For or against war [Archive] - Sculpture Community

Stevem

08-27-2005, 07:54 PM

Sorry Guys, I have to disagree! Maybe you all will want to call me ignorant or what ever, but I always have been a little different, I suppose. I lost people in the trade towers. I know that we were suppose to have gone in over there under the threat of iminent danger, "WMD'S". And according to the media we have found no such thing. However: I have to wonder when we found enough seran gas to kill over a million people how that wasn't considered enough to be "WMD'S". I don't know about you but I still remember those people in the trade towers! We didn't ask for this, But we sure can't run and hide! No I don't completely agree with all the decisions that have taken place during this war. And I know people are going to say, " Iraq didn't blow up those buildings." " Thats not even related!" Let's not kid our selfs. This is all related! Sadam was paying the families of suicide bombers for attacking us. If that's not for trying to dismantle the United States, then I don't know what is. Sadam allowed Al-qaeda to set up terrorist camps in Iraq. Not to mention that he him self was a terrorist! Just ask a kurd! I read an intresting book by General Tommy Franks, entitled "American Soilder". Has a lot of insight that you won't hear from our media. I invite you to check it out. If that doesn't give you a little different perspective on what is happpening, maybe atleast you might be able to understand a little more to the insight of me. I am relatively new to this forum and I hope I don't offend anyone with these coments,I have already enjoyed the helpful advice from bluedogshuz and Sculptor, but I had to speak my piece to sound off for the other side. One thing is for certain! This should never be treated as another Vietnam! We have soilders over there that are doing there duty for this country. We as a population should never look down in disdain upon these fine men and women. Alot of them have made the ultimate sacrifice so we may be able to sit here in front of our computers and do just what we are doing now! being able to discuss freely our differences of opinions. So no matter what our opinions of this war may be. Lets give our men and women in the armed services a big warm welcome when they get home. Let's make sure this does not turn into another "Vietnam".

God Bless America!
Steve Miller

sculptr97

08-28-2005, 12:51 AM

Is freedom worth sharing? Is it a good thing to liberate millions held captive to a ruthless Iraqi theocrate dictator? As an artist I enjoy the freedom I have to speak out for or against my government. A government who has from time to time screwed things up. How about you? No one could ever say the things you are saying about your president in the former Iraq, or the consequences would be swift and brutal to you and your family. But I get the feeling you do not care that much about the Iraqis. If we "cut our losses" and leave what will fill the void? Likely more of the same. There are many radical extremeists in that part of the world (the 9-11 terrorists came from different middle east countries), terrorism is the world's greatest threat now not the Bush Administration. Clinton did not adequately address the growing threat of terrorism on his watch of eight years he obviously did not want to risk a loss in the polls for the freedom and security of the country. We need to be engaged in this part of the world even if it is unpopular or difficult. America cannot afford to be viewed as a paper tiger. You make a great point although about the numbers of deaths in this country from a variety of causes. We should hear more outrage and sorrow for the high death rate of this or that. But the media would rather focus on the casualties in Iraq. Incidently, the loss of 50 some thousand soldiers in Vietnam was far worse. There is a purpose in our being there, and good things are happening(people vote and actually have a choice when they go to the polls in Iraq now). We are, and have been, making great progress in the war on terror. Some people just have a great big axe to grind with Bush because he is a "bible believer" etc. We should bring some sense of perspective to the bigger picture. The only reason Saddam didn't use WMD's for terrorism is because he didn't have them any more, at least not in the quantity that he was seeking. This was a colossal error of the CIA's, in that we and other intellegence agencies around the world were convinced that he did. But guess who allowed him to kick the UN monitors out of the country back in 98? Yes we could have known for sure if he actually had them or not. The bigger point is that he was seeking them and that he would have used them. This is why we must remain engaged militarily as a show of strength and resolve to those who feed on weakness and governments of the world who can only issue threats as deterent.

Stevem

08-28-2005, 08:34 AM

This is not OUR problem So hey, let's just turn our back on the human population as a whole.

Annual Worldwide Deaths
Hunger under 5 Oxfam 15.0 million
Water Disease 5.0 million
Motor Vehicle 50,000.

Then we will appear better to the whole World. Then we can all join arms around a big camp fire an sing coom by ya.. What a great place that would be! Or better yet! Why don't we go down to Crawford Texas and hold a rallie? Wow! the things our freedom allows us to do!

bluedogshuz

08-28-2005, 10:04 AM

You would think we could look back at what HAS happened with 20/20 vision. My point is we (US) are not getting the full story by OUR government because OUR MEDIA is dysfunctional. I'm not getting into a pissing match of Bush vs Clinton. Clinton said we needed to do something about Iraq, it was unpopular and he didn't go in because he didn't see a way out anymore then Bush senior. Heck, Clinton bombed the heck out of Iraq, remember? My point is we were LIED TO BY OUR GOVERNMENT AGAIN! A lie is a lie. Ther is no coalition of the willing. Sure Saddam is a bastard but how come we didn't wait for world consensus before TAKING OVER A COUNTRY? This war is a mistake. There are 3 factions vieying for power and we may end up with 3 Iraqs. We screwed up and now are engaged in a civil war between 3 factions. We should leave now, tell the world we screwed up by interviening without any support, tell the world we (US) lied and stop doing tihs!! We are on a very dangerous path. We probably won't go into N.Korea, they kicked our butts once already. My theory is we are "doing" Iraq for the Arabs. I just wish our country would come clean and stop being contractors of death. I respect our troops, lets respect them. Tell them the truth and bring them home. I was proud to lay my life on the line, but I'm telling you this whole thing smells of Vietnam. Vietnamization= Iraqi military. The Arabs need to belly up to the bar just like England and level with the world!!

bluedogshuz

08-28-2005, 12:49 PM

I just go done stuccoing a wall so now I feel less mad. As I worked I thought about the Arab/US connection. Let me see Arabians..English..Americans..oil?
I am kind of paranoid by nature and often over thunk things... Could it be that this Nation is simply becoming thugs for hire? Are we simply a country that says "give me what I want and nobody gets hurt?" or "ya need protection? Its gonna cost!" I'm serious because yes Randall I see bright young faces going to war and coffins coming back. And on a sculptural note, I went to the ISC conference in DC years ago (what fun) I met a real nice guy to hang with and he told me to go see the VN memorial (Mia Lin) I have never been so moved in my intire life, seeing my friends name (the guy that was going to be a Vetenarian) but felt compelled as I to "fight for our Country" on that wall I cried real hard. I was inspired by the words on the Lincoln Memorial before I went to Nam, Lincoln (Chester French). We have symbols, we are symbol makers and we have an obligation to find out what is going on... I know what these young Women and Men are thinking as they go to war... I want our Country to come clean and tell us WHY WE ARE THERE? :confused:

jvc stone

08-28-2005, 02:04 PM

Well folks,
this is a subject that will never have total agreement. But I would like to throw my 2 cents into the pot.
( By the way, I am a VietNam veteran)

I agree that Blues feeling that this mess smells an awful lot like the mess of thirty years ago is right on target. (And it is real interesting that the companies that reaped huge no bid contracts in VietNam, are basically the same that are doing so today in Iraq. Different names, but check the families that control the boards.) Our escalating involvement in VietNam was based on lie after lie. Our invasion of Iraq was based on lies, and as each lie was exposed another reared up to take it's place. That's the thing about lying--always requires more lies until even the lier doesn't know the truth any more.

I for one am sick of hearing the party line that we are in Iraq because of the 9=11 attacks, and to make the world safe from terror. Total BS.
9-11 was carried out mostly by Saudies under the command of a Saudi (who I might add we armed and financed when he was fighting Russians in Afganistan). Interestingly enough, the Bush family and the Saudi royal Family have close ties going back at least 3 generations, and during the no fly time after 9-11, the only planes in the air other than military, were carrying Saudi nationals out of the country.Coincidence I suppose. We attacked Afganistan to get Bin Laden. and FAILED. But that was because Iraq was the target all along (from the first days of the administration), and wether we actually got Bin Laden or not was just incidental. We need another base of operation in the mid east since things are getting a little shaky in Saudi Arabia. Period. Iraq was the easiest to whip up on without fear of them fighting back. (so we thought eh?)
Ok, now sculptor 97.
That part of the world is full of dictators, some theocratic, some not (Saddam was anything but theocratic). "Democracy" has never been a part of their cultural traditions. The above mentioned Saudi Royal family comes to mind. Remember the Shaw of Iran. He was one of our puppets until the people of Iran ran him off. So then we propped a two bit dictator named Saddam in Iraq funding and supplying him with all sorts of weapons (gas included) so he could wage war against Iran. Of course we have done that sort of thing all over the world, and do our best including assassination (did you hear Pat Robertson the other day??) to destabilize any country whoes government we cannot bullie. While we give lip service to making the world safe for democracy, the fact is true democracy scares the hell out of the powers that be. We just can't have PEOPLE all over the world determining their own destinies.
Terrorism has always been with us, and the current "war on Terror is as much of a sham as the "War on drugs" has been. I might remind you that King George 3 concidered the guys who tossed all that tea into Boston harbor, an hid behind trees to ingage his royal troops, a band of terrorists. It does not matter how many years we remain in Iraq. We had troops dying in Vietnam for 16 -17 years. The end result will be much the same. Our chosen puppet government will not be able to resist the will of the people, (or it will be another Saddam), civil war will sort things out, and all those lives will have been lost for naught- same as all those names on a black granite wall in DC. I too hope and pray that that this time things are different for the troops. Hopefully the people of this country have learned that no matter how unpopular the war is, the boys (and now girls) fighting it have nothing to do with policy. Some are willing participants, some are not, but it is not their fault we are there.. We can honor their sacrifices, while at the same time condemming those who's policies and decisions have placed them in harms way. And the administration needs to support the troops with more than lip service. VA budget shortfalls are increasing, but could be fixed with what the war is costing per week. Returning veterans are not being given the help they need by the government that created those needs, and veterans of past conflicts are losing what they have worked so hard to gain. We as citizens of this great nation have an obligation to speak out when we see our leaders drift off course. Otherwise we will no longer be a free people. We have a great constitution. Our elected leaders need to do more than protect and defend it. They need to read, understand, and follow it.
So much good could be done both here at home and around the world with the amounts of money being wasted daily. dealing with hungar, and endemic illness, and lack of educational oportunities. That is what will curtail terrorism. Our policies only encouage such activity and absolutly no good for no one.

Guess that was maybe a dimes worth ;)
JVC

Stevem

08-28-2005, 07:28 PM

Liberal blinders are a beautiful thing! I believe I'll just bow out of this thread as it is not helpful to anyone or anything. A poll is one thing a type written argument is another.

sculptorsam

08-28-2005, 08:15 PM

I'm not a praying man, but for all those in the New Orleans area, my prayers go out to you. As I read reports of 100k left behind to ride out the storm because they're too poor to evacuate themselves, I thought to myself, "why isn't the National Guard down there evacating them? It seems like that's exactly the sort of thing they train for." That's right, it's because they're across the world occupying a foreign country that was no threat to us. They did not decide to go themselves, they are obeying, with honor, the orders of the civilian policy makers. Tell me again about liberal blinders, as I contemplate the massive burials, debt and rebuilding that will have to be undertaken in our own strained country?

jvc stone

08-28-2005, 08:55 PM

Liberal blinders are a beautiful thing! .

One question Steve-- When did liberal become such a dirty word. If it weren't for liberal thinkers like Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, we wouldn't have the country we have today. In fact, if it weren't for liberal thinkers throughout history, we would probably still be living in caves..
And, BTW, I ain't no liberal-- never voted for a democrat in my life. Do like what the libertarian party stands for though.
JVC

bluedogshuz

08-29-2005, 10:17 AM

4 more years... at least... according to the military... if this ain't VietNam I'm not sittin here

sculptor

08-29-2005, 11:24 AM

...
Our Government has a history of violence, starting with trading with the native indians and giving them smallpox infected blankets in the first Government condoned bioterrorism designed to wipe them out with diseases and steal their land.....

One small clarification:
The smallpox blankets idea was via the British General Amherst...(Baron Jeffrey Amherst...became a British Field Marshal)

Though the U.S.A. ain't exactly always been the good guys...

Also...one of the reasons for our world military and banking activities may be to constantly create generations of enemies, so whenever the police state gurus of our covernment need one, they can trot out a new enemy du jour....claim them as a scapegoat and utilize their activities to abrogate our freedoms.

(and you thought you were paranoid?)...
ever think that maybe big oil, old royalty, and associated corporations are in control of our government?--Gore-Bush election we had a choice of one candidate whose family fortune is with Oxidental petroleum and whose ancestry derives from Charlemain---and the other-texas oil and the british peerage.....oil and royalty...
Forget the silly claim that this is a democracy(never was, never will be).
This ain't even a shadow of a representative government and, bottom line, our opinions as individuals simply don't matter......

When Bush took over---oil was near $10/bbl and diesel was $1.19----now oil's over 68 and fuel is over 2.50------
Great job George-----Thanx a bunch

whither hence?

rod

ps
any Detroiters out ther have a copy of Frost Music by The Frost (circa 1969)which you could copy to cd for me?
someone kited mine and whenever I see anything about Mobile--I think of their "back seat love affair" song.

Bill Harsey

08-30-2005, 01:56 PM

Interesting discussion.

Just some points to ponder.

We do not have a war on terrorism. Terrorism is a tool used by insurgents.

A very large factor in the climbing cost of oil is the extraordinary industrial growth of China that is building industries and demanding resources at an unprecendated rate.

If everyone becomes an artist who will do the work?

Bill Harsey

08-30-2005, 06:23 PM

continuing...
Stevem,
You make a valid point that there are strong connections between Iraq and
Al Qaeda.
When the town of Sargat, Iraq was captured it was found to be the largest existing terrorist training camp after the Taliban was broken up in Afghanistan.

The mainstream media never did print what was found there but the story was broken by Linda Robinson, who is a senior writer for U.S. News and World Report, in her book "Masters of Chaos".

Bill Harsey

08-30-2005, 10:18 PM

Continued.
To all the folks here, I am making no attempt to impress people or sell something at this website. I have more paying work than I can get to in a lifetime already. What I do have to offer is a unique personal insight into some matters being discussed on this website that few who work with their hands and hopefully minds, will ever be exposed to.

I think for myself and am considered fiercely independant by those I work for both in the government and privately owned business.

What has my piqued my curiosity is that whenever I post here, few if any respond.

If I have offended by my presence here, please advise and help me erase all evidence of my being here.

Please note I have used my real name and am easily tracked.

Respectfully Remaining,
Bill Harsey

Araich

08-31-2005, 05:37 AM

Hi Bill, I'm not about to be drawn into this discussion but I would say that you're most welcome here and that I have followed your posts with interest (stainless to corten etc).

It's just possible that this thread has just run it's course, and we can get back to talking about the art of living as sculptors.

kathleenfen

08-31-2005, 07:01 AM

My own perspective is that there are much worse things than death and death in war....there is war at home in families everywhere...it's difficult to look further without correcting the seed problems first.

oddist

08-31-2005, 07:09 AM

Jamo

08-31-2005, 09:17 AM

Don't use your real name the U.S government is tracking offenders like you Bill :) I'm just joking I would like to join Araich in making you feel welcome. I haven't read anything offensive from you yet :) As for the war i don't want to get into it either however making sculptures to memorialize wars thats another thing. I hear they melted down the statue of saddam that they yanked down with a bradley fighting vehicle and made a weeping U.S soldier.

Bill Harsey

08-31-2005, 12:04 PM

I have been pondering your points...

War on Terrorism? True..It is a tool..The "war" (poor use of a word) should be against ideology that leads one to become a terrorist (also spelled "terrist" by way of pronunciation). These ideologies come in all forms..

Europe has suffered from high oil prices forever. They deal with it. Oil will not last forever but some are determined to get the last dollar, or euro, or peso, et. al. out of it... China's demand for oil did not occur overnight. However, China's affect on oil prices may be due to reasons beyond our knowledge. There are a lot of secrets, or should I say--"Politics." Or, is the media just not reporting it all?

If we all became artists? Are you insinuating artists don't work? ;) Actually, I was using the word metaphorically for those that dislikes war and I really should not have been so presumptuous as to speak so broadly..

Terrorist connection? How come the media is not reporting on events like this? Why doe's one have to buy a book after the fact to learn what was going on? This is a real-time world now. Or did I just miss this item all-together? The relevance to reasons leading to terrorism and responsibility escape me though.

Lots of questions that probably will go unanswered and even if so, may not be satiating.

I am firmly against all war..but mankind just wont stop.
Artists are some of the hardest working people I've ever known. They have to be or they don't make it. When I made that post I was referring to the resource providing communities like farmers and such.

The media chooses what stories they want to run with. Neither of us can influence this very much.

About relevance (and I might be missing your question) the reason I brought up Sargat, Iraq is that when United States Special Forces ODA 081 finished their business there the evidence they found pointed strongly to experimentation with the making and use of chemical weapons. This places Al Qaeda operating a major training site inside Iraq learning to do very bad things.

Being firmly against war is the correct place to be. I know many in military special operations who would agree but there may be times when we have no choice.

Araich

08-31-2005, 05:00 PM

I hear they melted down the statue of saddam that they yanked down with a bradley fighting vehicle and made a weeping U.S soldier.
Tell me that isn't true - please.

Jamo

08-31-2005, 05:57 PM

I read an article in a magazine an iraqi sculptor made the piece and it is of a U.S soldier kneeling and a little girl with her hand on his shoulder made from the same broze that saddam was made from. I wish I could post a picture of it but I saw it in a magazine I'll do a search see if I can find it

Jamo

08-31-2005, 06:04 PM

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37545 here it is. that was pretty easy to find but this is it. I think the idea of a sculpture being made from the same bronze and turned into something in memorial for the war
a very powerful concept. However this piece makes it cheesy and loses my interest in the concept.

bluedogshuz

08-31-2005, 06:10 PM

Yes please post it as I am too dumb! I did find it on google or snoggle. It is actually very respectful of the US soldier and shows a little girl trying to comfort a troop that had lost a comrade.

Bill Harsey

08-31-2005, 08:33 PM

Iraq has a tradition of making sculpture and is one of the very few Muslim countries that has allowed the use of the human form in art.
Yes, I realize most if not all of the work was focused on images of the leader but at least is was still work.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong in my opening statement here.

Arrow

08-31-2005, 08:49 PM

"However this piece makes it cheesy and loses my interest in the concept."
Jamo

I agree completely. Nice concept, but horrid sculpture. Maybe if they cut out the little girl and placed the entire sculpture in a outdoor setting. However I would rather have seen the Saddam bronze head turned into a giant planter.

Jamo

08-31-2005, 09:00 PM

I am not well versed in Islam however I think that its foundations are the same as Judaism and christianity. Ie: Muslims believe in the Ten commandments. One of the commandments pertains to not making any graven images. I think this is why there is a lack of figurative work from this culture. As a result we have seen some of the most beautiful geometric designs and artwork based in pure mathmatical concepts. It is very interesting work and very old work as well. I would love for someone to give us some perspective into this area.

Bill Harsey

08-31-2005, 09:12 PM

Jamo,
Yes the very fine and extraordinary geometric forms done by the Muslim artists are said to be done to help one contemplate infinity.
Private art in Muslim communities does use the human form but in the mosques or other public places it is not seen for the reason you mention. This is what made Iraq a little unusual with all the statuary of Saddam.

Again, If I'm wrong I want correction.

Stevem

08-31-2005, 09:18 PM

WHAT IS THIS? You mean they all don't hate us infedels?

bluedogshuz

09-01-2005, 10:17 AM

It is rather amaturish I agree. I am also not sure it was "heart felt" or more pandering. Was this the guy that had been making Saddam sculptures? I know those guys hated him especially if they didn't get him right they could be beheaded, now thats working under the gun!!! We have a "staged piece done in front of a fire station of two children playing. It was done by an individual with questionable cridentials. The piece is bonded bronze and is already flaking and looks horrible after 2 years. Anyone know what might cause that? I hate the piece (hate is a strong word but I do).

Stevem

09-01-2005, 01:16 PM

Some people spray bronze powder on top of cast resin to get a bronze effect. If the resin isn't prepped correctly you will get chipping and flaking. It's best to cold cast bronze by mixing the bronze powder in with the resin or atleast do a reverse layup with a gel coat and bronze in the mold prior to back filling with a resin.

Steve

bluedogshuz

09-01-2005, 04:32 PM

Steve is a sealer required on cold cast? I am going to take a closer look at the piece maybe I can get the city to $ for me to restore. Even though I think its ugly, work is work!

oddist

09-01-2005, 05:48 PM

And from the other side???This sculpture???http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0615/p07s01-woiq.html

bluedogshuz

09-01-2005, 05:57 PM

Good post Oddist. So the artist in Iraq see Americans as destroyers, hmmm...

Jamo

09-01-2005, 06:15 PM

I don't think the pentagon would be as quick to show everyone this artwork or have it displayed on a circuit across the country.

sculptor

09-01-2005, 06:29 PM

our military is best at killing people and blowing things up

we're in their country and (usually) don't shoot each other nor blow up our own things

so they look at us as destroyers

small wonder

.................................................. .
and---on to sealing "bonded bronze"

yes seal it----beware of the rebuild, sand or gouge something first-----bonded bronze is a very wide definitive term which has a range in quality from high to none
if it is just a surface coat that if flaking, and there is a sturdy and thick gellcoat holding the bronze powders then a stiff brushing---powerwashing--or whatever will bring out the gellcoat----then touch it up with a like material after a light sanding---then seal all
I often seal with several coats of clear lacquer----planning on it being sacrificial

eg: mermaid (http://www.sculpture.net/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=1118)
and Lynn also posted in here under thread patination

rod
sculptor (http://home.mindspring.com/~mandali/index.html)

Jamo

09-01-2005, 06:34 PM

The relief pieces are mine and are made from cold cast bronze I would think a surface coating of sprayed bronze on top of something would just be of poorer quality.
http://photobucket.com/albums/y94/p93mbm/Other%20Pictures/

Bill Harsey

09-01-2005, 07:32 PM

I don't think the pentagon would be as quick to show everyone this artwork or have it displayed on a circuit across the country.
Interesting that the Iraqi artist had the freedom to do the work.

Stevem

09-01-2005, 10:43 PM

Alot of times what you run into on flaking bronze is where who oever did the surfacing of the object doesn't get the release agent off completely. Therefore you don't get correct adhesion.

bluedogshuz -"Steve is a sealer required on cold cast? I am going to take a "closer look at the piece maybe I can get the city to $ for me to restore.

A good self etching primer is a good foundation to use on any plastic (resin type substance). It is a good idea to clean the piece really good with a solvent before hand. It sounds like what you could have is called a dusting. That is where someone will actually as (the term suggests) just spray a dust coating of bronze on the cast. This can vary in material used but it is still the same opperation. I have seen where people will actually mix bronze powder with shellac or a clear paint (maybe laquer all the way to urethane)

hope this is of some help.
Steve

Stevem

09-01-2005, 10:48 PM

Interesting that the Iraqi artist had the freedom to do the work.

