"Where is Raed?"
December 30, 2002 7:43 PM   Subscribe

"the West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."

Samuel P. Huntington
posted by bureaustyle at 10:01 PM on December 30, 2002

Excuse me, but who expects to win the world by superior religion?
posted by spazzm at 10:26 PM on December 30, 2002

OK, macho geeky commandos, is this for real?
posted by y2karl at 10:43 PM on December 30, 2002

That Huntington quote doesn't make sense. Of course colonialism was won by the sword; however, many ideas that have led to modern prosperity are Western. Does anyone even claim that "the West won the world?"

Put it this way: A state in the Pacific Ocean or Central America, for example, is a lot more likely to try and succeed by using democratic capitalism and the scientific method than through caste systems and theocracy.
posted by Kevs at 12:46 AM on December 31, 2002

i'm with you, karl. it reads well and i'm fascinated by the whole thing, but without knowing that the guy is actually for real - it means sh*t.
posted by triv at 3:58 AM on December 31, 2002

Assuming salam's legit (and Reuters seems to think so, as do other media outlets) it's unfortunate that salam wiped his archives.

Where is Raed has been broadcasting from Bagdhad for awhile now. Maybe six months? And asking for the invasion to start. The waiting, apparently, is worse than the bombing, and Saddam is worse still.
posted by swerdloff at 7:09 AM on December 31, 2002

well, hypothetically then...how much proof do you need to decide someone is "for real"? Seems impossible to know for sure about anyone.
posted by Vidiot at 7:16 AM on December 31, 2002

I dunno about you, buster, but I'm real. Cogito, ergo sum-a-lum-a-lum.

Everything else is just a Turing test, as far as Bishop Berkeley and I are concerned.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 8:47 AM on December 31, 2002

Here is another perspective, in the form of an interesting LA Times article. Both feel "real" to me, but I have NO idea which is "more real"
posted by cell divide at 9:14 AM on December 31, 2002

For my part, I have no trouble at all believing that within Iraq one can find persons desperate for relief from Saddam's reign, and persons who would desperately defend their country regardless of the intent of the invasion, its international character, or otherwise. Countries with millions of people are funny like that, having divergent opinions and all.

For one blogger's part, personal acquaintance is apparently the proof, although we also have to take her at her word.

Also, in case it isn't clear, it's my understanding that Salam is in Baghdad, and Raed is in Amman. And although the front page of his old blogspot site is fux0red, his archives are not wiped: July 02, Aug 02, Sep 02, {somewhere in here it gets more substantial, as where_is_raed is discovered by other bloggers and begins responding} Oct 02, Nov 02. As one can find, Salam's point of view is complex: he doesn't like Saddam one bit, but neither does he whole-heartedly endorse an invasion. (Note, of course, that salam and pax are the words for "peace" in Arabic and Latin respectively.) Also, he is completely skeptical of US intent and the bona fides of exile opposition groups.

Salam worries about the attention.

Regardless, I wish him well.

By the way -- if you read this, and the archives' being out there concerns you, I'm almost certain that the good folks at Blogger will delete them for you on request; and Google will delete the cache.
posted by dhartung at 2:42 PM on December 31, 2002

Well, if there ever was a macho geeky commando...
posted by y2karl at 8:52 PM on December 31, 2002

« Older Samuel Pepy's weblog   |   Rumsfeld met Saddam in late 80s Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments