I recommend it to others when I tutor online.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for your comments.
Please note that the Israelis and Palestinians are not equivalent as the former is occupying territory of the latter. There are even people in Israel itself who are against Israeli policies in the Palestinian territories.
The murder of Israelis is covered extensively in the Western media; the attacks on Palestinian residential areas by Israeli forces (paid for by the West) are rarely covered.
Your response was typical... claiming nonexistent media bias for Israel as a rationalization for your own bias against Israel. Your line about occupied territory speaks volumes as to your lack of education on the history and background of the Middle East.
Just who were these "Palestinians" before 1967? When Jordan illegally and unsuccessfully tried to annex the land from Israel, where were the calls for a "Palestinians" State then?
I will not even attempt to educate you as your Website speaks for itself. Please do yourself a favor and read the book From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters. She researched the history of the ME for seven years using the Arabs own extensive archives. She, like you, started out advocating for the "Palestinians" but ended up with an entirely different conclusion after her research.
Long before my recent stay in China... I knew something was missing from my life... something empty or misplaced... unbalance
While I was in China lesson planning lead me to your site... which I must say was used more than an handfull of times and was accepted well... turns out I'm a great teacher.
I have almost read your site from front to back (yes I understand it is not a book... but I wish it were)... and soon after I began to understand something.... I really dont love my country.
I am Canadian... so it is not like my country ever loved me... but this feeling... or lack of... is starting to disrupt a very short trip of purging my mind of things taught to me before I had a choice of what to learn.
I have been on a role recently... I gave up my hard stance on capitalism... on democracy... on religion (well never really had a hard stance here)... I more or less gave up my stance on everything.... I now find myself able to freely flow from one side of any argument to the other with uncanny ability to dominate a debate.
I now find myself free of religion (still undecided as to what I should have faith in, or if I should at all)... free of commercialism... and free of just about every worry... but with this "JUST FUCK IT" attitude came this lack of feeling for my country... and I do not think this feeling is going to come back.
I do not want to give up this new way of life for me... it is much easier... much funner... and more satisfying overall...
...but can you possibly explain how this happened? Has anyone else ever told you about this? is this good or bad? Do I need to love my coutry? Is self discovery/re-education worth it?
thanks for any reply, much love.
KryssTal Reply: Countries are abstract things. Save your affection for humanity or its individuals.
Hi:
After reading through your site, I thought I might point a few things out. You attack democracies without offering a viable solution. Of course, what was done was wrong, but democracy is surely preferable to the alternatives.
KryssTal Reply: My pages assert that I support democracy. I do not want to have any other system in place. Everybody should have the right to vote for who runs their country and how their country should be run. You have fallen for the classic EITHER - OR falacy. Because I criticise the democratic West does not mean I support non-Western forms of government. I criticise the West BECAUSE they are democratic - you and I are responsible for the actions of our countries. Before that we need to know what they are up to. Because the people in non-democratic countries have no control over their countries' policies, I have not included them. That was an editorial decision of mine. These violations can be found on other human rights sites. Because of the volume of work involved I have selected to do the work from 1945 to the present. Hence no Hitler, no Mussolini, no Amritsar Massacre, no Spanish Civil War, etc. I do occasionally go back to World War I to mention things like the Balfour Declaration when they are relevant. For the post-1945 decision I blame time, or rather the lack of it.
For example, you cite My Lai, but you miss Hue, where American soldiers found thousands dead in mass graves, killed by the N. Vietnamese forces.
KryssTal Reply: The main point in the section on the Vietnam-USA War is the fact that one country (the USA) had invaded another (Vietnam). Notice that I do not call it THE Vietnam War. That would insult the Vietnamese. They fought wars against the Japanese (during and after WW2), the French (1945 to 1954), the USA (1954 to 1975) and a couple of smaller wars against Cambodia (which they invaded to remove Pol Pot) and China (who invaded them). I have written about the French and USA violations in detail because these are the two democracies that have travelled half way around the world to invade Vietnam, making up all kinds of excuses to justify their actions.
Also, you miss the deaths of 12 million people by Hitler (not a democrat) and the actions of the democracies of the west to stop him.
KryssTal Reply: This is a large piece of work for which I don't have time. If you did this I would be happy to provide a link.
You also miss the atrocites of Stalin and the USSR, with anywhere from 20-65 million dead during his rule.
