America's #1 Balance Bike Destination

America's #1 Balance Bike Destination
America's #1 Balance Bike Destination

27 March 2006

We Were Bred For War, It's In Our Genes

Another pearl encountered while reading Orson Scott Card's SHADOW OF THE GIANT:
"...Humanity is a breeding ground for ambition, for territorial competitors, for nations that do battle, and if the nations break down, then tribes, clans and households. We were bred for war, it's in our genes, and the only way to stop the bloodshed is to give one man the power to subdue all the others. All we can hope for is that it be a decent enough man that the peace will be better than the wars, and last longer..."

Who comes to mind after reading this passage? -General President Pervez Musharraf.

The word on the street is that the Bush administration is suggesting free elections to the Pakis to demonstrate their unflappable resolve to spread democracy, while from the other side of their mouths, they pray that he is re-elected and continues to control the unwashed masses. I stand firm in my belief that the Musharraf style of military leadership is required to keep peace among Pakistani [Muslims]- and that introducing democracy to a place where Islamic fundamentalism still reign supreme, would repeat a recent lapse in judgment by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. What if the Pakis elect a Koran thumping cleric wearing a turban and counting prayer beads? Think of who will be in control of Pakistan's nuclear warheads. So then, why is anyone even talking about elections in Pakistan? To create an excuse to invade them too?

Look at how wonderful a place Iraq has become since their dictator was removed and democracy was "installed". Let's not even go there... But it's hard to deny that Iraq was better off with pre-war Saddam than they are with post-war democracy. Diplomacy was not exhausted as of March 19, 2003. Saddam offered to meet with Bush repeatedly, and was dismissed without exception, because the decision to invade was a foregone conclusion.

As for Pakistan, leave well enough alone, and think about grooming a like minded secular military successor. -AT

6 comments:

metin said...

You said: "Look at how wonderful a place Iraq has become since their dictator was removed and democracy was "installed". Let's not even go there... But it's hard to deny that Iraq was better off with pre-war Saddam than they are with post-war democracy."

Do you really think the war in Iraq is/was about bringing democracy to Iraq?

Murat Altinbasak said...

Not Metin, not exactly, but it IS what Bush and Rice babble about whenever faced with a microphone.

It sickens me to hear such tripe about democracy. It's not a cure-all. For some societies, it's like prescribing arsenic.

metin said...

I think the reason we're there is EXACTLY that. In other words, a dictator has control over his people and country. But if we 'introduce' democracy, then all the factions, ethnicities, racial, and religious sects, will be busy tackling each other instead of the issues. I think the British called it: Divide and Conquer!

In the meantime, 'we' get control of the oil fields. I meant the oil companies and their cronies in the White House.

Would you expect anything less if we are to pursue 'our' interests??

Anonymous said...

I stand firm in my belief that the Musharraf style of military leadership is required to keep peace among Pakistani [Muslims]- and that introducing democracy to a place where Islamic fundamentalism still reign supreme, would repeat a recent lapse in judgment by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

You are 100% correct.

On a related note, without the threat of military intervention, where do you think Turkey would be politically? Clearly there is not the same level of Islamism, but it's worrisome to think of Turkey (a country that I love BTW) going down that path.

Anonymous said...

In the meantime, 'we' get control of the oil fields. I meant the oil companies and their cronies in the White House.

This is a tired old canard. If oil was our objective, why don't we now control the oil fields and profits? I think the Iraq policy has been a fiasco from the "get go," but oil was not our objective.

metin said...

I never said we don't control the oil fields and the profits nor am I opposed to it. I was merely suggesting a 'vaild' reason for us being in Iraq, as opposed to the 'WMD' fiasco. There's nothing wrong with being honest about our intent even if it means enhancement for our national interests.