It certainly is Bill! I don't suspect that they would have been held in very high regard if they had tried that when "So Damn Insane" was in power. I guess there are strains in the development of democracy. Then again are they making any memorials for David Pearl or Nick Berg or any of the others?

oddist

09-01-2005, 11:24 PM

I'm not sure this applies but, on making memorials...don't forget this thread was started by someone saying they were "experiencing a moral dilemma."

For whom are memorials being made and by who?

Bill Harsey

09-02-2005, 02:20 AM

I'm not sure this applies but, on making memorials...don't forget this thread was started by someone saying they were "experiencing a moral dilemma."

For whom are memorials being made and by who?
Your right.
Going back to the original moral dilemna, Vietnam was a very complicated war and there is light being shown on the history of North Vietnam and the involvement of China that is interesting. They played the game very well too.
I have a couple books to recommend written by a friend of mine, John L. Plaster, who was there. let me find them in the morning to get the titles correct.
They are absolutely worth reading to get a better perspective on what went on there because it relates to what's going on now.

The other topic, I have no experience with bonded bronze but since plastics or polymers are used, wouldn't they be subject to breaking down with UV radiation from the sun?
Even the best sailboats and aircraft ( Lancair.com ) made with plastics have this problem and that's why they are painted white for maximum UV reflection.

bluedogshuz

09-02-2005, 09:01 AM

Thank you all for your suggestions regarding the bonded bronze. I will get on it and see if I am able to repair the pieces. As for my moral dillema all the comments here have helped me to think deeper regarding our involvement in Iraq and our military in general. I think am clear on several things:
1. We were lied to as to why we were going in and I think many of us already knew that..
2. It was not Afganistan and there was not a clear connection between the arbitouers of distruction that attacked our country.
3. The US should not be gun dealers and guns for hire for the rest of the world. It is simply immoral.
4. Our military and our sons and daughters should not be dying for the reasons they are. Our military should be used only to defend our country basically. That is morally right. Since post WW2 we have been involved in countless misadventures. US has obviously taken a leadership role in world affairs but the US needs to listen and participate with other countries when there are human rights being violated.
If I am hopelessly misguided in my thinking please let me know.

ironman

09-02-2005, 10:39 AM

Our gov't. knew there were NO WMD's and they also knew that Sadaam wasn't trying to obtain weapons grade plutonium!
We should not be in Iraq.
I thought Nixon was bad
Then we got Reagan, he made Nixon look good.
Now we've got Bush, he's making Reagan look good.
Words cannot describe the level of incompetence of this administration.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al should be impeached, fired, run out of town, whatever!
And now we've got the Gulf coast.
Why is the response so slow?
Because the Army reserve, the Nat'l guard (who were never intended to be in war except in an emergency) and there equipment are in Iraq, when they should have been here and mobilized to help with this disaster.
Where is the leadership of this country?
I think that this administration is the worst and most incompetent that this country has ever had!
GET OUT OF IRAQ------------------NOW!

Bill Harsey

09-02-2005, 10:50 AM

Bluedogshuz,
I wish you lived a little closer so I could buy you a drink of your choice because I respect your point of view. I'll go on the record as owing you one if we meet.
We are probably not going to agree here and that's just how things are.

There is strong evidence of a link between the leadership of Iraq and the terrorism that has hit us. The media won't touch the story because it doesn't suit their purpose.

Years after the Vietnam war was over the outside communist leaders who supplied North Vietnam with all it's war fighting capability (ordnance, intel., logistics, training, money) admit how careful they were to make it look like it was an internal conflict, that is simply a war within Vietnam between it's peoples. This admitted ruse was critical to the communist success because it is how they shaped world opinion via the media.

The communist war leaders of Vietnam have since stated that they were losing the war in Vietnam and won only with the aid of the American media that would not report what was really happening.

These facts are not in dispute but few have heard them.

Little has changed in the popular media.

bluedogshuz

09-02-2005, 11:36 AM

sculptor

09-02-2005, 12:19 PM

freedom, democracy, morality, just words

In a truely free society-polity, if you didn't agree with the government, you could choose to not fight for nor support them
remember the draft-----"fight for us or go to jail" (maybe a tad better'n Sadam's "fight or die or watch your family get tortured")
ever try not paying your taxes?

we have no moral superiority
we have no democracy
we have ever more limited freedoms

We have the freedom to pay 2.5 x more for medical care of anywhere else on this planet--while having higher infant mortality, shorter lifespans, and the lowest percapita # of doctors of any other western industrialized nation.
We have the freedom to watch the news while our screaming warbirds rain death and destruction on people all over the third world(usually on people of non-european decent)
We have the freedom to watch as monied interest whittle away at our very livelyhoods. eg: ceo's, politician's, and doctor's incomes have increased at 4x to 10x those of common decent working men and women. If minimum wage had kept up with ceo compensation, the median income would be $127,+++.00/year instead of the high 20s as it is now.
We have the freedom to watch agast as new orleans is turned over to the looters while the national guard sends in an original contingent of 2000 and is dead slow in supplying food and medical care. Forget Iraq, there are hundreds of thousands of guardsmen in this country who could be activated, including entire medical units if the politicians only had the will to do good.

So, war in iraq or columbia or afghanistan or somalia or peru or panama or libia or .........anywhere but here or in europe......allows the military to test weapons systems, and keep a front line cadre well trained for use anywhere (including here, should we ever try serious civil unrest).

We have our own troubles at home.
There is no morality in foisting off our failing system on anyone else.

Kadafi once claimed that we(the usa) were the true terrorists of the world---adding an exclamation point to his words, we sent in some of our warbirds and bombed a desert camp of his and killed his 3 year old son---the kid might've grown up to be a threat to the global interest of the multinational corporations. He also claimed that Libia had spent more money on tractors than on tanks-----How un-American can one guy get?

the simple moral position would be....."Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

I'd rather that some other country not send in their military to clean up our mess.

We need a society that honors builders over destroyers.
We need a society that honors and rewards integrity and the work ethic.
We need a society that protects the common man over the monied interest.

We ain't likely to get any of this from "our" monied plutocrtatic political leaders.

We destroyed bridges over the danube and never lifted a finger to rebuild them....so the people who used to commute over the bridge drive up to the ruins, mutter a curse word for us and drive on to the long way round. 'tain't likely to win us a lot of friends.

The North Vietnamese may have been less than open, honest, egalitarian or forgivingly decent, but...when the whole world was ignoring the millions of murders of PolPot and the Kmer rouge, it was the Vietnamese army that entered Cambodia and made him stop.
Does that make them the "good guys" any more or less than our military actions have done or are doing for us?

whither hence?

rod

bluedogshuz

09-02-2005, 01:24 PM

Well Rod this tragic event in the Gulf coast may just be the connection that make people REALLY hate the government and G Bush. When the deficit goes stratosphere, inflation takes off, which it will. PEople will take a stand on this war. I actually voted for this idot twice! The first time I thought he would be the better leader, especially his statement of conservative $, farmers, small business etc. The 2nd time I voted for him because I totally expected him to clean up this mess he and his party created AND Kerry just wouldn't say the magic words "We are getting out now!" I cannot believe Bush did not interupt his selling of medicare prescription plans (a windfall for drug companies) to get over to the command center on this recent disaster. 9-11 all over again.
How do we get out? Same way we got in, go to the UN and tell the world we F-d up, listen to what they say and proceed from there... Whats wrong with that? I don't think anything heals like confession, you know what, I may be pollyanish but I bet the coalition of truley willing would step in to restore order. Heck, thats shock and awe! US has done alot of dumb things but the spirit of this country continues to shine through to many other countries and we are friends to many. Stop lying, tell the truth, Bush and Rice go to the UN and tell them we are sorry, we lied and we need help.
Khmer Rouge- the killing fields, I didn't know the VN stopped that, but I will say beyond being a Vet totally ignored and looked down on by my society I wondered why we pacifist were allowing the murder of 1 million Asians accept that we ran out of money and the will to allow our youth to be slaughtered.

jvc stone

09-02-2005, 03:12 PM

freedom, democracy, morality, just words

we have no moral superiority
we have no democracy
we have ever more limited freedoms

We need a society that honors builders over destroyers.
We need a society that honors and rewards integrity and the work ethic.
We need a society that protects the common man over the monied interest.

We ain't likely to get any of this from "our" monied plutocrtatic political leaders.
rod

I seem to remember something about government of the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE, by the People. I also remember something about it being the right of the People to throw out a government run amuck.

Until We the People of this country take back our government from the industrial - political complex that now controls it, nothing about our behavior in front of the rest of the world will change. It appears to me that we now have a ruling class akin to that the writers of the declaration declared their freedom from. At the fundamental core there is no difference between democrate and republican today. Opposite sides of the same coin - a coin which is bent on world dominance for it's own profit, and as much separation between the people and themselves. The immediate relief :confused: :mad: to the gulf coast simple demonstrates what our ruling class thinks about those in our society who are have-not's. We are deluded into thinking we have a choice come election time, but what is that choice. No wonder so many no longer participate in the process. (another good thing for the coin).

We need to break apart this intrenched two party system by demanding the media give equal voice to those speaking from out side the system. We need to demand of our elected leaders that they honor their oath to protect and defend our constitution, and not be so willing to change it for political Capital. And we as a people need to participate in our government.
By very definition, government is a parasite, only taking from the host, and giving nothing back. Unless that host can somehow rid itself of that parasite, or at least contain it, both the host and parasite wither and die. :eek:

just a few random thoughts and idle speculation from an addled mind :D
JVC

bluedogshuz

09-02-2005, 06:10 PM

It hurts a lot more when you got lied to. I'm a conservative and my liberal friends have been trying to get through to me for quite some time. I am glad I put up this post cause I heard from a number of different folks.. and quite frankly haven't heard much from people around me except for that war protest. JVC, you got it we can control our government. I spent some time on the web site the cost of the war. I'm sure many of you have seen it. We are approaching 200 billion (thats Billion). I'm not too good at math but assuming the cost continue to escalate (when have gov. cost been less) we may be looking at the trillion (thats TRILLION) dollar war to remove a puppet. That's when Pat Robertson should a been saying I'll kill him for half that! I'm done, I'm old and I have kids coming out of college about when we(US) will be flat broke, I can't afford my health insurance and all the other insurances let alone this reformed alcholic. Damn, he needs a drink! No more dilemma here(thanks for the therapy)except how to begin protesting this effectively.....

Bill Harsey

09-02-2005, 07:12 PM

Bill,
I would never turn down a drink, even though my Dr. has warned me what an iddot I am. Spirits are a good thing. Regarding VietNam, didn't Ho chi Minh come to the US for support against the French initially, and, didn't we turn him down because of some SEATO arrangement we had? Didn't he want to unify the country North and South? Was'nt it a case of us pushing him toward the Communist? Finally, The admission that we were fighting "Communism" states that in fact we were involved in an ideological war, correct? What did 58,000+ men die for? Were we afraid of the red spreading across Asia, thats the movie I saw... First VietNam, then what CAmbodia, then what, Chicago and Kansas? Communism (not its pure form) DOES in fact work some places for a while. Democracy works some places but not others. These are ideological discussions not pass the bullets please. Terrorism is an ideological war that the terriorist have started against us. It's not so cool to be on the recieving end of spreading ideological wars as we have painfully discovered. Am I getting somewhere in this session or am I simply full of Sh..t? What I am seeing in Iraq is the imposition of an ideology on a people that don't seem to want it, probably won't accept it and will probably retaliate against our troops for bringing so much death and destruction. Again, I think we are headed for another dishonorable tragic situation. I pridict that Bush is Johnson and will be seen that way. I also predict at least 10,000 dead americans, 7 years, a bankrupt country (US) and 3 countries where once there was one.
Bluedog,
Ho Chi Minh sought power and therefore was very useful to the communists.
I'm fully aware of how many died in Vietnam.