KryssTal Reply: Stalin is probably the biggest individual killer of the 20th century. Two points: he was an ally during WW2 and Russia's contribution to the war effort cannot be ignored. Secondly, he signed a treaty with Hitler and occupied much of Eastern Europe after WW2. However, his actions do not affect the fact that the USA committed a war crime in My Lai. If you were a rapist and I banged you on the head with a piece of metal, I would still be guilty of assult. I cannot say "Alex was a worse worse criminal than me", can I?
So, before you attack democracy, provide a better alternative, and in fact, I am really curious as to what your alternative is.
KryssTal Reply: My alternative is democratic countries treating other countries with dignity and fairness. In other words, not invading them for their resources, not supporting tyrants when it suits us and removing them when it suits us, having a fair economic system that allows all countries to trade fairly with each other, not allowing our allies to trample on human rights while using the human rights of our enemies as an excuse to invade them. That is my alternative. I would encourage tyranies to become more democratic by not trading with dictatorships (like Saudi Arabia) or occupiers (like Israel) or selling them arms when I know they'll be used to oppress. I would respect international law and encourage other countries to do the same.
Communism? Yes, we can see how that worked in Cuba, and the former USSR. Facism? Obviously not. Anarchy?
KryssTal Reply: Cuba is an enemy of the USA because the USA has no economic or political control there. The imperfect Castro is respected there because the American backed regime he removed was much worse. Communism may work in small regions. It has been successful in Kerala state in India and villages in Bali run themselves in a Communist-like way. Cuba has been blockaded by the USA so we can never know if it would have worked there. The USSR was too big for such a centralised economic system to work and it collapsed. However, their new Western system was imposed too quickly and has caused a lot of hardship, especially to the elderly, as well as obscene wealth concentrated in a few (crooked) hands. The truth is that countries should be allowed the flexibility to make their own choices and their own mistakes. The West has been guilty of imposing their own values too quickly on some places.
Stupid, it would never work, leaders always emerge, and without a system to hold them in check, they will become corrupted with power.
KryssTal Reply: I agree. Even the democratic systems of the West have their flaws. Democracy means being on your guard all the time. There is NO perfect democracy. Probably the most democratic is Switzerland where there is real local government allied to a federal system.
Philosopher king? This would never work, any king rises to power by tredding upon the bodies of his enemies, no philosophic benevolent dictator could ever rise up.
KryssTal Reply: Tito in Yugoslavia? King Juan Carlos in Spain?
So, what is it? How do you propose we replace your evidently evil democracies?
KryssTal Reply: You do not replace democracies - you apply their principles to other countries you deal with.
Just Wondering, Alex
KryssTal Reply: Keep questioning, Alex.
I came to your site under the impression that it was somewhat objective. I found the opposite. Your gallery in Iraq did not show any of the mass celebrations. You might as well have stuck a picture of Saddam with a halo over his head, since the US is so evil.
KryssTal Reply: Let's remove one myth straight away. Saddam Hussein was a nasty vicious dictator with no redeeming qualities. There are not many people who think otherwise. He has been a nasty and vicious dictator for 30 years.
The trouble with the USA and UK position is that our two countries supported him for 20 of his years in power. We gave him political and military support when he invaded Iran and when he gassed the Kurds in 1988. So, if our two countries want credit for removing him, we must also take blame for keeping him in power when it suited us. The Iraqis are fully aware of the relationship that the dictator had with the West and that is one reason that they are so suspicious of our motives. Your government has not gone into Iraq to provide democracy or to liberate the Iraqis. It's gone in for oil, military bases and to install a pro-West government there.
As for the mass celebrations. Well, they're not celebrating now with 500 people dead and 200 children injured in Fallujah.
We are currently supporting the dictator in Uzbekistan (Karimov) because he is allowing US bases there. Recently he boiled two of his opponents to death. We don't care about the Uzbeks as long as his regime does what suits us. If he disobeys us, then we'll demonise him and tell the world we want to remove him to help the Uzbeks.
People in Iraq died from the government and what changed? Nothing. People died from the US and what has changed? Everything. If you are fighting for Saddam you are a legitimate US target. You don't think that soldiers who kill innocent people don't have to live with that the rest of their lives? Why do you think the suicide rate of Marines is so high in Iraq? It is a lot to handle.
