America’s Moral Compass

Re: # 92

tahmed32, ``How many countries would willingly accept the military presence of the Pakistan army (even we Pakistanis ourselves have issues with what it is doing within Pakistan!!) or the Indian army or the Russian or Chinese armies??``

You have simply proved my point by yourself. People of Pakistan don`t want `bloody` army rule on us, but still it has been there for most part of the history. Similary, most people don`t want US forces in their countries, but they are still there. The conclusion is, might is right whatever its opponents think; and might does what is in its best interest.

You seem quite a reasonable guy. I urge you to read some anti-US views in newspapers and articles with a neutral mind. Probably it will help you understand the motives of American empire. It is waging the most open type of war on two fronts which are pretty much correlated; ending the power of Muslims by striking them turn by turn and capturing as much as of the world resources as it can.
Thanks

Re: # 97
Great Question!!!!
Bravo!

Re:rshridhar#91

Ha Ha!! Good one. I wish Chowk had a board to post jokes, especially Sardar jokes. I would love to hear some from the Pakistanis.

Here is a good non-Sardar joke, that is quite appropriate for the Bush administration and its wishful thinking Iraq policy -

There are two donkeys who meet on the street.

Donkey 1 says to Donkey 2 -``Hello yaar!! How is life?``

Donkey 2 says - ``Life is horrible. My master beats me every day, there is no food to eat and I have to work 20 hrs a day. It is really bad. How about you?``

Donkey 1 replies - ``Same here. Life is horrible. My master beats me every day, there is no food to eat and I have to work 20 hrs a day. However, my future is bright!!``

Now Donkey 2 is really intrigued. He asks - ``Vow. How come your future is bright?``

Donkey 1 replies - ``Whenever my master has a bad fight with his wife, he always threatens her that he will make her f*$k the donkey!! So someday it will come true. So my future is bright!!`` :-)

Romair

If you were a non-Muslim deeply-entrenched White American, how would you have reacted to 9/11? What would have been your view of the Muslims and Islam in the aftermath of 9/11?

Sistani seems to have outsmarted everyone. Following is from Time Magazine. As I had mentioned earlier, the US tried its best to not hold elections in January, however, Sistani forced its hand.........

``But even as President Bush claimed vindication for his Iraq strategy in the spectacle of millions of Iraqis braving terror and intimidation to go to the polls, the real author of Sunday`s election —Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani — confined himself to a simply thanking voters for turning out, and expressing regret that his own Iranian birth prevented him from joining them. It may be easily forgotten in the post-election spin that Sunday`s vote was not the Bush administration`s idea—quite the contrary. The U.S. had never intended for Iraqis to democratically choose the body that would write their new constitution; Washington had envisaged an election only after a constitution had been written by a body appointed by, and under the tutelage of the U.S.

Initially, the plan had been to hand power to returning exiles after toppling Saddam Hussein. When the exiles proved too unpopular, the U.S. then sought to have its handpicked Iraqi Governing Council write the new constitution. Even after the IGC proved incapable, the Bush administration consistently rejected Sistani`s demand for democratic elections. Instead, U.S. administrator J. Paul Bremer proposed, that a constitution-making body be appointed by a series of caucuses comprising handpicked elites around the country. Sistani was having none of it. He insisted on democratic elections, used his influence among Shiites on the Governing Council to block Bremer`s scheme, and then brought his supporters onto the streets to warn that anything short of democracy would be deemed illegitimate by the Shiite majority.

And it was this pressure from the Iranian-born Ayatollah—certainly an unlikely Tom Paine figure —that forced the administration to scrap its own plans for Iraq and agree to hold elections by the end of January 2005.......

Opinion polls continue to show that a majority of Iraqi voters want the U.S. to leave immediately after the election, and a new government, whatever its makeup, will be expected to respond to that sentiment......

Ironically, ending the U.S. presence is a point of consensus between Iraq`s new political class and the insurgents
``

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1022720,00.html?cnn=yes

Sistani seems to have outsmarted everyone. Following is from Time Magazine. As I had mentioned earlier, the US tried its best to not hold elections in January, however, Sistani forced its hand.........

``But even as President Bush claimed vindication for his Iraq strategy in the spectacle of millions of Iraqis braving terror and intimidation to go to the polls, the real author of Sunday`s election —Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani — confined himself to a simply thanking voters for turning out, and expressing regret that his own Iranian birth prevented him from joining them. It may be easily forgotten in the post-election spin that Sunday`s vote was not the Bush administration`s idea—quite the contrary. The U.S. had never intended for Iraqis to democratically choose the body that would write their new constitution; Washington had envisaged an election only after a constitution had been written by a body appointed by, and under the tutelage of the U.S.