The Muslim insurgents using terrorism against us are not worried about ideology, they just want us dead. There is no grey area here.

Yes communism works very well, if you are in upper management.

Many people in Iraq want some form of self rule and many Iraqis are risking and sacrificing their lives to achieve it. Do not underestimate the Iraqi people.

Since folks like to talk about presidents here, I notice Clinton gets a free pass. I don't give him one.

It was the failed United Nations food effort in Mogadishu, Somalia that brought the United States military there to keep the warlords from stealing all the food intended for the greater starving population.
Our military tried to bring in the warlords and was accomplishing this mission but they requested heavy armor and the use of indirect fire. This was denied by Clinton. The result was the infamous battle of Mogadishu (see movie "Blackhawk Down") and the withdrawal of the United States military.

Here is why this story is important:
After the battle of Mogadishu and the subsequent withdrawal of US Forces, Osama Bin Laden made the statement that he knew America was weak ( I think "a Paper tiger" was the actual term) and could be hurt because it couldn't stand the sight of blood.
Clinton was offered at least two chances to bring in (actually, have him hand delivered would be more accurate) Osama Bin laden while Osama was in Somalia but Clinton wouldn't touch it because of the political difficulties it might cause him personally.
Osama then started planning for what happened in New York and Washington.
Some here don't think that was a big deal. Watch for what's next.

No one seemed to read here where I pointed to the connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq and chemical weapons. I guess it's easy to overlook inconvenient facts.

Some folks here think a United States policy of isolation would work. It wouldn't. There are too many pressures even in our own hemisphere with narcoterrorism and Al Qaeda getting a foothold in South America.

I will not jump on the fast rolling bandwagon of automatically hating the government, you bet we have problems but what kind of world do you think we'd live in without the United States government?

I think it would look something like Mogadishu.

Bluedogshuz,
Thanks for your service to this country and Welcome Home Sir.

jvc stone

09-02-2005, 08:53 PM

Bluedog,
Ho Chi Minh sought power and therefore was very useful to the communists.

No one seemed to read here where I pointed to the connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq and chemical weapons. I guess it's easy to overlook inconvenient facts..

Bill, First I would like to remind you that Ho Chi Mihn was a strong allie during WWII, and he first turned to the united states for help in making his country a free nation. We turned him down in favor of letting the French keep VietNam as their economic play toy. We actually told him that his people belonged to the French. Only then did he turn to the Russians for aid and support. Ho was only one of a line of "freedom fighters" who first approached the US before turning to the Russians. For some reason, we weren't interested in people being free in much of the third world.

I seem to recall that there was evidence that an Al quida leader spent some time in an Iraqi hospital, but that there was no evidence that he ever came face to face with Saddam. Saddam and Al Quida were oil and water.. The "terrorist" training camp (a real streach) located on arial photo's was claimed to be associated with Palestinian groups (Hamas?), and not AlQuida.Al Quida was only conviently linked to Iraq after all those WMD's failed to show up. Saddams power was granted by the US, while he served our purpose by staying at war with Iran. Whatever weapons of mass distruction (GAS) he originally had came from Rocky Mountain Flats. Bin Laden was also a recipient of our largeness when fighting the Russian's (their VietNam) in Afganistan.
Since WWII we have been meddling in the internal affairs of little countries all around the world, and wonder why there are people out there aginst us.

JVC

Bill Harsey

09-02-2005, 09:14 PM

JVC Stone, I won't argue with much of what you list here.

The large contingent of armed arabs found in the Sargat training camp had the same makeup as the Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan and Al Qaeda's associate Abu Musab Zarqawi presence had been confimed in that camp by Kurdish Intel sources.
Contact information was found there for an Al Qaeda group leader in the Phillipines and of course the Arab groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
This camp was heavily fortified and the fighters well trained.
Suicide bombers are not well trained in actual combat.
It was hard fight for ODA 081.

Take that for what it is.

Yes I knew that Osama learned his lessons well from the United States. Then he chose another direction.

sculptor

09-02-2005, 10:34 PM

Don't get me wrong guys...
I do not hate our government nor country I just want it to be better and more egalitarian for its citizens, and worry that we seem to be on a path that leads away from liberty equality and brotherhood.

I too am a nam vet.(was there for tet)..I'm just not settled in my feelings for that episode in my life so I rarely bring it up. Had a lot of anger, sorrow, regret and dissapointment to work through and ain't done yet.

I'm proud of my son in the peace corps and know that the 200 odd folks he is working with, teaching and helping are becoming friends to all of us.....I think this is the sort of world involvement we should emphasize and support. "Honor the builders over the destroyers".

funny story:
I met my wife at the airport, parked the truck in the loading zone and went in to greet and hug her and carry out some luggage---left the truck doors and tailgate open so's anyone interested could see that it was safe--I came walking out with bags in hand and slung from shoulders and saw a giant cop standing at the back of the truck. As I approached, he asked if it was my truck---I said, "Yes"(didn't say my thoughts..."naw I was just putting my luggage in here cause I saw the guy who owns it and thought he could use a new wardrobe"). He said you're not supposed to leave the vehicle". I looked at him, then at the loading zone sign and at the luggage, back to the loading zone sign and back to him. Then told him that "I was just loading the luggage, and had left the doors open so's you wouldn't worry". He ignored the obvious and restated "You're not supposed to leave the vehicle"
This guy could've worked for Draco, tyrant of Athens, from whom we get the word Draconian.
With fantasies of motorized luggage whisking it's way out of the airport and next to the truck where I was obediently waiting, I said "O.K." and proceeded to finish loading the luggage into the truck parked in the "loading zone". Why argue with a rock?

A small thing indeed......but the stupidity of the massive inconvienence for the miniscule possibility that some crazed terrorist might try to blow up his car in front of a podunk airport in the middle of nowhere is almost incomprehensible for me. When common sense and a feeling of community fly away in front of some really stupid regulations we should all be concerned.

Freedom isn't free! It involves some risk which I am willing to accept.
I don't want to live in a box or cage. I don't want to be assaulted by a continuing barage of unnecessary regulations. I don't want to be held responsible for military actions when I do not have the full story.

It has been said that generals are best at fighting the last war---this stupidity after 911 is locking the barn door after the horse has got out...the odds against them trying the same trick again are astronomical.....if given a guess, I'd guess that the next suicide attack will be via a plague infected group of travelers wandering from airport to airport to city to city infecting thousands of fellow travelors. Hassling folks loading luggage ain't gonna protect anyone.

With the low percapita # of doctors, and 45 million of our fellow citizens not being able to afford medical care, a plague could spread to dozens of millions unchecked.
And, just like what we're witnessing in the aftermath of Katrina, the people we'll need the most seem the ones most likely to pull the big fade.

and so, I say
whither hence?

bluedogshuz

09-03-2005, 10:49 AM

Bill,
Thanks for the kind words. And folks I drink Coors (regular in cans) if you don't mind drinking that stuff I'll be more than happy to bring a truckload to the next ISC confrence (assuming its in the continental US). Bunch of Viet Vets, my hat is off to anyone that served during Tet, I was just 18 when I hit nam in 69 and saw the look in the eyes of other Marines coming back. I will never forget that. I have a theory that some artist take snap shots in their head and can play them back.
We can't attack every country that has terrorist in it. We really need some world assistance and need to get off our high horse and be a little more cooperative. I really like Laura Bush, but when told other nations were willing to help us with our latest disaster she said "well isn't that sweet!" I wouldn't want my neighbor saying that to me. We are an awesome country and I love America, I have some other favorites too like Australia, but its that love that makes me upset that we may be on the wrong path. As for Clinton, correct me if I am wrong but I thought he stated in his book that he did not want to go into Iraq because of the mess it would create?

sculptor

09-03-2005, 06:09 PM

...
It was hard fight for ODA 081.
....

who are ODA 081 ?

couple thoughts

As/re paper tiger.... Yes, precisely on target for a lot of my disappointment and anger.......
I wound up working directly with/for a colonel the last few months, and he said that he was removing his name from the generals list and taking an early out and recommended I get out too-----his reasoning, when everyone sees us not having the will to win, we'll have to take some serious casualties before the next guy thinks we will fight....

For that reason, I want us to "stay the course" and help the troops finish what was started.
Someone said that "we" "had lost the will to fight"..
..As the dust was settling, I had thought that the only ones who had lost the will to fight were people who weren't actually doing, and hadn't done any of the fighting...
...As/re
BlueDog's "we're being lied to" (from a thousand clowns) "Gosh 'n gollies you betcha"!
But still---we owe the troops on the ground the dignity of having actually done the job they were given.
Don't get me wrong, I was no hero, they almost had to drag me onto that plane kicking and screaming and crying for my momma. But once there, we all had a job to do and counted on each other to have the integrity to do our best. And the only people I give a damn about have that integrity.

Bill you seem to have an objective viewpoint, while I seem to be reacting from the gut on a very subjective level.

Personally, I didn't like the outcome and would not wish the experience on anyone else...."Do unto others...etc." I wouldn't want myself, or my sons to repeat my folly.....So how could I wish that on anyone else's sons..?
Which makes me anti-combat a tad more'n anti-war.

War is a sure indicator of the total lack of competence or ability on behalf of the intelligence community and the diplomatic corps.

Which brings us back to Bluedogshuz's original moral dilemma
Yes, Me too Blue...a serious and I fear unresolvable moral dilemma

I'd like to see a more honorable (I mean that word literally) leadership.
"Lead from infront, sir"
"'Tain't likely"

Guy on the 50s says
"Sarge, I can't shoot women and children"....
"Sure you can, just don't lead 'em as much"

I just hope that Bush has an attainable goal and the generals a workable strategy for achieving that goal and the troops the tactics to execute the strategy, and our support for the effort is a big part of the logistics.

The ideal runs into the real like a judge(fast car) into a brick wall.

Blue, I think we'll face this same dilemma periodically till the day we die.

rod

Bill Harsey

09-03-2005, 08:56 PM

Sculptor,
ODA stands for a United States Army Special Forces "Operational Detachment Alpha" so ODA 081 refers to a specific Team of United States Army Special Forces members tasked to take the point on an extended combat operation often without support.

Yes the intel has sucked, to a degree. Anyone want to guess when we started to dismiss HUMINT or actual human intelligence gathering and started to rely solely on "high tec" eaves dropping means?

