Osama is, I suppose, a nice enough looking fellow but nothing special.
Che, on the other hand, was HOT! I mean, I’m straight and clueless and I can still tell he was good looking. Why do you think he was so popular for posters? You don’t really think most of those people knew much about him, did you?
“Oooh! This guy is cute and so HIP! Let’s buy THIS poster.”
I just watched (suffered?) Rambo 3, and geez, the irony… it seemed that they were this close of pasting halos over the mujahideen heads. :rolleyes:
Those airbases are remnants of the actual full-blown occupation that followed the actual full-blown war, which culminated in such atrocities as bombing of Dresden, Hiroshima & Nagasaki. If anything must provoke the desire for revenge, those airbases are it. On one hand we have almost complete indifference to the real grievances caused by US in the past from the people of Japan and Germany, while on another we have over-exaggerated sensitivity of the Arabs to some obscure and practically insignificant US offences.
Also, we don’t really want anyone’s natural resources all that much. Our troops are in the ME to provide “stability in the region”. Primary benefactors of that stability are the countries of Europe and Asia. We may have the luxury of leaving for our own hemisphere, endowed with ample supplies of natural resources; Europeans and Asians don’t have such luxury. They are stuck there and they all need ME oil. Do you think if we remove our military those countries will repose in everlasting peace or will there be a total nuclear war in a few years?
You’re just goofy!
I don’t think he ‘decided’ to get upset about anything, he’s the fanatical type. They’re easily pissed off as a rule. The fact that he didn’t become a leader in Afghanistan after the Soviets left and the Taliban came to power indicates that he wasn’t interested in leading one country, he wanted to carry out a lot more terrorist attacks.
quite right.
From an objective analysis, Che was a loose cannon who was trying to move the people to armed struggle way in advance of creating the conditions on the ground to support this. An adventurist, I guess would be the Marcusian term.
And yet, look at South America today, particularly Brazil and Venezuela.
I believe the “idea” (archetype?thoughtform?) “CHE” is more powerful than the apparatchik .
I was driving for the point that the thoughtform "sama is taking on that sort of “noumen”. (and plus, he DOES win battles, unliek partner Guevara…)
BTW the saudi chicks giggle about how studly 'sama is. Go figure…
Originally posted by alaricthegoth
You know; We have an organisation that sends second-hand glasses to third world countries. Maybe we can send some to the Saudi girls?
You guys are forgetting that Osama’s strategy was the same as Che’s: take over a landlocked country surrounded by lots of other countries you’d like to take over as well so that from that country you can spread your revolution in all directions at once. Che had Bolivia; Osama, Afghanistan.
Revolutionaries do think alike, sometimes.
Also, I’ve never seen Che speak, but watching Osama it’s easy to see how convincing he could be, since he seems almost a fatherly figure. Also, he’s very tall, which automatically gives you a commanding presence. I don’t think we made Osama into a Che-like figure; he was there already on the strength of his charisma among his followers and sympathizers.
New Iskander is right that we’re in much deeper with Osama, since we’re dealing here with religion, a far more powerful force than a mere political movement, and since Osama is probably still being protected by Pakistan’s ISI. That makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to “dispatch” him.
Well, Marxism has been called a religion. :-p
Osama certainly has his own appeals, but he isn’t Che. They are just very different people.
One thing you forget, Isk, is that dead revolutionaries aren’t corpses. They are beacons. It is like those cheesy anime movies where the hero dies, then his body gets turned into light and is seen by the entire army, then they are rallied to victory. This is half of the reason popular fanatic revolutionaries are more than happy to risk themselves. They are more powerful as martyrs. Now, just the name “Che” is a rallying point. Hell, look at the rise of any revolutionary party. Relatively minor characters constantly get idolized in death/capture. Hell, it isn’t like that is only done by revolutionaries. The name “Tillman” ring a bell? Remember what happened when Kennedy died? People love a good martyr.
