Overlooked Mandella's opinions on the USA and Israel

[janie48]

Maybe here it's different then. We have Jessie Jackson and the Reverend Al Sharpton ever ready to emerge from the woodwork and start throwing around accusations of racism and bias at the slightest provocation and it's bad for the media because so many tend to believe them and then they lose viewer ratings which eventually effects their ability to earn needed money from advertising.

 

Ever watched any American TV channel for any length of time? There's a commercial break every five minutes.

Yes, but its a long time ago, those constant commercial breaks were most irritating, especially when they interrupted an interesting conversation you were watching.

 

The two programmes I watched that replaced listed programmes were very good in my view.

They showed a few clips of him on his visits to the UK, and some short interviews, plus interesting interviews with people who had met him, or knew him personally. One pre-recorded interview was with his widow, who seemed to be a better replacement for him after Winnie. I'm glad he had those few last years of happiness with her.

[mjw47]

Harleyman. I never said Iraq under Saddam was 'a more or less stable country'. I said he was' keeping the lid on like Tito did in Yugoslavia'. I also pointed out that people living in Democracies never had to put up with that crap.

 

My point was that the killed & injured total would have been a lot lower. You would have to ask the survivors as to what they would have preferred an Invasion or a 'surgical strike' involving Special Forces, or a Drone attack, or both.

 

The US military suffered 4,486 deaths in Iraq between 2003 & 2012. That statistic would never have occurred obviously.

 

Your assumption with regard to a civil war is of course just that, an assumption.

Even if that happened it would have, initially at least kept the US & UK out of it. Invading other peoples countries & being responsible for thousands of civilian casualties leads to ongoing hatred & is just what organizations such as Al Qaeda thrive on.

Volunteers to exact revenge will be plentiful.

 

As to the big business angle I am fully aware of the situation. Big Business exists to make profits & can be quite ruthless as to how it goes about that aim.

If a market is shrinking, create a new market.

 

For several years I worked for a subsidiary company of RCA. Amongst many operations which they were responsible for at that time was the cold war Early Warning System. RCA installed & maintained the electronic part of the systems in all their complex's from Greenland through the UK & into northern Europe & down to the Med.

The 'Balls' on the north Yorkshire moors were included.

So I have a little experience of how Americans operate on the business front. They were a good company to work for in my opinion but certainly ruthless. not everyone was as content with their attitude as I was.

 

That in the end is what it's all about, Trade, & always has been since before they transported silk, rugs & spices by camel train from the East.

[Harleyman]

Yes, but its a long time ago, those constant commercial breaks were most irritating, especially when they interrupted an interesting conversation you were watching.

 

The two programmes I watched that replaced listed programmes were very good in my view.

They showed a few clips of him on his visits to the UK, and some short interviews, plus interesting interviews with people who had met him, or knew him personally. One pre-recorded interview was with his widow, who seemed to be a better replacement for him after Winnie. I'm glad he had those few last years of happiness with her.

 

I hope that my comments on him were not misintrepreted as disrespectful.

The complete man should always be shown. I don't go for those who like to whitewash over facts and reach a stage of hysterical adoration that places people in the category of one who walks on water. He did indeed suffer for his beliefs and his actions while a member of a terrorist organisation. He was of course inclined to be biased against America but he was an old Communist and so who could expect more? He never acknowledged for example that in his lifetime America had helped deliver Europe from a man who would have had no scruples whatsoever in including black people with Jews, Gypsies and anyone else who did not fit into his plans for an aryan master race. He could only see the negative side in that respect and wise men are supposed to see the whole picture. He also condemned Israel without condemning at the same time the inequaties suffered by women and girls in Moslem society.

 

Hero he was. Wise, not always. Human, very much so.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 20:20 ----------

 

Harleyman. I never said Iraq under Saddam was 'a more or less stable country'. I said he was' keeping the lid on like Tito did in Yugoslavia'. I also pointed out that people living in Democracies never had to put up with that crap.

 

My point was that the killed & injured total would have been a lot lower. You would have to ask the survivors as to what they would have preferred an Invasion or a 'surgical strike' involving Special Forces, or a Drone attack, or both.