Sculptor, Thank you also for your service. For this I am in debt because of what you've done, I can do what I do.
Stay safe.

bluedogshuz

09-04-2005, 08:12 AM

Sculptor,
What you are saying is you aren't for the war, but we should"stay the course and help our troops get the job done". This is pecisely what the moral dilemma is. It is also precisly why most people aren't talking about THIS war. It is a wait and see kind of thing. I'm upset that you said that. You were in Nam. Tell me you didn't hear the frustration when we all wanted to either go into Hanoi and get the damn thing over with or simply nuke North Vietnam. They (our government) would not let us WIN that war, you know that. No fire zone-musleum mosque whats the dif? We ALREADY WON our troops performed brilliantly. Saddam is gone the country is liberated. I wouldn't want my buddy blown up by a radio controlled car bomb! This is bull s..t. Its politics time and we need to secure our troops and stand down. If this country can't stand on its own albiet with (some)help from THE REST OF THE WORLD then so be it. I can't hardly talk about Nam except to say: The country was relatively secure when I got there 69-70-71. We turned it over to the SVN's and they did not have the will to fight. We didn't lose the war, there wasn't anything to lose. Yuo can't lose a civil war in a country you have no intention of annexing. If Iraq becomes a terrorist state is that the fault of our soldiers, hell no. It's because they WANT to be a terrorist state or do not have the will to determine their destiny. I understand what you are saying but I am losing patience with this situation ergo my dilemma: I am deeply disturbed that we are going to exert our will on the unwilling. This one is much worse than Nam because it is a HUGE strategic blunder, you know it I know it and the rest of the world knows it. I don't like fence sitting. We announce we are leaving in what ever 12 mo. 18 mos and THEY have to get THEIR s...t together.

Bill Harsey

09-04-2005, 10:47 AM

Bluedogshuz and Sculpture,
There is much both of you say I'm agreeing with. I've recently lost a very good friend in Iraq who was due to fully retire after twenty years service this summer. He was on his sixth trip over there and didn't have to go but volunteered because he had the experience in combat to give his team members the best possible chance of coming home. He was killed in action.

Iraq has become a hotbed of fighters from other countries like Iran and Syria.

What Bluedogshuz might be saying, and I'm not putting words in his mouth, is that the entire region isn't ready for self rule and freedom.
We know for a fact that the leaders of those surrounding countries sure aren't.
There are Iraqi people that are taking on the insurgents themselves in many cases without our help. Much great news goes unreported.

Magicman

09-09-2005, 11:01 AM

For or against? I don't think *anyone* is for war, but sometimes it beats the alternative.

I know an elderly woman who, as a child, was in a ghetto in Europe. Her father was taken away and killed in a concentration camp. She remembers the day that Russian soldiers (who were at the time our allies) arrived to free them. Unfortunately, after the war she continued to live under oppression in an Eastern block nation

She eventually made it to freedom in America. To this day, she says we must intervene because nobody else cares. Had we not "butted in" during WWII(Germany never attacked us), she'd probably be dead right now.

We and our allies had no more business being there than we do now in the Mideast. But the alternative is to allow thousands to be brutally tortured and killed.

Have you ever been picked on as a kid, or seen a weaker child being bullied? Wouldn't it be nice if someone else would help the poor child? There are bullies in the world, and sometimes it's our job as the world's only remaining superpower to stop the bullying (particularly when it's in out best interest -- Saddam was never a friend of U.S.)

In my mind, freedom trumps peace. Sometimes, war is the price of freedom.

ironman

09-09-2005, 11:17 AM

Well Magicman, I think that with that attitude you should just join the army, become a combat infantryman and volunteer to go to Iraq!

jvc stone

09-09-2005, 02:52 PM

yep, thats the bumper sticker I've been looking for.

If you really support the war--JOIN the Army

Too old??? then sign your kids up. :rolleyes:

JVC

Stevem

09-09-2005, 04:15 PM

It absolutely amazes me, when some one else expresses an opinion about this subject that doesn't quite fit the relm of thinking here how they seem to be personally attacked. I thought this was a discussion to weigh both sides of the issue to try and develop some kind of understanding to the moral dilemma. There will never be a total agreement on this situation, just like there will never be just one color in the spectrum. But atleast with this forum it's an oppurtunity for each of us to express our thoughts. There is no reason to treat anyone who has a different view of the situation with disrespect. If it wasn't for the two trains of thought there would never be a middle ground or compromise. I know everyone here, who is an American, loves their country. We all just have different ideas on how things should be handled. This is a good thing in actuality! After all isn't that the whole idea with the legislative branch in having a checks and balance system? I for one, appologize, if I have offended anyone with my previous comments. Bluedog I sincerly hope you find some kind of closure for your dilemma.

A Patriotic American,
Steve

bluedogshuz

09-09-2005, 05:58 PM

Stevem,
I didn't restart this thread...if you read my previous post you will see that I do understand my position quite well now. I really appreciate other artist contributions to help me understand and most importantly this isn't some kind of "set up" .Magicman, I may not have a good grasp on history but I do believe we didn't exactly rush into WW2. I mean U2 boats were off our coast, it wasn't just the Germans but the Japanese and Italy in a pact, and Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. This is different. Hey, I don't like bullies either!

Stevem

09-09-2005, 06:05 PM

"set up" ?? I dont understand?
I appologize I missed your earlier post.

Magicman

09-09-2005, 09:18 PM

So I can only hold an opinion if I personally go to war? What an idiotic concept! Are you against crime? Then you should join the police force and volunteer for hazardous duty. Do you want clean water? Then go to work at a sewage treatment plant. Do you enjoy a hamburger once in a while? Then go work in a slaughterhouse! Hate drugs? Head to Central America and take on a drug lord. Obviously, there are a lot of worthy desires, yet only a select few will actually be part of bringing them to society. That's all part of being a community -- nobody can do EVERYTHING simply because they believe it's right.

Come on, guys, let's try to discuss this rationally. You know nothing about me and my military service, yet to condemn my opinion. I think you'd be a little more reserved until you know to whom you are talking. But that's not the point, since I think the entire concept is absurd. We were attacked by a foreign enemy on our own soil, for the first time in history. If that's not reason to respond, I don't know what is. You may not like it personally, but pacifism (although it might make you "feel good") never works. Never. Study your history.

No, WMDs were not found, but who knew that up front? Early on, military action was suported by almost everyone, including John Kerry, Bill Clinton, and the UN! That doesn't nullify the actions we are taking there. Creating allies and friendly nations in that part of the world will be important WAY down the road. That alone is worth the fight. It's easy to criticize after the fact; it's a little tougher to make the call without the benefit of a crystal ball.

iron ant

09-10-2005, 10:24 AM

I have an old metal pendent from 1969 that my granfather used to wear."War is not healthy for children and other living things".The bottom line is we boofed Iraq,but anybody that does not thing Sadam would not have sold weapons to terrorist needs reality check.It goes beyond oil,freeking religous beliefs once again screwing up the world...................

bluedogshuz

09-10-2005, 10:40 AM

Stevem,
I mean I did not have a preconcieved notion about how people would respond to this thread. I truely was not for or against the war. I like many Americans sat back and let this administration go forward with it. That is a moral dilemma when a person realizes they "sat back" and let it happen. There weren't massive demonstrations in the US. We do have a representitive government and in effect if I don't stand up and protest then when mega bombs are dropped on cities by my country I have blood on my hands, you follow? It's not that I am not patriotic, I simply feel that I did not exersize my obligation to question this action. This has been 2.5 years. The president of Iraq has requested or advised that our troops be outa there in 12-18 months. I totally agree, if not sooner. I hope the cause was just as I get disturbed when others talk about losing friends over there. I know how that feels. I also know that a whole lot of civilians, women and children were killed. If history is kind then our US intentions were noble. I can tell you one thing, I will not sit back and watch our goverment unilaterally attack another country unless we have been attacked EVER again.

Bill Harsey

09-10-2005, 12:19 PM

Ok, Guys, let's revisit the one thing that keeps coming up on this war topic, that no WMD's were found.

Someone do a search in the New York Times for the article they ran on the 1.8 ton of refined weapons grade uranium that was found in Iraq after we went in, this weapons grade uranium, along with some other very radioactive substances was secured and brought back to the United States to keep it out of enemy hands.

The New York Times is hardly a mouth piece for the Bush administration.

I confirmed this story with another source before posting here this morning.

Anyone have any idea how useful this radiactive material would be to wrap around conventional explosives to create an instant dirty bomb?

It has been proven that Al Qaeda was operating in Iraq before we got there.

You draw your own conclusions.

jvc stone

09-10-2005, 05:33 PM

Bill, It would be nice if you would post links to these sources and stories. As far as I know, (and I do pay attention) no one has ever made mention of weapons grade uranium being found in Iraq, and I do believe that this administration would have made a real big deal of that since they have been scrambling for justification of the WMD reason that was used in the first place. ( Oh and also those fighter planes buried in the sand every one points to as proof. --nothing but obsolete junk that would never fly again.-- again something the administration didn't make a big deal out of. ) Guess I'll ask Karl about the uranium stuff next time I have dinner with him.

JVC

Bill Harsey

09-10-2005, 10:25 PM

Iraq Uranium (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/17/171214.shtml)
Here is a link that references the story in the NYT.
The New York Times story is referenced in paragraph 5.

Stevem

09-10-2005, 11:05 PM

In the hard cover book, American Soilder, by General Tommy Franks, on page 332, it draws connection between terrorists in afghanistan and Iraq. It says "Several terrorist camps of the Ansar al Islam group were up and running in northern Iraq. These camps were examples of the terrorists "harbors" that President Bush had vowed to crush. One known terrorist, a Jordanian-born Palestinian named Abu Musab Zarqawi who had joined al Qaeda in Afghanistan--where he specialized in developing chemical and biological weapons--was now confirmed to operate from one of the camps in Iraq. Badly wounded fighting Coalition forces in Afghanistan, Zarqawi had recieved medical treatment in Baghdad before setting up with Ansar al Islam. Evidence suggested that he had been joined there by other al Qaeda leaders, who had been ushered through Baghdad and given safe passage into northern Iraq by Iraqi security forces.
What was especially troubling about this intelligence were reports that Zarqawi and his al Qaeda colleges were using the camps to train other terrorists for WMD attacks in France, Britain, Chechnya, and the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. ( In January 2003, When British police broke up a terrorist cell in Manchester that Zarqawi had helped train, they discovered traces of ricin, the deadly biological toxin, in the terrorists' flat; reports indicated that they were plotting to use it to poison the food supply on military bases across Britain)
If the evidence were confirmed that the Iraqi regime was in fact linked to al Qaeda, ther would be an insatiable apppetite in Washington for immediate action. Our special Operators had discovered proof in Afghanistan that the terrorists were trying to acquire a chemical and biological capability. And the UN inspectors' January 1999 report stated that Iraq could have ample supplies of such weapons.
Saddam Hussein, a dictator bent on repressing Shia Muslims, and Osama bin Laden, one of the worlds formost Islamic extremists--if these two were indeed collaborating, it was proof that war made strange bedfellows. Yet I knew that money transcended both ideology and faith, bin Laden had plenty of money. Any power that could provide al Qaeda with nerve agents or anthrax was a major strategic concern, and Saddam was very likely in a position to make such elements available for the right price.
It would have been foolish not to consider our options for eliminating that threat."

As told by four star General Tommy Franks

Jamo

09-10-2005, 11:53 PM

Sounds like from this article saddam had the capacity to build one bomb. And just from reading that one article it appeared as though he had a way of hiding weapons grade uranium. I have hardly read up on any facts so i'm sure i'm talking nonsense. But I know If I wanted to attack someone I wouldn't wave a flag around saying hey look I have a bomb. Meaning I'm sure saddam was aware that at any moment facilities could be inspected by the U.N. You could stock pile this low grade uranium without fear of inspectors raising a red flag and when you had the chance you could make a bomb & hide it. I think it's near impossible to find an atomic bomb that someone doesn't want found. I don't think we have seen the end of terrorism on U.S soil either. People should not only try to prevent it from happening but be prepared as if it was going to happen. I think Katrina was a demonstration of how well equiped the U.S government was to deal with a massive terrorism attack.
In a sense some good can come from this dissaster because you know now
that the rescue response was poor. If people can smuggle millions & millions of dollars worth of drugs into america i'm sure people who are intent on smuggling sarin gas or some other nasty stuff can do it pretty easily.
But again to put things into perspective smoking kills 440,000 people in the U.S every year (http://www.quitsmoking-clues.info/Stop-Smoking/Stop-Smoking-article-2.htm) The U.S should have removed Joe Camel from power long before Saddam.That's a medium-Small sized city quietly nuked every year from something entirely preventable. I also think alot less marines would die in a war against tobacco. Maybe Osama doesn't contribute enough to Political campaigns.

