Subject: RE: Uncle Tom Powell ?
From: Sean Draine (seandr@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed Dec 20 2000 - 15:32:28 GMT
Here's an equally 'detached' response.
Any suggestion that Powell is an Uncle Tom is based on ignorance. Powell has
spoken out in favor of things like affirmative action, civil rights for
minorities, and abortion rights. I don't expect he'll change his tune even
though it doesn't resonate well with the Republican Party platform. It's a
shame he wasn't a bit more generous to homosexual soldiers, but whatever.
Regarding his abilities as a general, which so far as I can tell have
nothing to do with his race, Powell was the key advocate of the Gulf War
'exit' strategy, which, in my estimation, you would have to be blind with
partisanship, patriotism, or vague and ill-fitting historical allusions not
to see as a dismal failure. Green party idealism aside, it's obvious the war
was soundly motivated - US interests had been directly threatened in the
short term, and would continue to be threatened over the long term unless
military action was taken. Yes, Powell succeeded in securing our short term
goals (big f***ing deal, given the incredible imbalance of force). Out of
fear, miscalculation, or naivete, Powell decided that economic sanctions,
inspections, and the endless policing of Iraq was preferable to conquering a
brutal regime that will forever be hostile to the west, and will forever try
to spread that hostility among its Islamic neighbors. Saddam Hussein has
succeeded Fidel Castro as chief US nose-thumber. Everyone, even the Bush
clan, knows this was a mistake.
The recent Balkan war was motivated by US interests in European stability
and human rights. We've intervened before on those grounds - I suppose you
consider those wars the vanitities of pygmies?
-Sean
P.S. Come clean, Scotty. Are you a devil's advocate, or a Republican/Tory?
-----Original Message-----
From: Scottie Bowman [mailto:rbowman@indigo.ie]
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 12:02 AM
To: bananafish@roughdraft.org
Subject: Uncle Tom Powell ?
For once, I write in a genuinely detached spirit
of enquiry.
I'm quite amazed by the uninhibited abuse being
heaped on General Powell. This is quite simply
the first time in several years membership of list servs
I've ever seen an American black man given such derisive
treatment. Is it his membership of the military that
neutralises the protective effect of his dark skin?
I'm never surprised by moral outrage from Canadians -
they're naturally much, much nicer & decenter in every
way than the rest of us - but I hadn't realised that Americans
could be roused to such fury by what most of us hereabouts
see in much the same way as Andy does: a successful, limited
war to reverse a blatant invasion, readjust local power balances
& underpin our own oil supplies. It had a sensible rationale
with realistic aims - as opposed to the more recent folly
in the Balkans where our true interests were not involved
& which WAS largely fuelled by the vanity of a pair of
political pygmies. (And who, unlike both Bush & Powell,
knew nothing of the reality of war.)
The Gulf was the kind of operation - often followed by
chronic skirmishing on the frontiers - that imperial powers
have had to execute throughout history. Since we Brits
have laid down the main weight of the white man's burden
I personally am very grateful to see it now taken up by
my American cousins.
Scottie B.
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 18:02:58 GMT