Quantcast The Red and Black
College Media Network

The Red and Black

Search the Archives

 

Forum will 'soil' Rusk legacy

Abstract:
The Dean Rusk Center has invited five former secretaries of state to a forum organized to give "Bipartisan Advice to the Next Administration." The ironic thing here is that a school created to "expand … [the] service … [of the] international dimensions of law," as its Web site proudly proclaims, would host severe transgressors of both international and domestic law....

  • Displaying 1 - 23 of 23

crybaby

posted 3/27/08 @ 8:15 AM EST

oh goodness, another zaid jilani column... waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Post a reply to this comment

phhhhbt!

posted 3/27/08 @ 2:03 PM EST

Originally posted by

crybaby

 oh goodness, another zaid jilani column... waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!


Shut up, already. Your comments are as shitty as your diaper, and you're stinking up the whole newspaper.
Post a reply to this comment

James

posted 3/27/08 @ 8:57 AM EST

"When civilized man can no longer stand the horror of war and refuses to fight then he will surely be killed or enslaved by the uncivilized who can."
Post a reply to this comment

you can't get a job with a bachelors in IR

posted 3/27/08 @ 9:39 AM EST

You've ignored the context of each event and pinned these individuals with the responsibility of decisions that weren't made by themselves. These decisions they made weren't made in a vacuum where the morality of each issue was clearly defined. Kissinger is probably the only person you accurately credited with immoral action.

I don't necessarily agree with your agenda to draw attention to yourself with sensational and unsubstantiated opinion articles. I noticed that you didn't comment on James Baker and Warren Christopher... ...two perfectly reasonable diplomats who never made popular headlines.
Post a reply to this comment

wow

posted 3/27/08 @ 10:07 AM EST

zaid, you are the epitome of an idiot. please transfer to ga tech, immediately.
Post a reply to this comment

Matt

posted 3/27/08 @ 10:16 AM EST

Is this how it always happens, Mr. Jilani brings up good points and perspectives -- in this case, documented facts of the public record -- and folks attack him personally rather than addressing his points?

Jilani's implicit point, it seems, is that there is a terrible ignorance of what our leaders do in our name. Attacking Zaid in a childish manner only reinforces that point.

If you haven't prepared yourself to debate his points, keep quiet.
Post a reply to this comment

Steph

posted 3/27/08 @ 10:34 AM EST

The author ignores the fact that when leaders in the US government make important decisions, their choices inevitably have good and bad effects on thousands, if not millions, of people in the US and abroad.

When Kissinger, Albright, and Powell chose to intervene, they did so with the purpose of saving lives and promoting democracy and freedom. If Kissinger hadn't intervened in North Vietnam, many people would have died at the hands of a repressive regime, and thousands more would have been deprived of basic liberties. The same goes for the intervention in Iraq.

If US leaders completely avoid getting involved in international affairs, they would be accused of being murderers by failing to use their power to save lives.

Maybe we're all murderers because we contribute to making this such a great nation, which leads to people dying in attempts to illegally cross our borders.

Jilani displays such a consistent hatred for this country and disdain for its historical choices that one wonders why he chooses to benefit from the ill-gotten gains of US prosperity by living here and learning in its university system.
Post a reply to this comment

cecil

posted 3/27/08 @ 11:15 AM EST

a little extreme but a good column if all the facts and quotes are right. i particularly like the second to last paragraph. don't let the pissy, mindless fratboys slow you down.
Post a reply to this comment

Jim

posted 3/27/08 @ 11:17 AM EST

Steph, Mr. Jilani is a patriotic American who understands that only by honestly addressing the nation's mistakes can we make our nation better. Is that a bad thing?

Where would you have stood when Georgia was a murderous slave regime and someone like Zaid would've said that slavery is wrong by all laws of God and man? Most everyone at that time -- and you, I presume -- would've said that Zaid wasn't a proper Confederate patriot.

Someone who draws attention to the nation's flaws is, I would argue, more of a patriot than you are. What are you doing, specifically, to make this a "more perfect union" as the founders prescribed? How are you exercising your democratic freedom? Because the way it looks to me is that you are only interested in worshipping America, the way one does in a religion.

There are a number of theocracies and kingdoms around the world that you might enjoy more if Zaid's patriotic, democratic criticism makes you uneasy. The Saudi Kingdom might work well for you, or maybe China (you could denounce the Tibetan liberation struggle or whatever).

But this is America. America was founded on dissent. It is OUR JOB to be critical, sister.

Maybe you're the one who hates America.
Post a reply to this comment

David

posted 3/27/08 @ 12:43 PM EST

Originally posted by

Jim

 Steph, Mr. Jilani is a patriotic American who understands that only by honestly addressing the nation's mistakes can we make our nation better. Is that a bad thing?