Bill Harsey

09-11-2005, 11:09 AM

Jamo,
Thanks for looking at the article about the Iraq's uranium. This is like having a barrel of diesel and a few hundred lbs. of fertilizer, that's pretty innocuous stuff until it's mixed together and ignited like at the Oklahoma City Federal building.

In other words, the components existed in Iraq along with those who had the will to use them.

About Katrina, that isn't a fair indication of a slow response by "the government" in a terrorist attack on our soil because there is a marked difference in protocol.

With Katrina the federal government cannot mobilize and enter a state until the Governor of that state has requested the help and granted permission for same to happen.

In the event of a terrorist act on US soil, the United States federal government is the immediate top authority over the situation.

JasonGillespie

09-11-2005, 03:08 PM

Bill, Steve,
Thank you for posting some of the known but often ignored facts about the threat Saddam and Iraq posed in the Middle East and abroad. If as much time was spent researching the connections between Saddam, Al-Queda and various Middle Eastern and African governments by those who write some of these well meaning, but uninformed posts...they might see the error of some of their assumptions. An excellent book on the subject is Holy War Inc. by Peter Bergin. He is one of the few Western correspondents to actually meet and talk with Osama Bin Laden. His research is enough to make one's blood go cold at the organized and utterly ruthless efficiency with which Bin Laden and his cohorts have set up alliances and monetary backing for their Jihad. Combine this with Saddam's documented support for Al-Queda and terrorists in general, there should be little doubt about the rationale for being being in Iraq...this is not to mention the effect a democratic Iraq would have on Iran and the power block of the Arabic countries friendly to Bin-Laden's Goals. That the Bush administration put all their emphasis on the WMD's as a reason to be in Iraq was a questionable choice given the other perfectly good ones out there. But.....the belief that Saddam had them prior to our attack was one that was based on information that everyone thought to still be true as we knew it to be true during the Clinton years. The WMDs issue is a dead horse, yet some still seem to want to beat it.

That some die in war is a tragic fact. If all other countries were out for our good...war might be an avoidable event, but that is not the reality we live with. Just because we wish for war to go away does not make it so. This makes the military and the job it does a necessity. Part of that job is putting oneself into situations that could be fatal. During my time in the service I, and those I served with, understood that were it to come to it, we would be expected to put our lives on the line to secure the rights of all who live in the US.....and to defend/attack against those who threaten those rights. That some might not understand my voluntary choice, I was aware of. I'm sure it is the same for those who are there now and yet they make that choice with the same knowledge. Perhaps there are some who have enlisted without counting the cost,but the number has to be small....a soldier's job is to fight and defend.....and if it comes to it, die in the commission of his/her duty. There seems to be much confusion on this account as if the realities of military service are a mystery to some people.

I shudder to think what would have happened if on a general level our populace was as uninformed during WWII and our confrontation with Germany and Japan. Perhaps we would be speaking a different language. During that war we understood as a country what it would take to bring victory and peace to the world....and we didn't attach a manufactured timeline on it. For those that mistakenly think that we are in no less a dire conflict now than in WWII, although today's wars are fought with different means, I would say wake up. Terrorism is the new battle tactic for many of our enemies....and the battlefield is the entire world. And ...those who support terrorism are no less our enemies than those who strap bombs to their chests. We can confront them over there or if you would rather, we can confront them over here. The smart tatic has always been to take the battle to the enemy and keep it from the home front whenever possible.

Also some have erroneously come to the conclusion that to strike preemptively is wrong and this shows just how little they understand about the way the world really is beyond our borders. To stand back and wait for a known threat to take the first shot in an age where 21st century weaponry can leave no second strike capability (or at the least kill thousands with one stroke) is beyond stupid...it's suicidal. If there is any lesson from 9/11 it should be that we are in danger and it isn't something that is just an isolated event that won't happen again. The cozy affluence the US has experienced for the last forty some odd years has dulled the senses of many and put us in jeopardy. A quick look at history will show the failure of appeasement when dealing with rogue countries and totalitarian regimes.

I realize that many as artists are peaceful people. I myself wish the world were not as it is, but I don't think that we as a creative community should be any less informed about the present world situation and the goals of those who would subvert the rights and liberties of all who fall under their sway. Ivory towers and peaceful platitudes will not make the harsh realities go away...but they might get us killed.

jvc stone

09-11-2005, 09:45 PM

Bill, Read the article you linked to. Also tried to find the NY Times article, but to no avail. Seems to me that the radical right press is just as capable as the liberal left at taking something out of context and running off the deep end with it. In the article , all of this "see --Saddam could have made a nuke" talk fails to consider one important statement. The stuff was in sealed storage , and that seal was put in place by the UN Inspectors. In other words, we new about that stuff since 91-92, and like I said, the administration never did use it to bolster a WMD claim, unlike the article's writer. There were many sealed arsenals, and the ones that have become a problem are those that for some reason or another were not secured by our troops after the "fall of Bagdad". Lots of high explosive material is missing from some storage facilities that were under seal (by UN inspectors), and secure when first visited by our guys, but were later broken into, and now have become the source of the explosives that are proving so deadly now. To bad that material was not guarded or otherwise dealt with initially too, as it apparently has proved to be more of a threat than the uranium was.

Thanks again for the read, though. ;)
JVC

Bill Harsey

09-12-2005, 10:50 AM

jvc stone

09-12-2005, 11:29 AM

Hi Bill, I wasn't implying that you were quoting anything specific--just stating the obvious-- that media sources are suspect no matter what side of the coin they come from. Truth is always somewhere in the middle, and I personally find it important to to look at the entire picture before delving into details as those details can be manipulated for whatever purpose.

I do appologize for making an assumption about that particular seal being place by UN inspectors. Since I can't seem to find the NY Times article that was quoted in the newmax article, I may have miss spoke. However, all that I have read about sealed facilities -be they arsenals, chemical production facilities, ammo dumps etc. -- indicates that the seals were indeed put in place by those inspectors after inventorying the contents, and that some facilities that were still under seal when major combat operations were over and we had "won" the war, were in fact later violated by the "insurgency" since for some reason we did not feel the need to keep them secure.

JVC

Bill Harsey

09-13-2005, 12:43 AM

JVC,
Glad you read the articles.
The New York Times archives it's articles and then charges a retrieval fee. I was trying to find the article without having to give up a credit card no. over the 'net.
If I find anything new, regardless of which side it supports, I'll advise.
Out here, long day.

Darwin26

12-19-2005, 05:11 AM

Gulf of Tonkin = WMD's on an on ... It's about the money and power over the Middle East... Oil not so much... if you were a CEO you'd find an easier way to ease that black gue from the ground beneath anyone ...
Also: i served in Viet Nam as well A/Co;3rd/47th Inf Reg; 2Bde; 9th Inf Div Mobile Riverine Force.
i'm a member of Progressive Democrats of America...and were gonna change the way Dem's do business... Repugs arn't the problem it's inside the Dem Pty (DLC)...Other wise we would not have signed on to that lunatics terror prevention scheme

Blacksun

12-19-2005, 09:01 PM

bluedogshuz

12-19-2005, 11:29 PM

Blacksun,
What do you mean by scope and intensity??? Did it occur to you that we are paying for all of this? This war is a huge mistake and we have a leader that admits he didn't have a plan, had lousy intelligence etc. I cringe when he says "coalition partners" why in the world should we continue to trust this liar.
This President said during his first debates that "he would never allow nation building". The lie is simply getting bigger. The US had a shot at leading and blew it. The one nation he isn't building is the US, thats for sure.

daaub

12-20-2005, 01:59 PM

Someone was asking about the veracity of the "Iraq Hussein statutes melted down to make a sculpture of a weeping US soldier" story. Basically a true story....The soldier statue was commissioned from an Iraqi sculptor by a US Army unit in Iraq. The price was too high, but when they figured in recycling the bronze from two Saddam statues they were tearing down anyways, it was affordable.... The statue was completed and shipped home to the Unit's home base in the US.

Is it justified for one regime to destroy the art / propaganda of another and use that material to build their own art / propaganda?
Be it a portrait of Saddam or of a weeping US soldier, they are both specific messages aimed at actively influencing people's opinions in accordance to the regimes adgenda.

It is not just for the US to destroy the sculpture in the first place. It would be bad enough for them to destroy it and use that material to force their own design / sculpture onto the Iraq populus, but to then take that sculpture back to America.

The symbolic ramifications of destroying a Saddam sculpture during that highly contrived media event were obvious, though not exactly just. What gives them the right destroy the art and take that bronze even if that art was forced onto the population by a 'ruthless' dictator. Should it not belong to the Iraqi people in a museum or if destroyed shouldn't the scrap bronze still belong to Iraq.

It is not merited to destroy the art of another regime symply because it depicts an enemy. Should we destroy all images of Hitler and other enemies of humanity too? Should our galleries and museums only host images and sculptures of 'good' people? And who's definition of 'good' should we then go with? The American one, i suppose!

Blacksun

12-20-2005, 09:55 PM

Okay.... first off it's a poll...not a political diatribe....

The bronzes of Saddam were scrap....and yes, anytime you overthrow an evil meglomaniac (like Stalin, Sadamm, Hitler etc... it is most certainly appropriate, nay requisite, that you destroy those items of self-aggrandizement he has built and put up all over the country.... And it could only be classified as propoganda if the big bad government commissioned it and paid for it with your tax dollars, and put it out to influence the public... This was a private memorial commissioned by individual officers of a US Army unit, paid for by private voluntary contributions of the unit's personnel, and intended for and sited on the home base of the unit, to honor their fellow warriors that died in combat. No one put it on tour and lined up lots of lttlle impressionable 10 year olds to wave at it. It was a private monument.

Now the war....
By expanded in scope and intensity, I mean that I believe we should stop playing politically nice war and pound anyone, anywhere who raises a weapon up against the US into the mud. My safety and the safety of my friends, family and countrymen is paramount, and the Islamic community has demonstrated the desire and capacity to be a danger to me and mine.

I don't let a nest of rattlesnakes continue to live in my backyard once I've discovered them, just because I cannot identify every one that will absolutely, positively bite me or mine at some future point. They're rattlesnakes. It's what they do...maybe not today or maybe not tomorrow, but someday they will. And what we are doing in the middle east right now is tantamount to pulling up a chair and a medium length stick and poking, poking, poking at the nest of snakes.... when what we need to do is flip over the rock they're hiding under, flamethrow them to crispy - well done, burn the surrounding fifteen feet, till it under and salt the earth. Stop sending out small patrols that get a cowards ambush from some muslim IED, and start lobbing some serious expolsive warheadage (I think I just coined a term....). On 9-12, 2001 Afghanistan should have been a radioactive glass plain...and the only valid response to the world from our President should have been "who's next?" Pax Americana That's what I mean by expanded in scope and intensity.

And yes, I do realize its expensive....but this is the primary function of Government.....to wage war when required against our enemies. Cut everything else to the bone, crank up a mandatory military service requirement for all citizens, and let's get this done.

