I am hoping this is an unsubstantiated news item. And i had to think twice before I posted it. But, since early 2005, there has been intense shuttle diplomacy between Washington, Tel Aviv, Ankara and NATO headquarters in Brussels. sf indymed
but, i am aware of waay increased chatter in ankara (many articles and reports in turkish papers) among generals and politicians. there is definatly strategic planning taking a place with al the military brass and defence dept. types from above mentioned countries.
i hope this madness never happens and sf indynews is worhless.
however, iran has turned on the enrichment process as of yesterday.
i am just afraid this administration pulls another one under the public nose.
A part of me wonders if the Bush Administration isn't thinking in terms of 500-1000 year future histories - Bush's famous quote about "history? who cares?" or whatever he said – and that anything they do now will sound, in 2550 AD, as irrelevant and uninteresting as the papal raids against the Albigensian Heresy, or pre-Westphalian wars no one ever hears about now.
Iran? What was that, some attack on the desert by Bush? Bush who? What was Iran?
Perhaps the "Crusade" Bush mentioned in 2001 is really only now beginning.
Genghis Khan annihilated entire cities, skinning people alive and reaching the foothills of Austria – Austria! – but no one protests against Genghis or passes laws to discredit him. In other words, no matter how horrific Genghis was, who cares?
Genghis who?
What I mean is that I think the Bush Administration takes this as a green light to just attack anything, do anything, go anywhere, conquer everything – no one will remember. If they do remember, they won't care. After a decade – maybe two decades – no one protests.
There's a bestselling book now saying Genghis Khan was a "visionary."
Bush in 2650 AD? Rumsfeld?
I'm sure their bombing plans are more advanced than we think.
Rome invades Germany? No one remembers. No one cares. Italy invades Ethiopia? That was last century. No one cares.
They'll invade Iran. Then 1000 years from now, no one will even know what "Iran" was. Or Bush. Or America. Or us. It will be accepted as a fact of history.
I think the Bush Administration is aware of this. There is nothing you can't get away with, if millennia are your timescale. It's called "history". "Making history".
But who knows. Maybe Iran will elect a liberal, and the hyper-masculine stand-off can finally end.
Good point - but what I mean is that no one will care in 1000 years. And, by that, I mean that you don't see people protesting in front of the Mongolian embassy for something that happened 500-600 years ago. Or in front of the Italian embassy because of Mussolini's Ethiopian campaign. I just mean that time takes the punch out of everything.
Of course I might not have a clue what I'm talking about, but it just seems that history absorbs all sorts of horrors, which are soon regularized, by narrative, as standard, accepted history. No questions asked. It's in a textbook somewhere. X invaded Y. Whole cities were sacked. You memorize it for a test but it means nothing. Soon you can't remember what they'd been fighting about. You pass the exam and forget. It's distant history.
My only real point is that if you think of history in these terms, as the great absorber, impersonal, almost fictional, free of a human face for all its suffering, then egregious acts of unbelievable violence will eventually be forgotten; and if you're a hawk against Iran and you think these things, then there's no telling what you might do.
Which in no way advocates or apologizes for nuclear war; it's rather to point out how easy the decision to wage such a war can be made, when you're thinking on a thousand-year timescale, or a divine timescale for that matter. And if Bush thinks the end of the world is coming soon anyway, then... Dig your bunker while you can. Tell your friends you love them. Go to Disneyworld.
I agree, with one expection I think that time or history continue to occur in the minds and stories of those who have been transgressed. Is there anything more true than the persisent of memory in the Middle East?
Do we truly believe that these people so easily forget their past as we do? Iran is a great example of this. No American will ever understand why the US Embassy was taken over by radical students in the 80s without reading more history. Until then it will only be an act of terrorism.
I do agree, and in fact almost offered my own counter-example, that the Middle East was still simmering over the Crusades, the Serbs over some battle 800 years ago, me over that burnt toast my mom once served me... but I would also add: pending further research, of course, I am not aware of deep-standing Irani-Mongolian anger, or Uzbek-Mongol tensions, still directed against Genghis Khan. Or some random Welsh guy who hates people from Rome because of the centurions who came through in 200AD... (There probably is such a person - but forgive me if I can't take him seriously).
The Iran hostage example is accurate, and totally right on; but it only goes back to the CIA and the 1940s. Or perhaps European colonialism, in which case the bar is set back another 50-60 years. Still: 100-120 years. Tops. (I don't think the Crusades, for instance, had a thing to do with taking hostages in the 1970s). That said, surely there was some king, Marduk or whomever, who screwed over the Tehranis in 1200BCE, maybe castrating everyone - but is there still resentment? It's not a rhetorical question; I don't know. How long does memory last? (That is a rhetorical question).
I really don't know. Obviously. I just think that anyone who feels they have eternity on their side will do something insane sooner or later. But is "something insane" nuking Iran, or is "something insane" deciding to restart your nuclear program when almost everyone in the world except for some shrieking homophobic fascists thinks it's a shite idea? Both presidents think they have god on their side. I just think we're screwed.
okay so maybe there is a half-life on memory, but I hear they still hate Alexander the Great! Let's just hope somebody will remember this exchange for the future.
then again I heard on NPR that a city in spain still celebrated the spanish cursades with an effigy of Muhammed--something about a parade of the Moors and Christians?