Initially, the plan had been to hand power to returning exiles after toppling Saddam Hussein. When the exiles proved too unpopular, the U.S. then sought to have its handpicked Iraqi Governing Council write the new constitution. Even after the IGC proved incapable, the Bush administration consistently rejected Sistani`s demand for democratic elections. Instead, U.S. administrator J. Paul Bremer proposed, that a constitution-making body be appointed by a series of caucuses comprising handpicked elites around the country. Sistani was having none of it. He insisted on democratic elections, used his influence among Shiites on the Governing Council to block Bremer`s scheme, and then brought his supporters onto the streets to warn that anything short of democracy would be deemed illegitimate by the Shiite majority.

And it was this pressure from the Iranian-born Ayatollah—certainly an unlikely Tom Paine figure —that forced the administration to scrap its own plans for Iraq and agree to hold elections by the end of January 2005.......``

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1022720,00.html?cnn=yes

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

vivek #90: “To the common man in the USA 9-11 was committed by Muslims. We, as more educated people can talk about not all Muslims being the same, but for the common man they are.”

This is my whole point (with one difference). I think to the common American, all Muslims are the same. However, I have definitely not found this to be true for the common Canadian. Which is why I am really interested in finding out what the common European thinks, to get a well-rounded view of the whole Western thought process.

I would seriously encourage you to visit other Western countries. My eyes have really opened up, as I have started doing so. The public discourse on terrorism, in Canada, is so different from USA, that one has a hard time believing the two countries belong to the same Western philosophical thought process. The discourse on int’l affairs is also very different. Despite so much American pressure, There is a common phenomenon amongst many American Muslims that even though they live in the USA and still hate its guts (the Urstruly phenomenon). I have not seen this in Canada. I don’t know the situation in Europe……

The Muslim view is far more represented in the Canadian media, than in the US media. In fact, just Pakistanis themselves are more represented in the Canadian media and politics than all the Muslims, combined, in the USA. And after discussions with so many Canadians, I am quite convinced that there does exist a much better understanding of Muslims amongst Canadians (and of other minorities, also). And a far better and fairer understanding of the Middle East situation (including Israel-Palestine). In fact, the biggest fear that exists in Canada (and in the USA) is that some terrorist will go from Canada to America and blow something up. Not that someone will blow something up inside Canada.

“Inspite of it most Muslims do not face discimmination in their daily life. I would say that as a very positive aspect of this society. “

I would say this is true (although it does exist at the borders for non-US resident Muslims). I acknowledge that. This is because there are decades of systems that have been put into place through Civil Rights Movements, etc. and because USA has never really been under pressure, till 9/11. Continental USA hadn’t been attacked for almost 200 years.

This is why I keep saying the USA is sitting on the fence, and I am not saying it is openly discriminating. We will find out which side it will go to, if another attack occurs inside the USA. I think it will, at that point, roll over to the negative side. Muslims in the USA are, on the whole, an insignificant community. They have never bothered to organize themselves into any kind of lobby. They are not even a minor political force. They are at the mercy of the majority. And if the majority gets really angry, and can’t differentiate between one Muslim or another (as you say), and cannot take its anger out on Iraq any longer, and cannot locate OBL, who is it going to take it out on? My guess is on all our Chowk expats……..

In addition, there is a proxy war being fought inside the USA, between pro-Israel Jewish lobbies and an increasing US Muslim population. It is in the interest of the former to limit the rise of the Muslims in the USA. And it has a lot of influence. No such lobby exists in Canada or Europe. In fact, in France, Muslims themselves are a lobby now. Which is why France is very popular in Arab surveys (barring the headscarf stuff).

Following is a quote from Daniel Pipes, who has been appointed at a very senior religious position by Bush,

“``I worry very much from the Jewish point of view that the presence, and increased stature, and affluence, and enfranchisement of American Muslims...will present true dangers to American Jews.``
- Daniel Pipes speaking before the convention of the American Jewish Congress, 10/21/2001

Who do you think Pipes is afraid of? The bearded maulvi Muslim, saying his prayers, who has no interest in the USA and will never rise in the system. No. He is afraid of the affluent, well-integrated yuppie Muslim who can give the Jewish community a run for its money. He is more afraid of hamidms than of the Urstrulys. And he (neo-cons etc.) will eventually isolate these individuals, if one more attack occurs. Unfortunately some of the Muslims, themselves, are feeding his fire, by becoming Bush’s biggest cheerleaders, instead of joining up with the with the ACLU and Democrat/Nader side….

”Regarding Israel, I think Israel will recognise Palestine sometime soon. However it would want a Palestine state which is dependent on Israel for its survival.”

I agree. And because of this, the conflict will continue. And the USA will continue to be targeted, even though it has no direct conflict with Arabs. And the cycle of violence will get larger and larger………..

Charging #73 There is no question about the far-reaching influence of the US in the world today, and I am not contesting that. Indeed there is even a term for it, namely ``Pax Americana`` (which compares with ``Pax Romana`` of ancient Rome and ``Pax Brittania`` of the 19th century). However, the article you referred to proves little beyond making this obvious fact.