So, back to the simple poll...Yes, I am in favor of the war in Iraq.

daaub

12-21-2005, 12:55 AM

Okay.... first off it's a poll...not a political diatribe....
The bronzes of Saddam were scrap...

To say I am denouncing the war is a little misleading. I posted mostly questions intended to make one look at the situation from both sides. The entire post was aimed at questioning the ethics of destroying another regimes art, not at the validity of the war or which regime is the right one. I never stated whether i was for or against the war.

Yes, the metal was scrap after the statue was torn down. Ok, so the statue is torn down and becomes scrap... The question then would be who owns that scrap bronze. In my opinion the statue(s) should have been stored somewhere to be displayed in a museum in the future, not used or shipped to another country for their own art. Just because someone is, in your view, 'bad' is no reason to omit them from history. On the contrary, the ''evil' dictators role means he will be in all the history books and thus has more of a place in museums then the average Joe. Sure it is not feesable to store all the hundreds or thousands of images or statues that he had made, but the major ones could have been kept.

It was obvious in the plannign and execution of the war that no one really cared about the art or historical artifacts be it public or housed in a museum. The treatement of art should concern us, should it not? I was simply trying to get a little discourse on the treatement of art.

And it could only be classified as propoganda if the big bad government commissioned it and paid for it with your tax dollars, and put it out to influence the public...

This view of propaganda seems a little narrow..

One encylopedia would say that propaganda is the "systematic manipulation of public opinion, generally by the use of symbols such as flags, monuments, oratory, and publications."

To think that using the material from a destroyed statue of Saddam to make a weeping US soldier has no planned political effect is quite naieve.

No one put it on tour and lined up lots of lttlle impressionable 10 year olds to wave at it. It was a private monument.

A tour is not needed when we have television. The 10 year olds are not the ones that need convincing. It is the intelligent; the ones who can look at things from all sides that are a little more skeptical.

My safety and the safety of my friends, family and countrymen is paramount, and the Islamic community has demonstrated the desire and capacity to be a danger to me and mine.
I don't let a nest of rattlesnakes continue to live in my backyard once I've discovered them, just because I cannot identify every one that will absolutely, positively bite me or mine at some future point. They're rattlesnakes. It's what they do...maybe not today or maybe not tomorrow, but someday they will. And what we are doing in the middle east right now is tantamount to pulling up a chair and a medium length stick and poking, poking, poking at the nest of snakes.... when what we need to do is flip over the rock they're hiding under, flamethrow them to crispy - well done, burn the surrounding fifteen feet, till it under and salt the earth. ... Afghanistan should have been a radioactive glass plain...

WOW.. are you serious? The idea of condemning and killing an entire ethnic or religious community because one may be 'bad' is not only exreemly rascist, but inequitable.

And yes, I do realize its expensive....but this is the primary function of Government.....to wage war when required against our enemies. Cut everything else to the bone, crank up a mandatory military service requirement for all citizens, and let's get this done.

The primary function of the government is to wage war? Really?

As for my opinion on the war... It is not relevant. I joined this site to learn about art, not to debate politics. The only reason I first posted in this thread is because the issue of destroying art is interesting and deserving of debate on a site devoted to sculpture. As for debating a war, this post is as far as I intend to go..

Blacksun

12-21-2005, 11:25 AM

Well, reasonable people can disagree... Some people think communism was a great idea. Some folks think Hillary would make a good president. Some folks think the 9-11 decleration of war between the Christian & Muslim world was just an abberation. And some people just can't face reality.

JasonGillespie

12-21-2005, 07:46 PM

Here is two more cents.....Perhaps we would be more mutually informed if we actually tried to understand the other person's point a little more. I have read alot of posts where people are talking "at" each other rather than "to" each other. Now people either will or they won't think about something that does not fit into their life view, but as artists I would think we all might be a little less dogmatic in our stances...pro and con. I could be wrong. That "open mindedness" characteristic that is supposed to be an artistic trait may be just a sham.

bluedogshuz

12-24-2005, 02:23 PM

We should be talking art, I originally posted this thread because I faced a moral dilemma of wether to support or not support the war. Having served in Viet Nam when my testesterone levels were significantly higher and my educational level was much lower I felt it important to find out from other sculptors what there opinions were because I do believe sculptors have superior intellect then say politicians :D Trying to get a handle on this issue has the brightest people in the world disagreeing. I am not sorry I posted this because I have learned a great deal. For one thing I am against war period, so to say for or against this war was a mistake. War is violence and violence is ignorance. If you have ignorant people tha choose to harm you or your loved ones you strike out. This war is as ideological as vietnam. We were not attacked by Iraq. There is no connection with 9-11 and Iraq. Its like kicking the dog because your boss made you mad. We elected (some of us) a President that chose to eliminate a dictator with his personal army. I am deeply disturbed that I voted for this idot and believe he should be impeached for killing our sons and daughters. We are now the patriach of a country and our resources and good will probably will be expended to have a (favorable) outcome to this war created by our representitive government.
As for the art, well, priceless art and artifacts were lost. Regarding the dictators sculpture it is obvious to me that any artifacts of oppression should (have) been preserved for a museum in the United States the same way we have holocust meuseums to act as educational institutions world wide to remind humanity how important freedom and self determination are. That my friends would be a work of art! I wish you all love at this holiday time and reflection on how we make the greatest work of art: Peace.

Jay Long

12-24-2005, 03:41 PM

We stand eye to eye with our intellect drawn in defense, limited to just a noise, that we utter from our chest. What bits of truth we collect, we hold like a good hand in poker, and everybodys bettin that their hand is the best.
As we stand around this room, with our opinions, truths, and rhymes, Do you think there's something better, That men can do with their time. If you ever stop to wonder, how we got into this mess. There are our world leaders, standing eye to eye, with their intellect drawn in defense.

Jay Long
Two things a man can do
create or destroy

Merlion

12-24-2005, 07:04 PM

As a sculptor, I very often try to express my feelings through my sculptures.

About a year ago, I was quite unhappy with a world politician. He was known to have facial expressions that look like monkeys. So just for fun, I decided to make a small sculpture of him with polymer clay.

It shows three heads of this man and his hands bobing out from the water surface, as if he is standing in deep water. One of them I tried to show him seeing a lot of evil. The second one I show him hearing a lot of evil. The third one? Well, I'll let you finish the story.

Here are pictures of them.

JasonGillespie

01-06-2006, 02:44 AM

bluedogshuz,
I respect your experience in Viet Nam and can understand your aversion to violence. Violence is to be avoided and war is definitely violent, but we do not live in a world where others will allow us to be only a peaceful country. That puts us into a position of having to deal with other societies and cultures that will not give us the chance to live without violence. Your time in the military must have taught you that there are times when action must be taken to keep further, greater bloodshed from happening. Think of WWII....what if we hadn't acted to keep the Axis from destroying the Allied European powers? Did we have to fight? Were lives lost? The answer is yes and yes and we did it because we understood, imperfectly perhaps, that if we didn't greater evil would result.

What about the countless deaths that happened in Cambodia as a result of our unwillingness to atleast finish what we began in Viet Nam? In our typical American selfishness we look only at the loss of American life and forget those who were killed after we left in 1975. There were many in Cambodia and Viet Nam both that were betrayed and lost their lives because we allowed radical sentiment back home to undermine our will to finish and keep our promises of support. (Despite the fact that our clandestine efforts in Cambodia were considered off the record we were directly involved there...as you know. As the only superpower in that war we have the responsibility of leaving a power vaccum that was responsibile for the resulting killing fields.) That fact, however, gets overlooked all too often. There was ideology at work in Viet Nam, but there were also real people who did not want to be taken over by Communists and we let them down. To say "ideology" is the only culprit for our nation's military actions is simplistic. War is always idealogical to some extent. That goes with out saying, but there is more than mere ideology at work in our present struggle just as there was more than ideology at work during the Viet Nam war. We understand now, again perhaps imperfectly, that action is called for to preserve the US from further terrorist attacks. Any other assessment is myopic.

The 9-11 commission established that there was a connection between Saddam and Al-Queda and that is why he was dangerous...he gave aid to the same terrorists that took so many American lives. (The administration's focus on WMD's, although warranted based upon the best intelligence and Saddam's previous use of Serin gas, wasn't well thought out as the rationale for going into Iraq,....but I think they thought it was easier to sell than to say we need to invade Iraq to unseat an unstable mass murderer and known supporter of terrorism. Which was the truth.) Saddam wasn't directly involved with 9-11, but that was never the point. The stated US position is that we will confront any nations/groups that aid the enemy as if they were the enemy themselves. You understanding of the facts is a little slippery in this area and...dare I say, a little simplistic.

Also, to say that the politicians are merely stupid or idiots and Bush the king of them is to be ignorant of the realities of the global problem that we are dealing with. That just smacks of partisan rhetoric and usually accompanys derogatory bumperstickers and t-shirts. Again a gross oversimplification of facts and reality. Have you paid any attention to the problems in France and the radical Muslim forces that they are finding out were behind much of the incitement and violence there? Have you looked at the Sudanese genocide that is being perpetrated by the radical Muslim government that controls that country? What about the children in Beslan? Your over simplifcation of the foreign problems we are dealing with does not do you much service if you are really trying to arrive at a true moral understanding of what Iraq is really about. Your seeming denial of certain facts of the world we presently live in, however, is your choice. In starting this thread you appear to have already made up your mind and are looking for affirmation that your view is right? Yes, no? This oversimplification of mine may not be true, but given your comments I am hard pressed to find an alternate explanation.

While I might lament the need to take action...I see that need as a greater responsibility to the innocents that might be killed over here were we to prosecute this war on terror and those who aid terrorists with any less diligence. The tragic reality is that some of our sons and daughters will die over there as they defend those at home. How else though will we unseat the governments and powers that enable Al-Queda to train and flourish within their borders? Al-Queda has no country we can assault. They are around the globe and exist because others make their existence possible. Iraq was just such a country. Our action, our violence there is a direct strike against those who would make Al-Queda's terrorism a reality. Now we should do everything to eradicate the mindsets that create violence, but we will not do it by being dogmatically against force when it serves to protect our families here.

Have you forgotten that we have had no further attacks since 9-11? Do you think that a coincidence? I assure you, if you read any of the enemy's fatawas or writings by Al-Queda's chief thinkers you will see that they would be raining death upon us at a very consistent rate if allowed to. Iraq is merely one country that gives aid and comfort to Al-Queda...what should we do when we have to deal with Iran and their burgeoning nuclear capacity? They, unlike Iraq, are a country run by Radcal Muslims...how should we deal with them? A clue...in their culture to be unwilling to fight is seen as weakness and is an invitation for violence. The new president recently called for wiping the state of Isreal off the map. They do not yearn for peace....what will we do? This moral crisis will not end and a student of history will tell you that it has been, despite other attempts at utopian foreign policy, the case for the entirety of mankind's history. What will we do when other countries do not want peace, rather they want aggression and violence? If we do not deal with it properly now we bequeath an uncertain future to our children.

The point I make is merely this....I know that violence is not good...I know that war is not good....but, I also realize we do not live in a world where we have the luxury to be utopian in our ideals. Force, at some times must be a tool for peace. That balance of peace and judicious force represents an understanding of the reality of this world and a yearning for at time when that force will no longer be needed. It is, not to sound corny, the yin and yang of American world affairs. Conflict is bad, but when needed as a means to protect it is a better choice than sticking one's head in the sand and hoping things will work out by themselves. That isn't really an educated choice.