 

The US military suffered 4,486 deaths in Iraq between 2003 & 2012. That statistic would never have occurred obviously.

 

Your assumption with regard to a civil war is of course just that, an assumption.

Even if that happened it would have, initially at least kept the US & UK out of it. Invading other peoples countries & being responsible for thousands of civilian casualties leads to ongoing hatred & is just what organizations such as Al Qaeda thrive on.

Volunteers to exact revenge will be plentiful.

 

As to the big business angle I am fully aware of the situation. Big Business exists to make profits & can be quite ruthless as to how it goes about that aim.

If a market is shrinking, create a new market.

 

For several years I worked for a subsidiary company of RCA. Amongst many operations which they were responsible for at that time was the cold war Early Warning System. RCA installed & maintained the electronic part of the systems in all their complex's from Greenland through the UK & into northern Europe & down to the Med.

The 'Balls' on the north Yorkshire moors were included.

So I have a little experience of how Americans operate on the business front. They were a good company to work for in my opinion but certainly ruthless. not everyone was as content with their attitude as I was.

 

That in the end is what it's all about, Trade, & always has been since before they transported silk, rugs & spices by camel train from the East.

 

I'm not so sure that a civil war had it occured in Iraq would have kept the UK or the US out of it at all.

 

Again, a surgical strike could never have worked unless that strike took all his relatives both in his government and in the Iraqi military with him which of course was completely and utterly impossible.

 

The mistake made after he was toppled was not retaining the bulk of the Iraqi army and police forces after cleaning out the top dogs loyal to Saddam. That might have resulted in a more stable scenario but from what I know the army and the police forces just simply melted away, deserted, gone to ground, whatever which often happens in defeat.

 

America became a military power through circumstance. The founding fathers had clearly stated that the new Republic was not in anyway to meddle in foreign wars or affairs. That belief and policy survived up to the first world war when Britain's and France's beleagoured leaders called ou for help against an enemy they were not being able to defeat after 3 years.

 

Post WW One the policy of non intervention in foreign affairs again established itself and it became known as Isolation.

 

Roosevelt risked impeachment by assisting a foreign nation at war with another by his policy of Lend Lease dduring Britain's greatest hour of need in 1940

 

When WW2 ended with Britain skint and the empire crumbling and the alarm over Stalin's grab for power in Eastern Europe it fell on the US to step up to the plate (when in fact Truman had planned to withdraw all US forces from Europe) and so started the Cold War. For the next 50 years the US extended an umbrella over western Europe and it was inevitable that it also become a very large military power just as Russia did.

 

I think Obama is the first of a new generation of leaders who is pragmatic enough to realize that trying to solve the problems of other countries is generally a losing proposition so that bodes well for the young generation who wont have to end up dead and maimed far from home

[mjw47]

Harleyman.

 

If the US & UK had been dragged into a civil war we at least would have had an excuse to be there, & not had to make one up. Also the hatred would have been far less as at least one side would have seen us as an Allie.

 

Additionally both countries are crafty enough to have both sides fight themselves to a standstill before joining in on the side of who most looked like winning.

Wouldn't have mattered even if it was Saddam who looked like coming out on top.

Once we were in there who knows what dreadful misfortune might have befallen the Hussein family? As you know from personal experience 'accidents' happen in the 'fog of war'.

It would also have reduced US & UK casualty's to a minimum.

 

'America became a military power through circumstances.'

 

You're dead right they did. The circumstances of realising just how powerful they were in comparison to the European powers worn down by years of war & in dept to America.

 

Lets face it it's more or less what all previous Empires have done.

 

Your idea that America are doing any of this out for unselfish altruistic reasons is complete bolony.

Americas umbrella over Europe was to ensure that first contact with the Soviets would be in Europe & not at home in the good old US of A. Why fight a full scale war which may go nuclear on your own soil when you can destroy some other poor buggers home?

 

Don't get me wrong I have no problem with America looking after it's own interests, that's the name of the game. Britain was brilliant at it for century's, it's what the big dog does.

