Skip to content or view screen version

Noam Chomsky on the prospects for war

Oliver | 18.09.2001 16:26

"If Pakistan does submit to U.S. demands, it is not impossible that the government will be overthrown by forces much like the Taliban -- who in this case will have nuclear weapons. That could have an effect throughout the region, including the oil producing states. At this point we are considering the possibility of a war that may destroy much of human society."

Oliver

Comments

Hide the following 12 comments

Another knee-jerk intellectual

19.09.2001 08:35

Oh yes, very clever. How many anti-US, anti-western, and indeed anti-muslim pieces have I read recently?

Oh! Hark at the voice of reason! Another voice from the wilderness! Another well-reasoned piece of junk from a well-meaning (but fundamentally biased) individual!

Balanced views? What are they? I blame Baywatch myself. Any country exporting that crap to the rest of the world is going to wind people up.

"independent media centre"? Bandwaggon-jumping, more like.

Andy

Andy Watt
mail e-mail: yeah_right@email.com

that last posting

19.09.2001 09:17

i blame the daily mail myself...

thnurk
mail e-mail: thnurk@kraaxx.com

poor wee soul

19.09.2001 10:50

it must be hard for dull-witted pizza-munching Homer Simpsons like andy to understand anything which isn't a blood-slathered yell on behalf of the Stars and Stripes to murder millions of innocent civilians - such as those described by NC on the borders of pakistan seeking refuge from the taliban.

i blame Pizza Hut home deliveries myself - some people just dont get out the house enough

Kevin W

Yes bu the facts...

19.09.2001 12:05

Whether you think the man is a living god or the devil incarnate (personally I think the former) You have to agree that what is missing from current discussion (exemplified by the posts above) is a total lack of factual basis. If you know absolutely nothing about the situation, best not to comment until you have done a bit of background reading!

Ben
mail e-mail: medicentre@hotmail.com

WTF is a bandwagon anyway?

19.09.2001 12:16

Hi there
Have you read anything else written by Chomsky? He is very scholarly. I would recommend anything he has written. I would recommend reading both sides of every story and then try to winkle the truth out of it. Making a fool of yourself on public forums is not really the most effective way to gain an understanding of world affairs now, is it?

These pieces might give ou an idea of where the resentment in the middle-east comes from.
 http://zena.secureforum.com/Znet/chomsky/dd/

 http://awfultruth.piranho.de/chomsky_middle_east.html

Cheers
mjarsk

mjarsk

On: Chomsky

19.09.2001 14:22

I don't know what's this about a 'knee-jerk intellectual'. Any sane peson who's read some of his work can see Chomsky is the most acute thinker of our age.

Luke

same old story

19.09.2001 17:19

Now, if I had a pound for every right-wing troll that pops up and denounces anything that is less than war-mongering racism and abdecating any resposibility, whilst themselves offering no substantial critique ( evidence ) I'd be fairly wealthy.

If I had a pound for every article that pointed out what the majority of reporateg is selective at best, I would be considerably less wealthy.

Now if I had a pound for every table thumping patriot baying for war whilst not elisting themselves, I'd be smoking cigars with Bill Gates.

I'll see you heroes at the Battle of the Doritos, HQ CNN.

:-(

Mustermann
mail e-mail: spam@spam.spam

uhh, knee jerk?

20.09.2001 07:01

Pardon me, but one of the implied themes of this interview was the intentional quashing and selective reporting by media in the United States. Given that Mr. Chomsky cowrote Manufacturing Consent in 1988, a book where the entirety was devoted to the same type of argument, how can this interview be classified as a so called knee-jerk reaction?

Lee Zamparo
mail e-mail: none@none.com

Andy Watt is more interesting than Chomsky

21.09.2001 02:17

Andy Watt,
(HOPE you're not the Andy Watt I know, from Glasgow?)

Your response confuses me. Where does Mr. Chomsky say that he is anti muslim? How do you think he is fundamentally biased? Or are you talkling about yourself? I agree that Baywatch is crap, but the danger of broadcasting boobies and muscles is, in my opinion, minimal, compared to broadcasting unformed and uninformed rants, like in your case. As for bandwagons, Noam Chomsky is not jumping on the bankwagon; he IS the bandwagon, and many people would do the world a favor by hopping on. I only wish this bandwagon would attract huge numbers of adherents, but Noam doesn't have muscles, or boobs, alas, the elements that hold Americas attention. Your response is muddled and silly, and I'm sorry I even chose to give you attention by responding to it.

Cielia
mail e-mail: sillyhatch@hotmail.com

For Mr. Watt, and others

21.09.2001 02:20

Chomsky ranks with Marx, Shakespeare and the Bible as one of the 10 most quoted sources in the humanities - and is the only writer among them still alive. Even one of his staunchest critics, the philosopher Hilary Putnam, acknowledged that reading Chomsky was to be "struck by a sense of great intellectual power; one knows one is encountering an extraordinary mind", whose virtues included "originality and scorn for the faddish and superficial". His dual prowess, in linguistics and politics, and some 70 books, have fuelled suspicions that there must be two Chomskys. Yet their relationship remains an enigma. When the New York Times called him "arguably the most important intellectual alive today"
Taken from an article in The Guardian
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4120040,00.html

Mark

For Mr. Watt, and others

21.09.2001 02:27

Chomsky ranks with Marx, Shakespeare and the Bible as one of the 10 most quoted sources in the humanities - and is the only writer among them still alive. Even one of his staunchest critics, the philosopher Hilary Putnam, acknowledged that reading Chomsky was to be "struck by a sense of great intellectual power; one knows one is encountering an extraordinary mind", whose virtues included "originality and scorn for the faddish and superficial". His dual prowess, in linguistics and politics, and some 70 books, have fuelled suspicions that there must be two Chomskys. Yet their relationship remains an enigma. When the New York Times called him "arguably the most important intellectual alive today"
Taken from an article in The Guardian
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4120040,00.html

Mark

Chomsky OWNS

28.11.2001 22:21

Noam Chomksy is most definantly extremely intelligent and one of the most knowledgeable people on the planet. I am glad For you Andy, that you have the guts to disagree with such a compelling argument. It shows an important strength (I think). It must be said though, that Chomsky makes a point of being as moderate as possible in his phrasings and ideas. He attempts to keep form being a left-wing alarmist, and sticks to facts and obvious truths. In short, Chomsky owns. Don't knock Chomsky.

Andrew K.