We are artists and I would agree that we can be very thoughtful...although sometimes not the best informed in matters outside of art and similarly related fields. The pragmatism of dealing with other governments/groups that do not understand what our own history and beginnings make us take for granted is the reality of our life as a member of the world. That pragmatism may be a paradox and an affront to the idea of being an "artist" to some. Hopefully we can learn and be able to see both sides of an issue without extremism....see the truth not in just one side, but the reality of living and having to contend for life, ours and those around us, in an imperfect and all too often times violent world.

arcdawg

01-06-2006, 01:41 PM

this is such a messed up thing that the world is going through, and I would like to chime in on it.

while I cant call myself a lib or a consertive I can sure as hell call myself an AMERICAN ! I think that there are so many diffrent pieces of this puzzle. first off how americans are viewed by others in this world. second, our dependicy on foriegen oil.... ( I cant stand seeing all of these gas hogs we call s.u.v.s) and the fact that the politians cant seem to mind their own businsess and take care of their own !

When 9/11 happened it just ripped my heart out. ( I live 1 hour north of nyc) and one of the best days of my life was when my father and I went to the top of the wtc. it was just simply devasting.

and then to hear about all of these 18 year olds dying while serving our country....man oh man it just sucks

well sorry for the ramble -

btw I will not be bringing children into this world :(

dawg

bluedogshuz

01-06-2006, 04:19 PM

Dawg,
It is painful to me when I hear a young person dispair about the world we live in and say they don't want children in this world. Life is bitter sweet. I thought the same thing when Reagan had his finger on the nuclear trigger. I have children and they are living believe it or not in a better world than in 1980. We need children because they are the flowers that bring us joy. They experience joy and they grow up to face the challenges of the times well equiped to change things. The human race is maturing and what you are seeing with terrorism and violence are those that wish to retard that evolution. I can assure you they will fail.(Death is jeolous of life because it has fewer oppurtunities) I believe in fact that nations, religions and intelllect are maturing so fast that some groups seek to stop it. I hope you will have children, even with the heart ache this sound corny but love, dedications, moral values overcome all the bad stuff.

arcdawg

01-06-2006, 06:33 PM

well said Blue-

dawg

Merlion

01-06-2006, 08:49 PM

We are artists and I would agree that we can be very thoughtful...although sometimes not the best informed in matters outside of art and similarliy related fields.

As an artist, I express and communicate my feelings through my artworks.

As a human being, I keep myself informed about what is happening in our currently troubled world. I base my opinions on the real and not ideal world.

I started recently to combine the two, not easy, still a bit primitive. But the point is to take it seriously and be creative. These are shown in another Thread (http://www.sculpture.net/community/showthread.php?t=2141) in this Sculpture Forum. I welcome others to join in with comments there.

Bill Harsey

01-07-2006, 12:29 AM

ilona

04-23-2006, 10:35 PM

I've read some, but not all, of the comments here. (Y'all wrote a LOT! lol)

I think we entered the war with good intentions and bad information. There isn't any doubt that Hussein was a monster. Whether we end up doing any good over there, long term, remains to be seen.

I do think that if we leave now we negate all the lives, money and work we've done over the past several years. I think we should stay and clean up the mess we made. (And, by the way, it isn't just our mess. I really do believe that most of our military has done an outstanding job in this war.)

My suggestion is to slowly transition from a military to a peacekeeping operation, and to eventually (when things are safer) send in as many experts on democracy building and mediation as we can. Otherwise we create another Israel/Palestine or Northern Ireland.

Merlion

04-24-2006, 05:03 AM

I do take interests in current, socio-political and world affairs. But so far I have not taken part in this thread for more than one reason. One is that most of you are from the US while I am from E Asia. Another is that this online Forum is about sculpture.

Perhaps I can post something here, using my sculptures to express my feelings about 'The War' and about wars in general. See photos below.

The first one, still WIP, is called "The Descent of Man", inspired by Charles Darwin's book of the same name.

The second one is just a maquette for fun, called "Three Evils", about the same person, inspired by the three monkeys.

The third one is called "War Widow", to remind us who are the ones suffering most from wars.

Incidentally, both the first one and the seond one are intended to be shown as being on deep water into which we seem to be sinking. :(

Chung Yeung

10-07-2009, 09:14 PM

When I joined the Marine Corps in 1966, we had experienced communists invading the Republic of Korea, Nikita pounding his shoe at the U.N. and telling us he would bury us, the USSR setting up missles in Cuba, and invading eastern European nations. We had instructions as to how to survive a nuclear holocaust in our high school auditoriums, and "duck and cover" drills.

About 60% of our Congress were veterans, and understood the ramifications of going to war.

Today, we have a group of radical extremists hiding in caves who got through our non-existant border defenses. The first instruction in infantry training regarding setting up a post: "secure the borders." Basic, basic stuff. Today, only around 10% of Congress are veterans, most have not a clue about military issues or about the sacrifices that our young heroes and heroines AND their families will make now, and for the remainder of their days. The most hawkish among them, and the most prone to support torture, are often the ones who dodged service in a war zone.

Politicians support just one thing: getting reelected. Their own personal self-interest comes before our nation or our military. It was politically expedient to satisfy the lust for immediate vengence, however unwise as a strategy. We went into Afghanistan half-heartedly, because we had already decided to use this as an excuse to move on Iraq. Just my opinion which isn't worth much.

ironman

10-07-2009, 09:58 PM

Chung Yeung

10-07-2009, 10:11 PM

H,i Iraq, Afghanistan, who cares, we shouldn't let our young die for those people. If the "DRAFT" were in place, we wouldn't be anywhere near those places BUT because we have a military composed of dumb A-holes with no skills, nor education and a belief in this country and maybe even GOD, we're there.
There is no god,
No one has given their life for this country since WW2.
Have you no SHAME?
Jeff

I agree we shouldn't be there. It is NOT however the fault of the military, but the politicians that we all elected to office. Our military are professionals who are sworn to defend our Constitution, and to obey legal orders without question.

You are sorely ignorant of the character of our young warriors. I have met many, the past two years at Quantico. They are intelligent, well spoken, respectful, strong in character and in body, and the most impressive group of young people I have ever seen. I will be 63 years old in a few days, I am a very successful geologist with a few degrees and an IQ of 143 (back when I was in the Corps, probably much less now). The minimum IQ for my MOS was 115 and most were a good deal better, some 40+ years ago. Today, these young Marines are much better than we were.

No, these are the men and women who make it possible for jerks who take for granted their freedom to insult the intelligence and character of our best. All because these young warriors believe that the principles spelled out in our Constitution are worth preserving.

If there is blame, it is shared by all, our elected officials, and we who elect them.

God or the absence thereof has nothing to do with this discussion, except in the minds of a few radical neo-cons.

And I do feel SHAME for those who supported the communists during the 50's and 60's as they subjugated eastern Europe, southeast Asia, Cuba, and "reeducated", tortured, and killed so many. Those Americans are my mortal enemies and will remain so until I die. The excuses they have now, "my football knee kept me out", and on and on, are amusing. I wonder what they tell their grandchildren.

The draft isn't in place because it would cost the politicians their jobs. They'd rather fight the war under-resourced than risk losing an election. You're correct - we wouldn't be there if the benefits were weighed against the costs. We've lost the creme of the crop, many are maimed for life, physically and mentally, and as before, we'll quickly forget their sacrifices. In a few decades they'll be killing themselves, begging with a tin cup, forgotten and disdained for their courage and heroism. It's happened before. There is a God, a new God, and it's name is M O N E Y. That's all anyone cares about.

evaldart

10-07-2009, 10:52 PM

Guess what, those ants LOVE their war. Always have, always will. It has NOTHING to do with Art...so put it away in the box with the other silliness lest you get yourself all worked up and ruined. There are personal challenges that ADVANCE a body - not tear it down (or blow it to bits). Busy yourself with those.

StevenW

10-08-2009, 09:58 AM

If anyone is interested, I suggest Michael Yon.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/michael-s-dispatches/

If we are to head anywhere near a peaceful world in the next 50 years then we must not leave entire societies living in the 9th century AD or under slave-like conditions as is the case with North Korea. That is the real shame, it's like knowing your neighbor is kicking the shit out of his wife and kids every night and doing nothing to stop it. Even a 9th century throwback can detonate a nuclear device on a boat in a harbor city like San Francisco and it won't matter what kind of border security you have then. The Taliban are winning in Afghanistan at the moment exactly because of a half-hearted effort and a pathetic UN and NATO. If they take Afghanistan back then they will get Pakistan too and they will have their nukes and the funny thing is that it will all have been funded by hash and heroin addicts here and elsewhere as opium is the Talibans life blood.

CroftonGraphics

10-08-2009, 11:33 AM

Unfortunately,
if it was not for war some of the greatest works of art would not have been created.

grommet

10-08-2009, 11:50 AM

I'd still trade in an instant.

SPRINGFIELD

10-08-2009, 01:29 PM

Start the draft end the war.
War is not profitable for a nation.

racine

10-09-2009, 12:00 AM

we are animals, just poor sad animals. war is just a symptom of our inabilities, our problem.. to claim a higher place in evolution.
Evald is right, i know this even as i work on what may be assumed to be an anti war series of bronzes. i am manipulating expectations and preconceptions not wax. lashing out at the tedium of society, hatefulness of being human whilst displaying my own inadequacies.
on the radio Gunter Grasse was discussing 'tin drum' answering a question whether his work was a recognition that anti war art was impotent to stop war, he replied along the lines that since EM Remarques 'all quiet on the western front' called the most powerful anti war book of all time, published in German 1920, republished many times by 1939 in many languages.. had no effect on the basic human[itis] principle... then probably yes.
it will take millions of years for humanity to reach 'humanity' i doubt we will ever get there.

evaldart

10-09-2009, 07:45 AM

Unfortunately,
if it was not for war some of the greatest works of art would not have been created.

A really "effective" work of Art always trancends it subject, surpasses its content and travels FAR away from its merely notioned crude beginnings. Any of these "great" works (Guernica) were far more relevent as formal assualts...they were battles won by artists against their medium; NOT commentary on the horrors and "immoralities" that nations and civilizations are constantly bothering about. A choosy viewer must look past the little story. Art is bigger that those antics; and likely is the only hope.

StevenW

10-09-2009, 09:51 AM

We are not just poor sad animals.. That is cliche even for a secularist these days. For all we know we could be the only intelligent creature anywhere in the universe. I'm not saying btw that this is likely, it's just that there is no evidence as of yet to suppose otherwise. In regards to war, everyone always talks it down and rightly so, no one wants to see or go to a war. Nobody likes volcanoes and earthquakes either and yet they can and do kill as many or more people than any wars, but they also serve a purpose and without them we wouldn't be here..

I just had this translated by a friend living in Afghanistan yesterday, originally written in Pashtun and I think it would be deplorable to leave these great and noble people at the mercy of a bunch of 9th century thugs.

Disgraces love
By: Sulaiman Layeq
(From "Chunghar")

The moon rising bit by bit, behind the lofty mountains,
The light spreading over the vast deserts.
Winds, with scents of flowers,
Nights, with echoes of shepherd voices,
Intoxication, with toasts of wine,
Were all chaining me in sins,
Promises to repentance were broken

I was in curls and plaits of intoxications,
She was twisting from heat of kisses
I, with my guilt and sins,
She, with her intoxications and cravings,
The cupbearers with overflowing bowls,
Were all boasting of love, loyalty and insanity
Decency was profoundly asleep

In heights of intoxication, she was gradually fainting in my arms,
I was smoothly drowning in lust and sins.
Together with, thirsty aspirations,
With sweet damnations,
With juvenile complications.
The crack of dawn, torn apart the curtain of privacy, (and)
So was our love disgraced.