 

But just as you don't like Mandela being praised for being a saint when he wasn't, I don't like people, or countries, being praised for self serving actions as though they had carried them out without thought of their own reward.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 21:42 ----------

 

This is clearly something you can't know, just like I can't know that one of the people that died would have caused the deaths of millions of innocent people if he had lived.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 18:08 ----------

 

 

How much did the war cost the USA and how much money have they made out of Iraqis oil.

 

My understanding was that the troops only stayed after the war to prevent civil war.

 

Your first point is verging on the realms of fantasy. You also don't know whether one of those who died wouldn't have ended world famine.

 

Your second point is missing the point. The war has cost the American TAXPAYER billions.

 

Corporate America on the other hand, has made Billions.

 

Ask Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld how they & their corporate pals are doing this Christmas.

 

As for civil war if the Americans hadn't been daft enough to disband the Iraqi police & army after the war they wouldn't have created the state of chaos which now exists.

[janie48]

I hope that my comments on him were not misinterpreted as disrespectful.

The complete man should always be shown. I don't go for those who like to whitewash over facts and reach a stage of hysterical adoration that places people in the category of one who walks on water. He did indeed suffer for his beliefs and his actions while a member of a terrorist organisation. He was of course inclined to be biased against America but he was an old Communist and so who could expect more? He never acknowledged for example that in his lifetime America had helped deliver Europe from a man who would have had no scruples whatsoever in including black people with Jews, Gypsies and anyone else who did not fit into his plans for an aryan master race. He could only see the negative side in that respect and wise men are supposed to see the whole picture. He also condemned Israel without condemning at the same time the inequaties suffered by women and girls in Moslem society.

 

Hero he was. Wise, not always. Human, very much so.

As with those further comments, I'm sure they won't have been.

[southcoast]

Maybe here it's different then. We have Jessie Jackson and the Reverend Al Sharpton ever ready to emerge from the woodwork and start throwing around accusations of racism and bias at the slightest provocation and it's bad for the media because so many tend to believe them and then they lose viewer ratings which eventually effects their ability to earn needed money from advertising.

 

Ever watched any American TV channel for any length of time? There's a commercial break every five minutes

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 18:29 ----------

 

 

Special Forces could never have eliminated Saddam. You're talking here about a country's leader surrounded by very well armed and trained guards, a government composed of many of his relatives with a big army and air force at it's disposal. Much different than some individual with no political power holed up in a compound.

 

As for the use of drones. The technology wasnt that developed back then as it is today and killing Saddam with a drone strike even had it been possible wouldn't have been the slightest use since as I mentioned earlier he had relatives in government as well as top ranking members of his military forces who would have just assumed power in his place

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 18:41 ----------

 

 

Perhaps if hezbollah and hamas stopped the practice of smuggling in arms hidden with shipments of food that might help improve the lot of the Palestinians but they wont. They insist on continuing a useless war that they can never hope to win and care little of the misery that goes with it.

 

Dont blame the Zionists... the real enemies of the Palestinians are Hebollah and Hamas

 

 

The thing is this,if the Israelis didn't have checkpoints and walls that stop the people from earning a living and allowed them to live life then there would be no need to smuggle would there.

You know all that ethnic cleansing is going to make people desperate,especially when they have been starved into action,until the Jews treat the Arabs with respect and accord them the right to their own land and to live in peace then they are going pay a price,Hezbollah and Hamas are simply doing all they can to resist the Israeli occupation.

[Harleyman]

Harleyman.

 

If the US & UK had been dragged into a civil war we at least would have had an excuse to be there, & not had to make one up. Also the hatred would have been far less as at least one side would have seen us as an Allie.

 

Additionally both countries are crafty enough to have both sides fight themselves to a standstill before joining in on the side of who most looked like winning.

Wouldn't have mattered even if it was Saddam who looked like coming out on top.

Once we were in there who knows what dreadful misfortune might have befallen the Hussein family? As you know from personal experience 'accidents' happen in the 'fog of war'.

It would also have reduced US & UK casualty's to a minimum.

 

'America became a military power through circumstances.'

 

You're dead right they did. The circumstances of realising just how powerful they were in comparison to the European powers worn down by years of war & in dept to America.

 

Lets face it it's more or less what all previous Empires have done.

 

Your idea that America are doing any of this out for unselfish altruistic reasons is complete bolony.

