|
obviously, lebell, if you are predisposed to support this war, then rationalizing the consequences, even the foulest ones (torture--the system of undefinite detentions without trial at lovely country-club settings like guantanamo--they are linked if you accept the administration's hogwash about this all being elements of the "war on terror")...
what i was asking about was what i see as the a motive for the thread itself--not just ok so there are some good things happening in the context of an illegal and illegitimate occupation--
but then you probably could have said the same of the belgian congo during the period when the belgians were doing brutal, horrific things to communities that did not make their rubber quota. for example--but elsewhere, there were nice buildings being put up and i am sure that the even the belgians could have found local people who would have been willing to argue on camera (*questions of motive never come up on camera if the person posing the question, and the apparatus distrubuting the clips, each have no interest in posing them) that their presence was not the wholesale catastrophe that anyone else would see in it--
but whatever--the question is about substituting this happyface list of Great Accomplishments on the part of the occupation for question about the legitimacy of the occupation.
this objection has been raised a number of times in the thread already and never gets an actual response. so i thought it time to force the matter.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|