lo yeeOn
2010-12-15 07:22:35 UTC
Well, by our new Nobel Peace laureate Liu Xiaobo, soldiers and civilian
casualties in the anti-terrorism wars are a necessary price to pay.
Liu gave his view in an article he wrote in 2004.
Published in Chinese on observechina.net - a website with the Chinese
name which could be translated as Laogai Foundation Observes - the
article was entitled the Iraq war and the ``Big'' US election (i.e.,
the 2004 presidential election). Note that Laogai is transliteration
of the Chinese term for reform through hard labor.
Since it is my attempt to translation into English for wider
circulation, it is a work in progress. (It will come in growing
portions until it is complete and will take some time to finish.)
Liu wrote:
=========
The Iraq War and the US Presidential Election (2004/10/30)
In this US presidential election, the question of whether the Iraq war
should have been fought has been a major topic of debate between the
Democratic party candidate Kerry and the incumbent president Bush.
Kerry seized on the US's current difficulty in Iraq to make his case,
But Bush's superior anti-terror performance, is not something Kerry's
disparaging remarks can easily erase.
Historically and in reality, the US is not a perfect nation,
nevertheless, at the minimum, it is the most idealistic and most
mission-driven free country, it led the Allies to win the fight
against fascism in WWII, helped put in motion the realization of the
rebuilding of a democratic system for each of the two most criminally
evil nations Germany and Japan, led the opposition fight against
communism/totalitarianism in the Korean war and the Vietnam war, and
in the end won the half-century long cold war between the free world
and totalitarianism; the US also helped Egypt win its independence, it
has continued to protect Israel which is surrounded by Arab countries,
without the protection, the Jews who suffered race-based genocide in
WWII could have been pushed under by the hatred of the Islamic world,
Arab hatred toward the US and the repeated violent attacks on the US
by Islamic terrorism clearly is highly connected with the enduring
American support for Israel.
[A long sentence composed of sub-sentences separated by many commas
and one semicolon.]
All these, have historically pushed the US into a position of
leadership in the free world. World attention to its presidential
election, is also proof of the US's leadership role in the world.
. . .
[And below is how the article ends:]
There is no free lunch anywhere in the world. The success of any
righteous enterprise demands lots of suffering, even at a tragic
price. This is especially true when law-abiding and civilized free
countries are confronted with immoral and unreasonable authoritarian
regimes, evil forces of terrorism and fundamentalism and the like and
must enter into a contest, it is necessary to pay a huge price to win
the final victory. The horrible catastrophe of 9/11 is the price for
the US to promote freedom, the anti-terror war after 9/11 is only the
beginning of an open contest between the forces of freedom and
terrorism, NATO soldiers and civilian casualties are the price we must
pay to fight terrorism, to overthrow Saddam's tyranny, and to build a
democratic Iraq.
Whether it is anti-terror wars or foreign relations, Bush isn't a
perfect president, nevertheless after all he won the reactive war in
Afghanistan and then the pre-emptive war in Iraq in succession.
Leftists in the West can seize on temporary setbacks to make a big
deal about it, yet in history many years must transpire before people
can talk about what Bush has done the way we talk about Churchill of
the early years of WWII or about Reagan of the cold war, both of whom
are now regarded as great strategists with great wisdom.
Regardless of how much danger the war to topple Saddam will entail,
the danger of inaction will be even greater, WWII and 9/11 are our
proof!
Therefore, no matter what, the Iraq war is righteous! And President
Bush's decision was correct!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
So said Liu Xiaobo! What a complete lack of nuance, what a distorted,
one-sided view of modern world history! Did Condi ghost-write this
piece for him when she was still ghosting every foreign policy line
George Bush spoke in 2004?
And for the western media and propaganda instruments to ignore his
views on the colonialization of China by the West and on the neocon
wars can mean only one thing: he is promoted and propped up precisely
because he is working for US government foreign policy interests.
lo yeeOn
========
casualties in the anti-terrorism wars are a necessary price to pay.
Liu gave his view in an article he wrote in 2004.