16 Comments
that article seems highly unsubstantiated to me. in any event, isn't turkey irrelevant for air strikes since we now 'own' iraq??
but, i am aware of waay increased chatter in ankara (many articles and reports in turkish papers) among generals and politicians. there is definatly strategic planning taking a place with al the military brass and defence dept. types from above mentioned countries.
i hope this madness never happens and sf indynews is worhless.
however, iran has turned on the enrichment process as of yesterday.
i am just afraid this administration pulls another one under the public nose.
A part of me wonders if the Bush Administration isn't thinking in terms of 500-1000 year future histories - Bush's famous quote about "history? who cares?" or whatever he said – and that anything they do now will sound, in 2550 AD, as irrelevant and uninteresting as the papal raids against the Albigensian Heresy, or pre-Westphalian wars no one ever hears about now.
Iran? What was that, some attack on the desert by Bush? Bush who? What was Iran?
Perhaps the "Crusade" Bush mentioned in 2001 is really only now beginning.
Genghis Khan annihilated entire cities, skinning people alive and reaching the foothills of Austria – Austria! – but no one protests against Genghis or passes laws to discredit him. In other words, no matter how horrific Genghis was, who cares?
Genghis who?
What I mean is that I think the Bush Administration takes this as a green light to just attack anything, do anything, go anywhere, conquer everything – no one will remember. If they do remember, they won't care. After a decade – maybe two decades – no one protests.
There's a bestselling book now saying Genghis Khan was a "visionary."
Bush in 2650 AD? Rumsfeld?
I'm sure their bombing plans are more advanced than we think.
Rome invades Germany? No one remembers. No one cares. Italy invades Ethiopia? That was last century. No one cares.
They'll invade Iran. Then 1000 years from now, no one will even know what "Iran" was. Or Bush. Or America. Or us. It will be accepted as a fact of history.
I think the Bush Administration is aware of this. There is nothing you can't get away with, if millennia are your timescale. It's called "history". "Making history".
But who knows. Maybe Iran will elect a liberal, and the hyper-masculine stand-off can finally end.
Or America will elect a liberal, of course, and the war posturing can end.
America's long war begins.
nice knowin y'all
its funny that someone runs through all types of history and then says nobody will remember...
Good point - but what I mean is that no one will care in 1000 years. And, by that, I mean that you don't see people protesting in front of the Mongolian embassy for something that happened 500-600 years ago. Or in front of the Italian embassy because of Mussolini's Ethiopian campaign. I just mean that time takes the punch out of everything.
Of course I might not have a clue what I'm talking about, but it just seems that history absorbs all sorts of horrors, which are soon regularized, by narrative, as standard, accepted history. No questions asked. It's in a textbook somewhere. X invaded Y. Whole cities were sacked. You memorize it for a test but it means nothing. Soon you can't remember what they'd been fighting about. You pass the exam and forget. It's distant history.
My only real point is that if you think of history in these terms, as the great absorber, impersonal, almost fictional, free of a human face for all its suffering, then egregious acts of unbelievable violence will eventually be forgotten; and if you're a hawk against Iran and you think these things, then there's no telling what you might do.
Which in no way advocates or apologizes for nuclear war; it's rather to point out how easy the decision to wage such a war can be made, when you're thinking on a thousand-year timescale, or a divine timescale for that matter. And if Bush thinks the end of the world is coming soon anyway, then... Dig your bunker while you can. Tell your friends you love them. Go to Disneyworld.
I agree, with one expection I think that time or history continue to occur in the minds and stories of those who have been transgressed. Is there anything more true than the persisent of memory in the Middle East?
Do we truly believe that these people so easily forget their past as we do? Iran is a great example of this. No American will ever understand why the US Embassy was taken over by radical students in the 80s without reading more history. Until then it will only be an act of terrorism.
I do agree, and in fact almost offered my own counter-example, that the Middle East was still simmering over the Crusades, the Serbs over some battle 800 years ago, me over that burnt toast my mom once served me... but I would also add: pending further research, of course, I am not aware of deep-standing Irani-Mongolian anger, or Uzbek-Mongol tensions, still directed against Genghis Khan. Or some random Welsh guy who hates people from Rome because of the centurions who came through in 200AD... (There probably is such a person - but forgive me if I can't take him seriously).
The Iran hostage example is accurate, and totally right on; but it only goes back to the CIA and the 1940s. Or perhaps European colonialism, in which case the bar is set back another 50-60 years. Still: 100-120 years. Tops. (I don't think the Crusades, for instance, had a thing to do with taking hostages in the 1970s). That said, surely there was some king, Marduk or whomever, who screwed over the Tehranis in 1200BCE, maybe castrating everyone - but is there still resentment? It's not a rhetorical question; I don't know. How long does memory last? (That is a rhetorical question).
I really don't know. Obviously. I just think that anyone who feels they have eternity on their side will do something insane sooner or later. But is "something insane" nuking Iran, or is "something insane" deciding to restart your nuclear program when almost everyone in the world except for some shrieking homophobic fascists thinks it's a shite idea? Both presidents think they have god on their side. I just think we're screwed.
okay so maybe there is a half-life on memory, but I hear they still hate Alexander the Great! Let's just hope somebody will remember this exchange for the future.
then again I heard on NPR that a city in spain still celebrated the spanish cursades with an effigy of Muhammed--something about a parade of the Moors and Christians?
Frank Gehry started that in Bilbao.
isn't Gehry a Genghis Khan ancestor?
Yup: and there's still etymological evidence... Ge-(ng)h-(is)-ry... The name of his next building in fact, a high-end apartment in Queens.
now I understand! Its all about the relationship between the smooth space of capitalism, the war machine, and gehry's architecture.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.