Maybe it's 'cause I'm an old guy--and therefore my political attitudes developed long before 9/11--but I feel great sympathy for the protagonist.
Another factor: I've read extensively about the horrific effects of American foreign policy on the Third World. Initially the U.S. interfered primarily in Central and South America--the "Monroe Doctrine"--but after WWII, the covert apparatus (CIA et al) spread through the world. Especially in Africa and the Middle East.
(The CIA does perform a little bit of actual intelligence gathering. But it's not their primary function; internally, these are considered the shit jobs. It's the paramilitary hijinks--ultraviolent spook stuff--which get the dollars and the prestige.)
It's difficult to find places on the globe where we haven't subverted local democratic movements in order to preserve the rule of dictators. American-based companies doing business around the world want "stability," which means they get cheap labor and natural resources...while the local population gets decimated. (Usually economically. But if war is necessary, well...we're pretty good at that.)
Example: the coup (engineered by the USA) against democratically-elected Mossadegh in '50s Iran. American business was happier with the Shah, whose SAVAK secret police were notorious as among the most brutal--and perversely imaginative--torturers on the planet. By the '70s all moderate opposition had been killed off--literally--so is it surprising the only force capable of deposing the Shah were Islamic fundamentalists?
Just one case. You'll find stories like this repeated again and again: throughout the years, no matter where you look. The U.S. even meddles with the internal political affairs of its allies: Italy and Australia for example.
OK Mojique sees his country being overrun by Western business, so he begins killing people, hoping to use fear to "drive them away."
He "has the past to guide him." If he lives in a poor country, he has ancestors who've fought similar guerilla campaigns in the past. Or who failed to resist, and watched helplessly as their country was nearly destroyed.
Let's bring things closer to home.
Imagine, oh, let's say...Russia secretly plans to ship U.S. oil and timber and wheat (etc. etc.) overseas: for the benefit of the wealthy in that country. (No, it isn't likely. But just try to imagine. It'll make things seem less abstract.)
The foreign government's security apparatus (the former KGB) sends operatives to the United States: fixing elections, using bribes and graft and assassinations to radically change everything about American society. The ultimate goal is to enslave Americans, under total Russian control.
Would the U.S. government, military--even civilians--simply allow these things to happen?
They'd be willing to kill, in order to preserve what's rightfully theirs.
@foreverdrone You're just going through contortions to legitimize Peter Gabrel's legitimization of political murder and terrorism. I lost a son to an IED ambush in Iraq.
I wish I could say that I hope Peter Gabriel never has to deal with that hell, but perhaps losing a son to a political murderer would raise his consciousness to what he's romanticizing in this song. As for me, I used to think nothing would justify the use of a nuclear device. My mind has changed. Asymmetric warfare works both ways.
@foreverdrone You're just going through contortions to legitimize Peter Gabrel's legitimization of political murder and terrorism. I lost a son to an IED ambush in Iraq.
I wish I could say that I hope Peter Gabriel never has to deal with that hell, but perhaps losing a son to a political murderer would raise his consciousness to what he's romanticizing in this song. As for me, I used to think nothing would justify the use of a nuclear device. My mind has changed. Asymmetric warfare works both ways.
I note you said your son died in Iraq. Not in Washington or Chicago or LA but Iraq. So what was he doing in Iraq? Invading it. Regime change as Bush said. Regime change is not legal under international law and sadly for you, the world biggest rogue nation is your nation.
I note you said your son died in Iraq. Not in Washington or Chicago or LA but Iraq. So what was he doing in Iraq? Invading it. Regime change as Bush said. Regime change is not legal under international law and sadly for you, the world biggest rogue nation is your nation.
The song was written by Talking Heads, Peter Gabriel covered it.
The song was written by Talking Heads, Peter Gabriel covered it.
Maybe it's 'cause I'm an old guy--and therefore my political attitudes developed long before 9/11--but I feel great sympathy for the protagonist.
Another factor: I've read extensively about the horrific effects of American foreign policy on the Third World. Initially the U.S. interfered primarily in Central and South America--the "Monroe Doctrine"--but after WWII, the covert apparatus (CIA et al) spread through the world. Especially in Africa and the Middle East.
(The CIA does perform a little bit of actual intelligence gathering. But it's not their primary function; internally, these are considered the shit jobs. It's the paramilitary hijinks--ultraviolent spook stuff--which get the dollars and the prestige.)
It's difficult to find places on the globe where we haven't subverted local democratic movements in order to preserve the rule of dictators. American-based companies doing business around the world want "stability," which means they get cheap labor and natural resources...while the local population gets decimated. (Usually economically. But if war is necessary, well...we're pretty good at that.)
Example: the coup (engineered by the USA) against democratically-elected Mossadegh in '50s Iran. American business was happier with the Shah, whose SAVAK secret police were notorious as among the most brutal--and perversely imaginative--torturers on the planet. By the '70s all moderate opposition had been killed off--literally--so is it surprising the only force capable of deposing the Shah were Islamic fundamentalists?
Just one case. You'll find stories like this repeated again and again: throughout the years, no matter where you look. The U.S. even meddles with the internal political affairs of its allies: Italy and Australia for example.
OK Mojique sees his country being overrun by Western business, so he begins killing people, hoping to use fear to "drive them away."
He "has the past to guide him." If he lives in a poor country, he has ancestors who've fought similar guerilla campaigns in the past. Or who failed to resist, and watched helplessly as their country was nearly destroyed.
Let's bring things closer to home.
Imagine, oh, let's say...Russia secretly plans to ship U.S. oil and timber and wheat (etc. etc.) overseas: for the benefit of the wealthy in that country. (No, it isn't likely. But just try to imagine. It'll make things seem less abstract.)
The foreign government's security apparatus (the former KGB) sends operatives to the United States: fixing elections, using bribes and graft and assassinations to radically change everything about American society. The ultimate goal is to enslave Americans, under total Russian control.
Would the U.S. government, military--even civilians--simply allow these things to happen?
They'd be willing to kill, in order to preserve what's rightfully theirs.
@foreverdrone You're just going through contortions to legitimize Peter Gabrel's legitimization of political murder and terrorism. I lost a son to an IED ambush in Iraq.
I wish I could say that I hope Peter Gabriel never has to deal with that hell, but perhaps losing a son to a political murderer would raise his consciousness to what he's romanticizing in this song. As for me, I used to think nothing would justify the use of a nuclear device. My mind has changed. Asymmetric warfare works both ways.
@foreverdrone You're just going through contortions to legitimize Peter Gabrel's legitimization of political murder and terrorism. I lost a son to an IED ambush in Iraq.
I wish I could say that I hope Peter Gabriel never has to deal with that hell, but perhaps losing a son to a political murderer would raise his consciousness to what he's romanticizing in this song. As for me, I used to think nothing would justify the use of a nuclear device. My mind has changed. Asymmetric warfare works both ways.
loupgarous
loupgarous
I note you said your son died in Iraq. Not in Washington or Chicago or LA but Iraq. So what was he doing in Iraq? Invading it. Regime change as Bush said. Regime change is not legal under international law and sadly for you, the world biggest rogue nation is your nation.
I note you said your son died in Iraq. Not in Washington or Chicago or LA but Iraq. So what was he doing in Iraq? Invading it. Regime change as Bush said. Regime change is not legal under international law and sadly for you, the world biggest rogue nation is your nation.
The song was written by Talking Heads, Peter Gabriel covered it.
The song was written by Talking Heads, Peter Gabriel covered it.