Americas umbrella over Europe was to ensure that first contact with the Soviets would be in Europe & not at home in the good old US of A. Why fight a full scale war which may go nuclear on your own soil when you can destroy some other poor buggers home?Don't get me wrong I have no problem with America looking after it's own interests, that's the name of the game. Britain was brilliant at it for century's, it's what the big dog does.

 

But just as you don't like Mandela being praised for being a saint when he wasn't, I don't like people, or countries, being praised for self serving actions as though they had carried them out without thought of their own reward.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 21:42 ----------

 

 

Your first point is verging on the realms of fantasy. You also don't know whether one of those who died wouldn't have ended world famine.

 

Your second point is missing the point. The war has cost the American TAXPAYER billions.

 

Corporate America on the other hand, has made Billions.

 

Ask Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld how they & their corporate pals are doing this Christmas.

 

As for civil war if the Americans hadn't been daft enough to disband the Iraqi police & army after the war they wouldn't have created the state of chaos which now exists.

 

Eh? Well of course first contact between NATO (including US troops) and Soviet troops would have taken place in Europe unless you believe that the Soviets would have constructed a huge armada, sailed it across 4,000 miles of ocean and then landed their troops on Long Island, New York

In fact the very first contact would have been in the divided city of Berlin and then a massive Soviet movement of tanks and artillery through the Fulda Gap in Germany.

 

Unlike me you never had the advantage of serving in the Armed Forces. I did national service from 1960-62. We were told back then that in the event of a war breaking out a Soviet advance would take place from East Germany and in all likelihood us being outnumbered, not only West Berlin would fall but that NATO Forces would also be forced back. We were also told that in that event nuclear weapons would be used by us against the Soviet Forces..... so there you have it.

 

Of course none of this was made common knowledge to the public at that time but we (my brigade) which was stationed in the far east were also duly informed by our commanders. Every serving member of the armed forces at that time no matter where stationed knew it.

 

Don't you realize also that nuclear missiles fired from Soviet territory had the range to reach American cities and that US missiles had the same capability to reach Russia? So where does all this "fight the war on someone else's territory and keep good old America safe" come from?

 

Anyway whatever you think and believe the fact that America through it's military might served to stop any Soviet aggressive move must remain a fact and nothing less.

 

---------- Post added 10-12-2013 at 23:40 ----------

 

[/b]

 

 

The thing is this,if the Israelis didn't have checkpoints and walls that stop the people from earning a living and allowed them to live life then there would be no need to smuggle would there.

You know all that ethnic cleansing is going to make people desperate,especially when they have been starved into action,until the Jews treat the Arabs with respect and accord them the right to their own land and to live in peace then they are going pay a price,Hezbollah and Hamas are simply doing all they can to resist the Israeli occupation.

 

A recognition by all Arab countries and also Iran of Israel's right to exist could have changed the course of history after the second Arab-Isareli war ended in 1973. From there on negotiations could well have resulted in Palestinians being given their land and even a Palestinian State coming into existeance.

 

President Carter almost achieved peace between Israel and the PLO but that still wasn' universal recognition by the Arab world.

Hezbollah and Hamas are simply for their own convenience continuing to fight a war on the backs of their own people. Only an end to hostile actions by both sides and serious negotiations will get anywhere.

 

Hezbollah and Hamas need their stupid heads knocked together. They'll get nowhere on the course they've chosen to take

[mjw47]

Harleyman. I have absolutely no idea why, but I kind of like you. You are however, without a shadow of a doubt, the most gullible, naive, believe whatever the authority's tell you, sap ( note the American terminology ) that I have ever encountered.

 

As quoted in a previous post 'We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Only our interests are eternal and perpetual'. Lord Palmerston 1784 to 1865 British Prime Minister 1859 to 1865.

 

Have those words tattooed just under Semper Fidelis on your arm. Because you will never hear more basic truth, as far as Governments go.

 

That sentiment is the ingrained truth & raison detre which determines every Government decision & action throughout the world.

And being realistic, why wouldn't it? Wouldn't any other course of action betray the inhabitants of the country concerned &, more importantly as far as politicians are concerned, risk deselection at the next election?

 

Incidentally, you know the way the US removed the threat of Britain by loaning it such an amount of money that it struggled to repay? Well China is doing the same to the US. America currently owes China in excess of 2 Trillion dollars & Americas overall national debt is over 16 trillion which exceeds the total economies of China ,the UK & Australia combined.

 

China is going for top dog status & you are right, when it happens people will probably realize that for all it's many faults, the US wasn't as bad as it's critics made out.

[Harleyman]

Harleyman. I have absolutely no idea why, but I kind of like you. You are however, without a shadow of a doubt, the most gullible, naive, believe whatever the authority's tell you, sap ( note the American terminology ) that I have ever encountered.

 

As quoted in a previous post 'We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Only our interests are eternal and perpetual'. Lord Palmerston 1784 to 1865 British Prime Minister 1859 to 1865.

 

Have those words tattooed just under Semper Fidelis on your arm. Because you will never hear more basic truth, as far as Governments go.

 

That sentiment is the ingrained truth & raison detre which determines every Government decision & action throughout the world.

And being realistic, why wouldn't it? Wouldn't any other course of action betray the inhabitants of the country concerned &, more importantly as far as politicians are concerned, risk deselection at the next election?Incidentally, you know the way the US removed the threat of Britain by loaning it such an amount of money that it struggled to repay? Well China is doing the same to the US. America currently owes China in excess of 2 Trillion dollars & Americas overall national debt is over 16 trillion which exceeds the total economies of China ,the UK & Australia combined.

 

China is going for top dog status & you are right, when it happens people will probably realize that for all it's many faults, the US wasn't as bad as it's critics made out.

 

Palmerston to my mind was the epitome of the arrogant head of a nation which was the mother country of a great big empire. Moreover he and Disraeli were Victorian warmongers. You want an example of a truly great Victorian Prime Minister? Try William Gladstone.

 

If you believe that such a thing as "eternal allies based on things other than cold common interests" do not exist then you are not taking into account the close ties that have existed between the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, the common ancestry, the shared culture, language, laws and institutions. American and the UK also shared much more than just an alliance of convenience. I dont need to go into any detail. The evidence is right there before your eyes every day. Your cold clinical outlook mixed with a fair amount of cynicism doen't hold much stock with me.

 

Canada for example had no reason to join Britain against Hitler. The world wasn't a global vollage back then. Canada was way out of reach and safe from Hitler's aircraft and war machine. It didnt need trade with Britain to survive. It had plenty south of it's border and enjoyed a standard of living and comfort equal to it's giant neighbor yet it sent it's youth to Europe to fight and die alongside their British cousins.

 

Roosevelt could have followed old man's Kennedy's advice amd abandoned Britain to Hitler. What would have been lost other than a friendly exchange of musical, literatature and movies basically? Very little in fact. Britain and the US were not the biggest trading partners by any means

After Pearl harbor the US could have concentrated the full force of it's manpower and war machine against Japan and after Japan's defeat easily signed some kind of permanent peace accord with Hitler who had no interest in acquiring North America as part of his Third Reich anyway and would have been happy to have also signed a trading agreement since he needed raw materials not readily available in Europe.

 

Dont forget too than many Americans had racial connections and family ties to Germany. The reason that Roosevelt decided on a policy of assistance to Britain was one of conscience. He valued the ties between the two countries and also saw Hitler as a menace and a warmonger

 

Palmerston's cold assessment of what constitutes an alliance falls far short of what actually does

[angos]

 

Your first point is verging on the realms of fantasy. You also don't know whether one of those who died wouldn't have ended world famine.

 

I'm happy that you now accept that predicting alternative realities is just fantasy, at least now you might think twice before doing it again when trying to support your stance.

 

Your second point is missing the point. The war has cost the American TAXPAYER billions.

 

Corporate America on the other hand, has made Billions.

 

 

Ask Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld how they & their corporate pals are doing this Christmas.

Who do you think pays most of the tax.

 

As for civil war if the Americans hadn't been daft enough to disband the Iraqi police & army after the war they wouldn't have created the state of chaos which now exists.

 

Was this the corrupt police and army that supported Saddam.