Where would you have stood when Georgia was a murderous slave regime and someone like Zaid would've said that slavery is wrong by all laws of God and man? Most everyone at that time -- and you, I presume -- would've said that Zaid wasn't a proper Confederate patriot.

Someone who draws attention to the nation's flaws is, I would argue, more of a patriot than you are. What are you doing, specifically, to make this a "more perfect union" as the founders prescribed? How are you exercising your democratic freedom? Because the way it looks to me is that you are only interested in worshipping America, the way one does in a religion.

There are a number of theocracies and kingdoms around the world that you might enjoy more if Zaid's patriotic, democratic criticism makes you uneasy. The Saudi Kingdom might work well for you, or maybe China (you could denounce the Tibetan liberation struggle or whatever).

But this is America. America was founded on dissent. It is OUR JOB to be critical, sister.

Maybe you're the one who hates America.


Jim, your ideas are so far from accurate and logical, it just makes me feel helpless..."murderous slave regime...looking for a more perfect union but stating a preference for dissent..." I sigh heavily and pray loudly that you never acquire power outside your laptop world. God help us.
Post a reply to this comment

Hammad

posted 3/27/08 @ 1:41 PM EST

Zaid is posting his opinions in the "Opinions" section and people choose to personally attack him and those who agree with some of his points. Are we really so ignorant that we cannot research things for ourselves, instead we must become angry at the writer and say how he is unpatriotic? He is stating his opinion--whether it be support or dissent--and that is what democracy is about. That is what some believe we are fighting for when we enter foreign nations (like the mentioned Vietnam, Iraq)--so how can we get angry at a person who exercises his rights? I respect those who refute intellectually, as some of you have and will, to his writing with counter-arguments and your own opinions. If you support policies because you feel they will eventually lead to something good despite current obstacles, I support you. If you support policies simply because not supporting them would be unpatriotic, then please reexamine your intentions. Thanks to those who posted productive comments; those of us who are not as educated are learning and will research and inevitably make decisions as well.
Post a reply to this comment

David

posted 3/27/08 @ 12:26 PM EST

When I stumbled onto this commentary, I was struck by the display of ignorance. I don't mean it in a demeaning way. However, it does validate my theory that the voting age should be raised so that naive idealists, such as some of you guys, can experience the work and tax world that you so grandly protest. When I read some of your musings, I truly lament the loss of our past and greater generations. I am sorry if I offended anyone. That was not my intention.
Post a reply to this comment

Lee

posted 3/27/08 @ 1:33 PM EST

Originally posted by

David

 When I stumbled onto this commentary, I was struck by the display of ignorance. I don't mean it in a demeaning way. However, it does validate my theory that the voting age should be raised so that naive idealists, such as some of you guys, can experience the work and tax world that you so grandly protest. When I read some of your musings, I truly lament the loss of our past and greater generations. I am sorry if I offended anyone. That was not my intention.


Please, David--you don't even TRY to obscure the fact that you're basically reiterating the "boo liberals, yay conservatives" argument. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an idealist and it would be quite a stretch to assume that all idealists are somehow naive. By involving the "work and tax world" and the "loss of our past and greater generations," you give yourself up as some sort of modern neo-conservative (since calling you a true conservative would be like calling Bush a humanitarian).

Where would our country be without a few idealists? Certainly not the power it is today. Your remark concerning raising the voting age is demeaning and goes against the ideals set forth by our Constitution (which I am more likely to trust than you, sir). You may live in the past all you like, but remember this fact--one can never return to the past, so we must look forward to the future and progress.

Finally, saying "I don't mean to offend" doesn't mean you aren't offending someone. Throwing around words like "ignorance" and "naive" and using a haughty and holier-than-thou tone in your writing WILL offend. Don't even bother with the excuses.
Post a reply to this comment

Douglas

posted 3/27/08 @ 1:35 PM EST

"It is alleged that before leaving office, Kissinger directed assassinations and coups in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Chile, Cyprus and even Washington, D.C."
- Who alleged it? Probably some far left wacko internet website, or some obscure conspiracy theorist you subscribe to. Anyone can "allege" things. Allegedly, you have a penchant for stupid looking hats, and are a whiny douchebag. There, see how easy that was?
Post a reply to this comment

Jim

posted 3/27/08 @ 1:46 PM EST

Come on y'all, we can either talk about Kissinger and his crimes or talk about Zaid Jilani.

Maybe one day we'll live in a country where the best insult about Zaid Jilani will determine the direction of the nation, but, as it stands now, we're stuck in a country where democratic decision-making and scrutiny of our public officials gets the job done.

Maybe you should leave this country if you don't feel that informed debate suits you. Be a brave pilgrim and charter your own country where childish insults constitute law and philosophy.