KryssTal Reply: I do not blame troops for obeying orders. The people I blame are the advisors in the White House who planned to invade Iraq several years ago as part of their plan to reshape the Middle East to serve American interests. The contracts for reconstruction have all been awarded (without Iraqi say so) to US companies that have close relations to the Bush administration.
We were promised that a victory in Iraq would open the way to peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Instead we are seeing the Israeli tactics of collective punishment and attacks on residential areas with helicopters and F-16s in Iraq. This will not make the USA safer and it will not win hearts and minds. It did not work in Vietnam (where US blanket bombing killed 3 million) and there is little reason to beleve it will work now.
If Iraqis were invading the USA I would be attacking the Iraqi government and publishing the human rights situation in the USA. But it's the other way round. This is not the first invasion by the USA. Read my War on Terror essay and try to see events from the Arab point of view. Not Saddam's point of view, but from the point of view of the Arabs who have seen their land divided and occupied by Western powers since 1916.
Don't villainize the military. You owe those people your life. Whether you live in Europe, the US, North America or wherever, the freedom of speech you just displayed is directly a product of the US military from World War 1 to Iraq. Never has any other army been in the front of so many liberating forces. NEVER.
KryssTal Reply: The people of Vietnam, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Palestine, Lebanon, Mozambique, Angloa, Cambodia and many other places might disagree with that view.
As for the two world wars, the USA joined World War I in 1917 a few months before it ended. During World War II, the UK stood alone against Germany in 1940 when this country was being bombed. The USA did not join the war until 1942 and then only because it was attacked by Japan. The USA role in that war was important and people appreciated it but, it did take time for the USA to come to the aid of Britain, its closest ally. You did not instantly stand "shoulder to shoulder" with us. We had to wait. When we fought Argentina over the Falklands, Reagan ditherered for several weeks before deciding between his two allies. There is the good and the bad on all sides.
If the UN is the source of all legitimacy then explain this:
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040128-094014-7323r.htm
And this:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/saddam_oil_vouchers_040129.html
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004667
http://www.usainreview.com/1_21_Security_Council.htm
http://newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/1/24/113801
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6344726%255E1702,00.html
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003053
Perhaps you can explain to those who go to your site about how the UN is made up of terrorist regimes, and 3rd world countries. It is not a haven of anti-Americanism, and the worlds biggest human rights abuser, China, has a PERMANENT seat on the national security council, imagine that! UN legitimacy?
KryssTal Reply: The word "terrorist" is overused. The UK could have described the American revolutionaries as "terrorists".
The reason that there is a clash between the USA and other countries is because you have 6% of the world's population but use 48% of the world's resources. The world trade system is set up to help the rich countries. You insist that coutries lower their trade tariffs while you raise yours. You dump subsidised goods onto their markets while forcing them to stop subsidising their industries.
As for China - you are right - it is a human rights abuser and it does have a permanent seat on the UN. And your former president, Nixon, gave them that seat in 1970 because he wanted the USA to trade with them. And of course you might check out the number of democratically elected governments removed by the USA, often after financing opponents to destabilise them. Haiti is a recent example where an elected president was kidnapped at gunpoint by USA forces. Venezuela is being destabilised at the moment. Guatemala, Chile, and even Iran have all lost democratically elected leaders in this way.
I would challenge you to point out which country has not tolerated murderous dictatorships. We don't have a perfect history and have never claimed to.
KryssTal Reply: A agree that the world's governments are all imperfect. Countries invade for their own interests not for altruistic reasons. That includes the UK (we were told we were civilising our victims), the USA (you are told you are liberating your victims), the French, etc.
Well after reviewing your web page. It did not take me to long to realize how much independent your thoughts are. Your view of the US and its policies are as skewed as the rhetoric from al-Sadr or Rummsfeld. Your views are unbalanced and without critical thinking. I agree in part that the US is not the worlds savor nor should it be. And at times its actions have not had the best outcomes. But speaking with clarity and thinking for myself. Its intent has been that of good.
KryssTal Reply: I think you are confused between the avarage American (a friendly and compassionate human being on the most part) and the people who actually run that country and control what you are told.
You list several times when the US had to use its military to bomb other, I presume poor innocent governments. Well I think I will add to your list some governments you seemed to forget. The socialist of Germany during WWI and WWII and there allies.
