TheStatutoryApe said:
I was referring specifically to MaxS, thank you.
I also happen to spell colour the same way that you do but I was born, raised, and educated here in America. What assumptions have I made about you here so far? What assumptions have been made about me here so far? Were it not for my avatar do you think that MaxS would have still assumed I was white? Even considering my avatar(we'll assume that's actually me) would you still think it would be a fair assumption that I am white? Do you have much of an idea where I live and the sort of people I interact with on a regular basis?
LOL
Well, first of all is the patronizing assumption that one must be OF a race to be offended for a start.
The next is thinking that my little onion peel of my background was not mockery of your criteria for feeling offense.
Your characterization of people who are presumably talented in certain things being based on race presupposes that there are other races not so 'talented' based on their race. Have you ever, for instance, advocated the hiring of a Chinese over someone else because they are 'good at math'?
You have also revealed that you HAVE been accused of racism by 'the sort of people you interact with on a regular basis'.
And since when did I ever 'accuse' you of being white?
I accused you of being 'patronizing'. A person can be 'patronizing' if their address is somewhere on the Sahara.
It was you who started mentioning 'racism' and now bring up the question of:
TheStatutoryApe said:
"Lighten Up America!" You know it really makes me wonder when the people who seem to get bent out of shape the most over this petty little crap are WHITE.
You are aware that racism and patronizing are two sides of the same coin don't you?
Face it. You applied a chriteria to a 'nationality' and not the subgroup of that nationality that engages in that practice which is what all the sites you referenced did.
ie. The sites that mentioned Japanese warriors referenced the minority of that nationality who were known as Samurai. The bulk of that nationality were agrarian based peasants and a mercantile/artisan based middle class. And even then, you will find that there were 'good' Samurai and 'bad' Samurai. It seemed to be your intent to elevate your 'scholarship' to this level because you equate saying the 'Afghanis' are great warriors to saying the minority subgroup of the Japanese people were great warriors.
Don't you actually understand that in the war against the USSR, Afghanistan's 'great warriors' included the Saudi National Ohsama bin Laden with a personal fortune of over $270 million and supplied with American Stinger Missiles and CIA training manuals? That their country was then taken over by a radical Pakistani organization known as the Taliban who became their government? That the 'warriors' supposedly sent to blow up the twin towers were actually 14 Saudi's, a couple of Syrians and maybe an Afghani or two.
Are these the 'great warriors' of Afghanistan?
I don't think you have quite figured out the mentality of the area yet. Religion is of far greater importance to the people. Many fight along lines of religious factions and not based on the borders of countries.
This is, in fact what the whole bogus 'war on terror' is about.
Saddam gassed the Kurds in his own country. The Prime Minister of Turkey was a kurd. Turky denied you the right to launch against Iraq from Turkey.
The Taliban were Pakistani and yet the secular leaders of Pakistan allowed the USA to launch from Pakistan while the USA had to prevent the overthrow of the Pakistani government during the operation.
Now they THINK bin Laden is in Pakistan but there were complaints from the US forces that the local troops were hindering the search by not allowing them to enter the areas alone. This required a visit by the US director of operations in the Middle East to sort things out during a closed door meeting.
These 'warriors' are not the Afghani people. They never have been. They have always been the religious fighters of certain sects directed by their religious leaders in the form of Mullah and Imam. Their 'success' or greatness comes from the religious conviction that their reward will come as a result of their actions of this life in the after life and provides them with a complete disregard for their own lives. This is something that their opponents rarely have. This is what unifies the Muslim warrior and the Samurai against secular forces ... how do you kill a man who has already accepted his own death?
The west is used to looking at a map and seeing national borders and making judgements based on the contents of those borders and the success or failure of battles. What I propose to you is that you attempt to understand other dynamics based on THEIR reality and try to envision a world of radical clerics unified by common philosophy traversing borders and fighting for differing ideologies.
None of this is about 'fences' until you create a secular government in the area like Saddam who actually sees his borders and wonders 'why he no longer rules his province of Kuwait'.
Runsfeld's stupidest statement to date was 'I will not allow the creation of another Islamic State in the Middle East'.
He fails to realize that this has already occurred in both Afghanistan and Iraq based on THEIR interpretations of the area and that he is trying to wrap two round holes around about 5 square pegs.
Why is this pertinent to you?
You have Rumsfeld's vision of people and Geography.