Che is an interesting point, because he is one of the few people who may have been as dangerous alive as he was dead. In any case, he is now immortalized.
And Che was better looking than Bob Laden - who has a nose like a fungus.
Hear that, Osama? What are you waiting for?
So are you saying that when we observed a dictator ruining his country we should have intervened? Because I’m not seeing a lot of consistency here.
It’s a sad commentary on past conditions in Iraq, but the fact is that even if every bad report coming out of Iraq is true, then conditions there are still better now than they were before the US invaded. Which is not to say that mistakes haven’t been made and changes aren’t needed. But try to maintain a bit of perspective.
And consider the possibility that while the average man in the street in Riyadh might hate the United States, it’s possible he’s wrong and we’re right. Personally I don’t feel the need to change America’s foreign policy because it makes the Saudis unhappy. Heck even if we pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan and dropped a nuke on Tel Aviv as we flew home, they’d still be mad at us for letting women vote and other crimes like that. You just can’t please some people.
I’m not saying we should have intervened militarily. There’s a lot that the U.S. can do short of military intervention. And as I noted, when Batista was in power, it wasn’t really a matter of the U.S. not doing enough to stop him…It was that we, and particularly lots of U.S. corporations, actively aided and abetted him. He was our friend. It was very, very different than our policy toward Saddam (between the First Gulf War and the most recent Iraq war) and also very different than our policy toward Castro.
Well, I think this is a debatable point (and I believe there are other threads looking at the latest numbers from polls in Iraq). Certainly for some Iraqis it may be better…For others, it may not be.
Und keine Eier!
The only reservation I have with Osama’s horrible, bloody demise of being chewed to death by a mule starting with his shrivled, tiny nutsack is that he would be an instant celebrity.
Likely, most people would, if they were German at the time. They just don’t like to admit it. Nationalism is a powerful force, and Hitler was a great speaker.
I don’t see why admitting that Hitler was an outstanding orator or Leni Riefenstahl’s “Triumph of the Will” was editing artistic genius or whatever is still taboo. That’s as stupid as saying that the great Renaissance works of art are rubbish because you hate the Catholic Church. Frankly, as a politican, Hitler makes Bush look like even more of a yokel than he is. Even Clinton an amateur in Hitler’s light.
Say what you will, 'sama has style.
The “kilo of gold” is just more, well, Khyber Pass, ya feel me?
You guys out there, this is for you (sorry…)
Can’t you see yourself tricked up like a cross betwee zorro, spartacus, and robin hood, and its like
(imagine here strong fake desert accent)
Bring me the head of this George Bush!! A kilo of gold and two of my daughters to the man who brings it…
alaricthegoth, You must be very young and naïve. *:: Having memories of puberty fantasies about famous persons:: *
you are too kind…
that aside, am I the only one who thinks that the manager of THEIR team is so far playing his hand ten times smarter than the (godhelpus) manager of OUR team?
Don’;t get me wrong.
'Sama and I are mortal enemies–He wants chicks in burkahs–
I have devoted considerable time and much capital to the removal of their clothing entirely…
This sort of thing being important to me, I caution that we not misunderestimate him, as they say in Crawford.
Frankly, the fact that he’s making tapes two and a years after 9/11 is mind boggling, and I think you would have found few to lay a bet that way on October 1 2001.
Let alone to have drawn the US into a trap liike Iraq, fractured our european and carribean alliances, and provoked atrocities from our soldiers which they were kind enough to document on videotape.
Granted, he had llots of help from Dumb George, but a lesser strategist might have pissed away what he was given.
I guess what scares me is this:
It’s bad enough fignting Pancho Villa if your leader is Dudley Doofus, but what if its like, Dudley vs. Lenin?
What if this motherfucker is really a Lenin? Why should Lenin have been the last one? (Hell, he wasn’t the last one, let’s not forget Mao…)
It could be worse.
It could be more like Frankie Williams against the Iron Sheik.