Morevore, this of itself does not reflect negatively on the US - in fact the opposite is true. How many countries would willingly accept the military presence of the Pakistan army (even we Pakistanis ourselves have issues with what it is doing within Pakistan!!) or the Indian army or the Russian or Chinese armies?? So, as I said, there is a lot more behind the obvious fact that we are going through a period of ``Pax Americana``.

I do not wish to analyse the global situation in this one post - that is beyond my ability, and I refer you to more learned posters like urstruly for such analysis, :-). So let me simply say that the success of ``Pax Americana`` is reflects the success of the democratic ideals that the US has consistently stood for that I mentioned earlier. Nor does anyone expect ``Pax Americana`` to last indefinitely - given the general rise of prosperity and democratic systems across the world, it is a question of time before some kind of a UN system replaces the US in ensuring a certain level of world order. But that would then represent the ultimate success of the values that the US has valiantly fought for over the past two centuries - against King George of UK to get their own freedom, against dictators, and even within itself in purging itself of the evil of slavery in the bloody Civil War that ``forged`` this nation into one with a clear set of democratic values.

re:#61 by amit
Amit,
Your mentioning the names Santa and Banta Singh reminded me of another joke i heard from my brother (my apologies to sikh friends on chowk in advance). Here goes:
Both Santa and Banta Singh (who run a construction company in Ludhiana, Punjab) submit tenders to govermnents of UK and France for construction of a underwater tunnel connecting the 2 countries. While many other international companies of repute had submitted an estimated cost running into millions of dollars. singh brothers` estimate was exactly 100,000 dollars. Intrigued, the officials call them for an interview.
Official: Can u please explain how come you claim you can construct this tunnel for just 100,000 dollars? What is your plan?
Santa Singh: O jee, we have lot of workers, so our cost is cheap. We have a simple plan. I will start the construction from the English end, my brother Banta will start from the French side and we will meet in the middle.
Official: What if you do not meet in the middle?
Santa Singh (after a long pause): In that case, Sir, we will not charge you any extra money. You will still have 2 tunnels for the price of one!
Sridhar

Romair #88,
To the common man in the USA 9-11 was committed by Muslims. We, as more educated people can talk about not all Muslims being the same, but for the common man they are. Inspite of it most Muslims do not face discimmination in their daily life. I would say that as a very positive aspect of this society.

Regarding Israel, I think Israel will recognise Palestine sometime soon. However it would want a Palestine state which is dependent on Israel for its survival.

Re: # 87,
Giving directions was just an example I was quoting. There are people in every country who do that. The point I was trying to make is that the USA treats people as fair as is possible in trying circumstances.

vivek #84: I kind of agree with you, though not completely.

“USA is a nation where people believe that they are under threat.”

The USA people believe correctly. They actually are under threat. However, they are reacting to the threat in exactly the wrong way, thereby increasing the threat (and violence in the world). They are reacting to a terrorist threat as one would react to a threat by another nation. Thus playing right into the hands of the terrorists. The USA has infact, itself, become a bigger terrorist, in its foreign affairs. Which is why it does not recognize any International Criminal Court and has set aside even the Geneva Conventions.

The USA would do well to see how the Europeans handled terrorism. The solution to decreasing the threat to the USA does not lie in bombing Iraq and threatening Iran. It lies in forcing Israel to accept Palestine, within the 67 borders. Something which the Arabs have agreed to.

“for example, would any person back home (India or Pakistan) take time to help others in the street if they are lost. All said and done, we can all claim that we come from older civilizations with longer history, but are our people as civil as the average American?”

I have never lived in India. But I can say that the average Pakistani is pretty good in giving directions. If he/she had the same sized pie and financial standard as the average Westerner, he might be as or more friendly. Hard to say. Westerners are more civil, probably because wealthier people tend to be so.

I get the feeling that you are describing the America of yesterday. For which you have given a correct description. It is currently sitting on the fence. What will be the America of tomorrow, if OBL strikes again? Will the Americans take out their anger on Urstruly, tahmad and hamidm, at that point?

One really finds out how civil a person and/or society is when it is under pressure or poor or threatened. And the ease with which the American society has allowed the current administration to set aside so many things like the Geneva Conventions and its new found passion for bombing other countries should be scary to American immigrants. Even the Democrats only kicked into action, once they saw that the USA was losing to the Iraqi resistance. Otherwise the current govt. would have gone into every country in the region and the repercussions would have been felt by immigrants in the USA; specifically those who are Muslims or look like Muslims………

Re: # 84

Probably you haven`t been to Pakistan. The people help those who are lost as much as possible.

QATAR IS FORCED TO SELL AL-JAZEERA TV UNDER US PRESSURE - NEWS