KryssTal Reply: The USA did very little in World War I. They entered a few months before the end of the conflict. During the early part of the war, there was even help for Germany. Also Germany was not socialist at that time. the government was very conservative.
During World War II, the German government was Nazi (which stands for National Socialist). It was not socialist in the accepted economic meaning of the term as it had based itself on Mussolini's Italy which was fascist. The reason the USA joined that war was because it was attacked by Japan in late 1941.
This should be of some importance seeing you are making a life for yourself in the UK.
KryssTal Reply: Let us remove a myth here. The closest that the UK has come to defeat during the 20th century was in 1940 during the Battle of Britain. At that time this country stood alone with no help from anybody. No other country was standing "shoulder to shoulder" with us. Propaganda and later events have created this myth. The USA's presence after 1942 was helpful and appreciated but that is not the complete story.
The Serbian government was also bombed to stop the massacre of Bosnia. This should also be of some importance to you for they were Muslims.
KryssTal Reply: Remember there are two reasons involved: the reason given to keep us happy ("we want to help the Muslims in Kosovo") and the real reason. For that I'll quote one of your presidents, Bill Clinton: "If we're going to have a strong economic relationship that includes our ability to sell around the world, Europe has got to be a key....That's what this Kosovo thing is all about."
Like it or not the US is the world, yes world only superpower.
KryssTal Reply: Yes, I agree. If my web page had been written during the 19th century then it would be attacking UK and France for their colonial activities. During the 16th century, Spain would be the butt of my attacks as it destroys ancient civilisations. During the 1st century AD, it would be the Roman Empire. The USA is the power now. That is why there is so much resentment. It is not your standard of living (Norway's is better); it is not your democracy (Switzerland's is more complete). It is your power and the way you use it.
And its merits to mine and your world are immeasurable.
KryssTal Reply: A lot of the world disagree with that statement.
Whether your views come from jealousy, envy or uneducated hatred, I asked you to take a step back and ask your self why do you view the world and US like this.
KryssTal Reply: And the insult. Yes I'm jealous of the USA and uneducated. It's obvious. Anyone who thinks differently has to be crazy. That attitude to the rest of the world is also a cause of resentment. It sems that as long as we obey and agree we are the good guys; if we disagree or disobey we become the bad guys. Friendship between nations has to be based on equality and compromise.
I wonder have you even been to the US before. You might be surprised? You won't find Satan. What you will find is a land and its people open to your views even if they don't agree with them.
KryssTal Reply: I have been to the USA. It's a fine land full of good people. They may not know what is going on around the world but they are a compassionate people. Their ignorance of world events is not from stupidity. After three days in the USA I had to look to external media to get some real news. Of course, they are open to ideas - that is why many of them turned to the internet after the terrible attacks of 11 September 2001 - they wanted to find out what was going on and why. The one main difference between most Americans and others is that we tend not to believe our governments. We have a joke in the UK. How do you know if a politician is lying? Answer: his (or her) lips are moving.
This is more than I can say for some governments your view favors.
KryssTal Reply: Many of the countries I write about also want what we want - freedom and democracy. Many have dictators backed by the USA (and often the UK). This is another cause of resentment. I favour (sorry about the spelling) freedom for them as well. You patrol the Persian Gulf. Would you be happy with Iranian ships patrolling off your coast? You have military bases in 160 countries yet no foreign bases in your country. Egypt has McDonalds but the USA has no Mahalabia. The USA pumps money to its favoured candidates in elections around the world but it is illegal to fund political parties in the USA. Chemical warfare sites have to be monitored in Libya but not in the USA, even though the latter dropped cancer-producing Agent Orange over three Asian countries.
I feel the US and the Arab world are at a crossroad. Its actions including the Arab world will affect the lives of future Muslims and Americans to come.
KryssTal Reply: Read my "War on Terror" - the conflict between the West and the Arabs. It began in 1916 not 2001. Most of it has been fought on Arab land: www.krysstal.com/democracy_terror.html
Instead of preaching this babble on the "Great Satan" we should try understand our differences and expand our humanity.
KryssTal Reply: I am not religious. I never talk about Satan.
Your current thought will only help in our alienation from another. Do you really want the US to call home all of its troops, close its borders and limit its view to that of North America.
