An appology

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Iraqi_DMI, Jan 22, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Before one of the American contributors jumps in, I thought this might be of interest to some readers:

    This appology has been widely circulating amongst the US military, Neo Cons and Defense contractors here in Iraq. In terms of starting some dialogue off, perhaps some simple questions need to be asked:

    * Who is Chuck Pitman "appologizing" to here? His comments seem to be addressed to his"fellow americans". I have ( thankfully, yet to see this precious prose in Farsi)

    * Are the americans capable of any other international dialogue apart from that which at best comes from behind kevlar and oakleys, or more frequently is transmitted in Texan on the Fox Channel, and at worse is transmitted from 32,000 feet without any visual verification??

    * Does this sort of rhetoric from a "leader", serve to promote wider understanding between disparate peoples, or merely to retrench existing xenophobia in the people of the worlds greatest superpower??

    * What ammunition does Chuck provide "foreign fighters" and their fellow travellers in Al Jazira, when this sort of thing gets into the hands of them and the French liberal press??

    I have to close down and move now before the AC130 closes in> What ever happened to gunboat diplomacy?? :wink:
  2. First, "Neo-con" is a fantasy of fanatic Liberals. There is no such thing.

    Second, is there a real Pitman? or is this another widely circulated by e-mail "fantasy" letter?
  3. Whoever he is, he's got a point. In fact, he's got several.
  4. [​IMG]

    Chuck is the one in the middle......

    perhaps the photo was taken by BB in Area 51??
  5. Chuck nailed it!
  6. Chuck looks a little like Roy Rogers
  7. Our Chuck has made some very valid points in his letter - it's a shame that he had to take the edge off it by flippant comments about MM and being slightly melodramatic.

    Nonetheless he has made some points which are seldom mentioned in an international press that are, by and large, anti american foreign policy (and rightly so on occasion).

    The Arab nations have never covered themselves with glory in any significant international issue - the Palestinians for example; loathed and reviled by a significant proportion of the Arabs, yet used conveniently as a stick to beat the Americans with. Brother Arab helping brother Arab - unlikely I think.

    Additionally, it is not PC to discuss whether Islam and sharia law are a suitable lifestyle for a modern world. Islam is, like most religions, fairly primitive if taken at face value and not discussed or debated. The trouble is that to debate it could be a capital offence in a host of Arab countries.

    It seems to me that Islam and western values will never be comfortable bed fellows but that we, particularly in this country, are terrified to criticise them. Criticism is healthy, natural and a part of civilised politics. It's also a two way street; Muslims (in the UK and wherever else) will cheerfully deride and criticise whatever they choose (indeed they will create the most fantatstic, banal and idiotic criticisms to aim at the west) - yet we tremble in our boots for fear of prsecution and being labelled Islamophobic when we see something that is abhorent to us and want to criticise it.

    It is time to stop the relentless march of the PC brigade, take stock and allow the voice of reason and sense to take control again. If we think it's wrong then let's criticise - provided it's well constructed and sincere criticism; not the ranting of the extremist.
  8. anti American foreign policy in the respect that American foreign policy isn't hard line enough.
  9. excellent article

    cynicism and sarcasim are alive and well in the US of A!
  10. An American who understands irony (is that an oxymoron?)!

  11. chimera

    chimera LE Moderator

    Neoconservative is a term generally accepted within the international relations and political community to represent those who subscribe to classic realist theories. In its modern derivation in the US this is seen in those expounding a unilateral approach to US foreign policy, as opposed to the Wilsonian liberal approach favoured by the Clinton administration and the early years of Bush's first term.
  12. "Neo-con" as presently applied is a term revived by fanatic liberals and applied to the current US administration as a negative spin on their policies.

    "Neoconservatism" is not "classic", nor "conservative" and was the failed brain child of an odd-ball minority.
  13. chimera

    chimera LE Moderator

    It is not negative spin, the term is an accepted one in the field of political science. As I said, the neo-cons hold views that in the study of power politics would be termed classic realist or neo-realist. This is not positive or negative spin, just correct terminolgy.

    Not a bad debate for ARRSE!
  14. A fanatic liberal eh? An interesting picture is being conjured up here!!! :p