I'm sorry America didn't suit you.
Post a reply to this comment

Realpolitik

posted 3/27/08 @ 3:24 PM EST

Is it beyond anyone to realize that in international relations there is no such thing as morality and power is all that matters? As the most powerful state the US can largely do as it pleases. The US has acted rather ethically when one considers that there are few checks on US power. I cannot imagine a more beneficent hegemon, and I defy anyone posting here to do so. Generally the US, including Secretary Kissinger, has acted with an appropriate balance of self-interest and conscience.
Post a reply to this comment

Vincent

posted 3/27/08 @ 3:32 PM EST

I believe it's is time that Mr. Jilani and the rest of the idealistic hopefuls acknowledge that nobody lives in the quixotic world he continues to profess in each one of his columns. All of his instances describing the "crimes" committed by the Secretaries of State fail to discern the depth and profoundness that each one of those decisions entails. He speaks of an embargo under Secretary Albright that was put into effect specifically to rid an oppressed population of a tyrant and authoritarian dictator that routinely murdered his own people. This, I would argue, constitutes genocide in and of itself. He then delves into the impetuous bashing of Colin Powell, as he fixates us on seeking permission from the United Nations before acting in our country's own best interest. I can hardly begin to explain how the UN-issued economic sanctions on Iran have helped deter them from seeking nuclear energy for what they deem "peaceful purposes". It is important that we take a pragmatic and un-idealistic approach when judging our past actions and decisions in 20/20 hindsight.
Post a reply to this comment

Realpolitik

posted 3/27/08 @ 3:38 PM EST

And I have to say something about how disgraceful some of these comments are. I don't agree with Zaid, but why would I waste a second of anyone's time insulting him? It's even worse that these cretins are boring and illiterate.

Douglas, you fool, Kissinger's involvement in Indonesia is a matter of historical record and substantiated by, among others, the American ambassador to the UN at the time, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. His involvement in Chile, in the assassination of Salvador Allende, is discussed, also as an historical fact, in The Trials of Henry Kissinger by Christopher Hitchens, and by Allende's daughter's book.

I also have to say that, familiar as I am with Zaid's views, if the US had intervened in Rwanda in 1994 to prevent genocide, he would have accused Warren Christopher of war crimes. For an American policymaker unwilling to enslave his country to the UN, there is no way to please Zaid.
Post a reply to this comment

Jim

posted 3/27/08 @ 3:51 PM EST

Realpolitik, thank you for restoring some order to this debate. While I disagree with you, I appreciate your willingness to engage in an informed discussion.

Obviously, you favor Kissinger's brand of realpolitik, hence your nom de plume.

Very, very sadly, an informed imperialist is a breath of fresh air after watching the uninformed jingoists embarrass themselves on this forum.

Huzzah for engaged debate!
Post a reply to this comment

Ryan

posted 3/27/08 @ 5:11 PM EST

It seems to me that Zaid simply loves to piss people off. I say this for two reasons, first a lot of people end up pissed off by his columns. Whether or not I agree with him (which happens) I end up pissed off after reading his column.

These historical issues, as others have pointed out are documented. Its just that the facts are boiled down and then taken out of context. It is kind of like saying "Bill Clinton lied under oath." Since that memory may still be fresh in our minds many would say, "yeah, but..." They are right to do so because that one fact says little by itself. Its complicated, kind of.

He writes well, obviously has some historical awareness so I bet that if he wanted to, he could create a column designed to inform or convince. Its hard to believe he cares much about either.
Post a reply to this comment

David

posted 3/28/08 @ 8:55 AM EST

Boy, this is fun!! I had often heard of the existence of the illogical-yet-illuminated college kid, I'd just never really talked to one. Now I can begin to expand my horizons and open myself up to the vast potential that I possess. Thanks, Lee and Jim. I'm floating on air...
Post a reply to this comment

Don

posted 3/28/08 @ 11:05 AM EST

Kissinger and Thieu scuttled the '68 negotiations because they knew the North Vietnamese would not honor the terms. Did the NVA honor the '73 terms? No. But that doesn't fit your narrative of how the world works so lets ignore it and just blame it all on Kissinger. What a joke.
Post a reply to this comment

Meghan

posted 3/28/08 @ 1:16 PM EST

Why do people have to personally attack the writers of these articles? They're in the opinions section, not everyone has the same opinions. Zaid writes these articles to inform people about things that are happening in this country that need to be addressed. Our government shouldn't be harming people left and right whenever they want to. The government shouldn't focus on other countries as much as they do either. Why bother with other countries and try to "fix" them when we have plenty of problems here in the US that should be fixed first?
Post a reply to this comment
  • Displaying 1 - 23 of 23

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

 

 

Advertisement

Poll

Hmm, what to make of Kentucky vs. Georgia:
Submit Vote

View Results



Advertisement