KryssTal Reply: All I ask is that the USA join the world community and live by the same laws it expects others to live by.
How long do you think it would take Israel to decide to expand its borders and absorb Palestine? Heck,why stop there instead of a three day war it will be a ten day with half of the Middle East now called greater Israel. Krysstal,like it or not the US is the only power strong enough at present to do this. The US keeps Israel in check with the millions of dollars we spend in aid to them.
KryssTal Reply: The money sent helps builds the illegal settlements and their access roads. Nearly 2 million Palestinians are already refugees. The USA is fighting to remove their right of return. Check out the number of times the USA has protected Israel in the UN when it violates human rights. The Palestinians are paying the price for what happend to the Jews in Europe.
And like your lists mine go on and on as well. Think, like you say think for yourself.
KryssTal Reply: Keep studying. Keep garnering. You ask if I have been to the USA and I answered "yes". I have also been to El Salvador, Vietnam and Syria. Have you?
Thank you for writing.
For starters I feel sorry for you that you are so mis-informed. We are not invaders, we have acted with our right to preserve our freedom and our security by removing threats abroad.
KryssTal Reply: This is the official line. If you are liberators why are they trying to get rid of you?
This is also very helpfull for the rest of the world. I you think that removing Saddam and his government is a bad thing, then you definatly need to read more.
KryssTal Reply: I agree that Saddam was bad. Why did you support him for 12 years? Why did Rumsfeld shake his hand in 1988 for Reagan? Why are you now supporting the Uzbek dictator Karimov (who boils his opponents to death) just because he has let you station bases on his land. In a few years he'll displease you as well and you'll be telling us how bad he is. If you care about the Kurds in Iraq why are you letting your allies the Turks commit genocide on them?
Also, to actually believe for starters that our country would ever be occupied in the first place is rediculous. Our economy and industry will never fall to the level it has fallen to in Iraq...which is zero.
KryssTal Reply: Zero? So Iraq was not a threat?
And not to mention our government and its people would never be able to let our country get to that level.
KryssTal Reply: I was using an analogy.
Order 39, (incase you never have actually read it), is for the capitalization of the Iraqui economy. At this point I can see no better way to help the country turn itself around. Do you?,
KryssTal Reply: It's not up to you or me. Would you like it if I dictated how you should run your country internally? You play football with your hands while the rest of the world kicks the ball. But that is up to you. As for the economy of Iraq, the Iraqis should decide. Not you, not me.
becasue if you do, which I doubt, then you should volunteer your time to the Sunnis, and Shiites and various tribes of Iraq, im sure they would love to hear what you have to say. Because I sure would.
KryssTal Reply: Shias and Sunnis are not tribes. The differences are the same as between Catholics and Protestants. Iraqis are educated enough to know that you supported Saddam during his worst excesses, you encouraged an uprising in 1991 and then abandoned them, you're there for the oil and bases. They are not stupid. If you believe in democracy let them elect their government - not appoint it for them with mainly exiles like the shady Ahmed Chalabi.
By the way, here's a little history lesson on Word War One for you.....maybe you will see that if it wasnt for the US you definatly would be speaking German.....................http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Bunker/3017/
KryssTal Reply: Thank you.
Mitsubishi is owned by Daimler Chrysler an essentially German American company,so is Jeep and I believe Dodge, also Mercedes. Mazda and Land Rover are owned by Ford.
Dear KryssTal,
I just found your webpage while looking for an introduction to organic chemistry. May I say how hugely impressed I am by the range of what you cover, and all your so-invaluable introductions.
I also hugely appreciate your political information, such as the list of US-backed coups. I have immediately bookmarked your page as a completely invaluable resource. (I do hope, incidentally, if you do decide to stop voting Labour (as you say in one of your letters, and with which urge I'm entirely in sympathy), I hope you can be persuaded to come over to the Socialist Alliance (socialistalliance.net) (or perhaps to the Unity Coalition that George Galloway is proposing, when it is launched), rather than to the utterly untrustworthy Liberal Democrats.)
Many thanks for your wonderfully useful site. Please keep it up!
Very best, China Mieville.
KryssTal Reply: Thank you for your kind comments.
It appears to me that whoever we vote for the USA's interests come first. I think any UK party in power that did not follow USA interests would find itself under attack by the pro-USA media as well as financial and political attack by the USA itself.