Published in Chinese on observechina.net - a website with the Chinese
name which could be translated as Laogai Foundation Observes - the
article was entitled the Iraq war and the ``Big'' US election (i.e.,
the 2004 presidential election). Note that Laogai is transliteration
of the Chinese term for reform through hard labor.
Since it is my attempt to translation into English for wider
circulation, it is a work in progress. (It will come in growing
portions until it is complete and will take some time to finish.)
Liu wrote:
=========
The Iraq War and the US Presidential Election (2004/10/30)
In this US presidential election, the question of whether the Iraq war
should have been fought has been a major topic of debate between the
Democratic party candidate Kerry and the incumbent president Bush.
Kerry seized on the US's current difficulty in Iraq to make his case,
But Bush's superior anti-terror performance, is not something Kerry's
disparaging remarks can easily erase.
Historically and in reality, the US is not a perfect nation,
nevertheless, at the minimum, it is the most idealistic and most
mission-driven free country, it led the Allies to win the fight
against fascism in WWII, helped put in motion the realization of the
rebuilding of a democratic system for each of the two most criminally
evil nations Germany and Japan, led the opposition fight against
communism/totalitarianism in the Korean war and the Vietnam war, and
in the end won the half-century long cold war between the free world
and totalitarianism; the US also helped Egypt win its independence, it
has continued to protect Israel which is surrounded by Arab countries,
without the protection, the Jews who suffered race-based genocide in
WWII could have been pushed under by the hatred of the Islamic world,
Arab hatred toward the US and the repeated violent attacks on the US
by Islamic terrorism clearly is highly connected with the enduring
American support for Israel.
[A long sentence composed of sub-sentences separated by many commas
and one semicolon.]
All these, have historically pushed the US into a position of
leadership in the free world. World attention to its presidential
election, is also proof of the US's leadership role in the world.
. . .
[And below is how the article ends:]
There is no free lunch anywhere in the world. The success of any
righteous enterprise demands lots of suffering, even at a tragic
price. This is especially true when law-abiding and civilized free
countries are confronted with immoral and unreasonable authoritarian
regimes, evil forces of terrorism and fundamentalism and the like and
must enter into a contest, it is necessary to pay a huge price to win
the final victory. The horrible catastrophe of 9/11 is the price for
the US to promote freedom, the anti-terror war after 9/11 is only the
beginning of an open contest between the forces of freedom and
terrorism, NATO soldiers and civilian casualties are the price we must
pay to fight terrorism, to overthrow Saddam's tyranny, and to build a
democratic Iraq.
Whether it is anti-terror wars or foreign relations, Bush isn't a
perfect president, nevertheless after all he won the reactive war in
Afghanistan and then the pre-emptive war in Iraq in succession.
Leftists in the West can seize on temporary setbacks to make a big
deal about it, yet in history many years must transpire before people
can talk about what Bush has done the way we talk about Churchill of
the early years of WWII or about Reagan of the cold war, both of whom
are now regarded as great strategists with great wisdom.
Regardless of how much danger the war to topple Saddam will entail,
the danger of inaction will be even greater, WWII and 9/11 are our
proof!
Therefore, no matter what, the Iraq war is righteous! And President
Bush's decision was correct!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
So said Liu Xiaobo! What a complete lack of nuance, what a distorted,
one-sided view of modern world history! Did Condi ghost-write this
piece for him when she was still ghosting every foreign policy line
George Bush spoke in 2004?
And for the western media and propaganda instruments to ignore his
views on the colonialization of China by the West and on the neocon
wars can mean only one thing: he is promoted and propped up precisely
because he is working for US government foreign policy interests.
lo yeeOn
========
Bay Area native killed in Afghanistan bombing
Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/14/BA0K1GQEDA.DTL&tsp=1
(12-14) 09:56 PST SAN CARLOS --
U.S. Army Spc. Derek Simonetta celebrated his 21st birthday with his
family in Redding and San Carlos two months ago before returning to
Afghanistan to fight. He confessed his had some misgivings about going
back.
"We're going over there to die," one service member told him.
Simonetta returned because it was his job, his family said. On Sunday,
he was one of six U.S. soldiers killed in a suicide bombing in
Kandahar province.
"He gave all he could, and he gave the maximum gift," Paul Simonetta,
62, said today of his grandson.
Born in San Francisco, Derek Simonetta attended Carlmont High School
in Belmont, where he met his wife-to-be, Kimberly, when they were
freshmen. He moved to Redding and transferred to a high school there
but kept in touch with her.
Bonnie Simonetta, 60, said her grandson had shuttled between his
parents while growing up.
"He was a young man that overcame a lot of obstacles in his life and
had absolutely become a man," she said. "He was bravely serving his
country. He was a good boy. We really loved him."
He and Kimberly married in 2008. Almost exactly two years later, Derek
Simonetta deployed to Afghanistan. In October, he came home for 16
days to celebrate his 21st birthday with his and his wife's family.
"He was so happy to be home," said Kimberly Simonetta, 20, of San
Carlos. "It was the best feeling to see his face, his smile, his
bright green eyes."
She added, "He is my world, my everything. He's not gone - he's always
with us. I know he's always with me, watching me, guiding me."
Derek Simonetta was serving in the 2nd Battalion, 502nd Infantry
Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, based at
Fort Campbell in Kentucky. The five soldiers killed with him were all
in the same unit.
Simonetta was planning to leave the Army in January 2012 and hoped to
become a deputy sheriff and start a family, his wife said. He knew his
time in the Army could be stressful and harrowing.
"I think he had some reservations because of the action he saw," his
grandmother said. "One of the things that impressed me was that he was
in a firefight the first week he was there. I told him, 'Oh my God,
Derek, what did you do? I would be scared if somebody was shooting at
me.'
"He just said, 'I just did my job.' To me, that just showed me so much
about what he turned out to be, a man who was there to do a job."
Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/14/BA0K1GQEDA.DTL&tsp=1
(12-14) 09:56 PST SAN CARLOS --
U.S. Army Spc. Derek Simonetta celebrated his 21st birthday with his
family in Redding and San Carlos two months ago before returning to
Afghanistan to fight. He confessed his had some misgivings about going
back.
"We're going over there to die," one service member told him.
Simonetta returned because it was his job, his family said. On Sunday,
he was one of six U.S. soldiers killed in a suicide bombing in
Kandahar province.
"He gave all he could, and he gave the maximum gift," Paul Simonetta,
62, said today of his grandson.
Born in San Francisco, Derek Simonetta attended Carlmont High School
in Belmont, where he met his wife-to-be, Kimberly, when they were
freshmen. He moved to Redding and transferred to a high school there
but kept in touch with her.
Bonnie Simonetta, 60, said her grandson had shuttled between his
parents while growing up.
"He was a young man that overcame a lot of obstacles in his life and
had absolutely become a man," she said. "He was bravely serving his
country. He was a good boy. We really loved him."
He and Kimberly married in 2008. Almost exactly two years later, Derek
Simonetta deployed to Afghanistan. In October, he came home for 16
days to celebrate his 21st birthday with his and his wife's family.
"He was so happy to be home," said Kimberly Simonetta, 20, of San
Carlos. "It was the best feeling to see his face, his smile, his
bright green eyes."
She added, "He is my world, my everything. He's not gone - he's always
with us. I know he's always with me, watching me, guiding me."
Derek Simonetta was serving in the 2nd Battalion, 502nd Infantry
Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, based at
Fort Campbell in Kentucky. The five soldiers killed with him were all
in the same unit.
Simonetta was planning to leave the Army in January 2012 and hoped to
become a deputy sheriff and start a family, his wife said. He knew his
time in the Army could be stressful and harrowing.
"I think he had some reservations because of the action he saw," his
grandmother said. "One of the things that impressed me was that he was
in a firefight the first week he was there. I told him, 'Oh my God,
Derek, what did you do? I would be scared if somebody was shooting at
me.'
"He just said, 'I just did my job.' To me, that just showed me so much
about what he turned out to be, a man who was there to do a job."