babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Imperial Diplomacy - from U.S. Dissidents.

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Imperial Diplomacy - from U.S. Dissidents.
Spring Hope
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 417

posted 14 September 2002 12:10 AM      Profile for Spring Hope     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
'Diplomacy' in the Age of the American Empire
by Robert Jensen and Rahul Mahajan

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0913-02.htm

In the age of American empire, this is what diplomacy looks like:

After months of open expressions of contempt for international law and disregard for the opinions of other nations (allies and enemies alike), the
U.S. president deigned to appear before the United Nations on September 12. In the hectoring tones of an annoyed parent scolding a fussy
child, George Bush explained that he would be happy to go to war with the endorsement of
the Security Council but that he does not consider such endorsement necessary. The United Nations can have a role, the president conceded, but if it makes the wrong decision it will be "irrelevant."

Somebody send this to the Hon. John Manley after his grovelling hurrah for Bush's speech at the U.N.


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Flowers By Irene
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3012

posted 14 September 2002 12:28 AM      Profile for Flowers By Irene     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Perhaps the most telling moment in the speech came when Bush said he wanted the United Nations to be "effective, and respectful, and successful." A text posted by the Associated Press almost immediately after Bush delivered the speech (from an advance copy provided by the White House, one assumes) used the word "respected" instead of "respectful." Did Bush intend to say that he hoped the U.N. would be respected? Or did he want to tell the U.N. that its effectiveness and success depended on being respectful (to Bush and the United States, one assumes)? Was it a Freudian slip, or a conscious choice?

Very good point raised here. Also telling was Bush's "We have no quarrel with the Iraqi people" which roughly translates as "We are going to bomb the shit out you, Iraq, so its time to duck and cover"


From: "To ignore the facts, does not change the facts." -- Andy Rooney | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Apemantus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1845

posted 14 September 2002 08:39 AM      Profile for Apemantus        Edit/Delete Post
I love the way people take the piss out of Bush's incompetence at speaking until it suits their agenda... Make your mind up!
From: Brighton, UK | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca