Disqus - Latest Comments for gizhou

Re: Weatherheading the Storm | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:47:29 -0000

bniothing new here folks. The Swedes tried the same method in the 1920s and 30s with Laplanders including forced sterilisation, and you could also argue the Russians have done the same thing in Chechnya- removed an entire generation to stop atatcks against its forces. It's hard top breed when most of the males have been killed or disappear. The forced movement of entire ethnic groups was a favored method of Stalin incidently.

Re: Student Groups Celebrate White Ribbon Against Pornography Week | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:22:59 -0000

What about gay porn? That does not appear to have been broached. Did all the Catholic priests jailed in the United States and elsewhere for child sexual assault did not watch hard core pornography? Did Dr Franks touch on that abomination?

Re: Student Groups Celebrate White Ribbon Against Pornography Week | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:19:11 -0000

Re: RE: “The Sri Lankan Dilemma” (Thrishantha Nanayakkara, Feb. 3, 2010) | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:36:26 -0000

Pardon me but the Chief of Defence Staff was no supporter of terrorism as he lost thousand sof his own soldiers, sailors and airmen in the fight to crush the Tamil rebellion/struggle for freedom (insert your term here). It was a particularly bitter and 'dirty' war, as wars go, so it is not unsurprising that many Sinhalese family donot to want reconcilliation, as all would have been touched in some way by the war .

It is often the military commander turned politician who has the credibilty to bring reconcilliation, as Generals Grant and Ramos showed. They had/have the respect of the military to offer generous terms to the defeated foes.

Thirdly, the external Tamils (who are often 'more Tamil than the Tamils' although having never live dor even vsiited Sril Lanka or Tamil Nadu) need to realise that it is now up to the people of Sri Lanka to sort the issues out. Many Tamils would have been coerced into fighting so now peace must be given a chance.

It would appear however, that the Sri Lankan government is still in war mode, and wishes to punish all the Tamils who lived in Tamil Elam, as did the victorious Allies at the end of the First World War. This will only be counter-productive in the long run.

Re: LETTER | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:58:57 -0000

Lest this become the he said, she said argument that occurred over the original opinion article, and I was one of them, what anyone says will be hounded down in ad hominen attacks. I can only conclude that anyone arguing from the center will cop it from both sides. Some facts:

The use of white phosphorous IS NOT illegal and it can be argued that nearly every military force has some in stock. The argument is whether it use in Gaza was appropriate.

Israel DID NOT directly target civilians as if they did the Palestinian casualty figures would be measured in the tens of thousands.

It IS NOT the most pressing issue of our time. Clean water it can be argued is the world's most preesing problem. I would bet that nine out of ten Americans could not even point to Palestine or Israel on a map, New York or Washington DC excepted :-).

Palestinians are only tolerated in many Arab nations. Most Arab nations support a Palestine for Palestinians, not because of some Arab brotherhood , but to get the refugee camps out of their countries. Palestinians are discriminated against in many Arab countries like the gypsies are in Eastern Europe. Just ask any senior member of the PLO what happened in Jordan when they tried to create something akin to Palestine there. They were herded into Lebanon at the point of a tank barrel - which became known as Black September.

The biggest supporter of the Palestinian militants isn't even an Arab nation. Iran is Persian.

What all this means is that it is far more complicated than people take it to be, and despite the spirited arguments heer, the average person in the world couldn't care. I do but I am not your average person.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:13:42 -0000

Tatz I am not hard to find on the net if you want to contact me

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:58:07 -0000

Actually I am not and will happily debate you all day - perhaps agreeing to disagree is what we must end up doing, as I applaud you actually working in the Palestinian homelands. The crux of my argument is that if your fire rockets and mortar rounds into Israel you must expect a response. My biggest complaint is your using the words Zionist, terrorist and Israeli in the same breath. Internationals can be a pain in the ass for all concerned, as are the media as people play up for the camera. Both have the habit of inflaming a situation, as for some notion many internationals believe their country of origin somehow protects them, and every cause needs a martyr. You didn't see a Palestinian facing off a bulldozer because they know what would happen.

I have had to explain to UN soldeirs, who had picked up melted Palestinian refugees, what happened years after the event. The camp received artillery fire after Israeli soldiers came under attack. The artillery rounds carried cluster muntions equipped with incendiary zirconium rings, which were unncessary as they wre the wrong munition for the target. I know peacekeepers who were put under three days or Israeli artillery fire, and who fought Isareli armour successfully protecting Lebanese villages. You don't hear me supporting Israeli actions there.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:49:37 -0000

As for Rachel Corrie, being an American or Swedish does not guarantee protection in a conflict zone. She has become, alas a footnote to a long and sorry conflict. People on construction and mining sites no better than to walk in front of a D-9 bulldozer, let alone one with vision blocks and armour plated, reducing the driver's vision. The armour is there to stop bullets and RPG rounds killing the driver. All armoured vehicles, as does the family car, have 'blind spots', and the bulldozer also has a large steel blade. Professional soldiers do not enjoy killing, it is part of the job, and would prefer to be at home in bed. Many recent military operations

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:30:51 -0000

Post moderation - Greta, if what you write is true, and Palsolidarity.org I am afraid is not the most reliable of sources, then those people should be charged under Israeli Law. Manning a checkpoint is often difficult, as by military law you cannot leave it except to perform a military function. What if a terrorist got through as you were handling an incident outside your jurisdiction. As soon as it became violent, the soldiers intervened. As no Israeli homosexuals have been executed for being homosexual, unlike Iranian ones, your argument goes no where. Rememebr actions speak louder than words.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:10:06 -0000

This is now being moderated which should lead to less name calling. It will be interesting to see what gets through.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:58:43 -0000

Great,

Action speaks louder than words. Since you brought gay rights into it. When was the last time an openly homesexual man was executed in Israel for being openly homosexual - never. Now should I point out the obvious to what happens to openly homosexual men in Iran, or women in Saudi Arabia and Iran who don't dress in accordance with state edict? Oops I forgot, there are no homosexuals in Iran, Abberdabadindong said so.

I don't condone what allegedly happened in Tove today, I would like to see a more reliable source, but if it did I expect the soldiers manning the check point would be charged if the Swedish Embassy cares to write a complaint. Except, what were the soldiers supposed to do as they were manning a road block. Internal security is a police matter, it can be traumatic watching shit happen in the military, ask any one who has done peacekeeping, and not being able to intervene. They nmay have been turned on by the crowd. Ask the police about how riots start and the issues of crowd control and proportional response.

As for Rachel Corrie, alas she has become a footnote to history. Shields get broken in combat all the time, and regretable as it was and I am not justifying it, war is war. Being an American or Swedish does not confer any particular protection in a combat zone. Again, ask anyone who has been a peacekeeper.

Greta, Have you actively ever got involved and tried to help people out, on the ground instead of the safety of your basement?

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:52:32 -0000

Actually not a homophobe dear, just stating an obvious fact having worked with more than one Arab military force, they do like nice young men. Some people sit and write blogs and some go out and have adventures, then write blogs. Some of us just have a life and alas.... some never really leave the environment of the school yard and go and work in academia. It is much easier commenting than going out and actually trying to change things in the world.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:26:12 -0000

I'm being remnded here of the old adage - My mind is made up - don't confuse me with the facts. Someone that runs a blog site and uses his own ravings to justify his coments isn't worth debating as he is just trying to jusitfy his lack of argument with thin air. Empty vessels make the largest noise, and debating such an individual really does taint one's body with the odour of hatred, or in this case, women's perfume .

I find that most vocal 'anti-Zionists' hide behind the petticoat of the First Amendment, too scared to actually go and live in Gaza. Thorsprovoni sounds like one of these, probably not wishing to stain his satin and lace underwear, as if he met an Hamas terrorist ooops freedom fiighter he would fall onto his knees. Having worked with Arab's you just know what will happen next ;-). Providing assistance to the fashion and entertainment industries just reinforces the argument.

Greta, get a life dear.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:38:22 -0000

Like firing rockets into Israel perhaps? Greta, you have side stepped all my questions with regard to Hamas aggression against Israel. You really should quit whilst you are behind. Shrill arguments do not a discussion make. Attacking Saracen, who has been THE voice of reason, is this debate shows the paucity of your arguments and lack of knowledge outside your rather limited reading. Thinks to one self she must be from Yale.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:17:05 -0000

Greta, Your arguments are spurious at best. No nation, lets people come in and inspect their entire weapons arsenal. Name one. Russia and the United States allow open vists to designated nuclear sites but other nations have not agreed to let inspectors IAEA into their facilities, India, Pakistan and China are three off the top of my head. Iran is the country currently facing United Nations sanctions over building secret nuclear enrichment plants, and there is that hole in the ground in Syria, that housed something that Syria will not explain what it was.

Let's see - I do not see people of the Jewish faith calling for Jewish religious law to supercede statute law in Britain or Australia. It is sections of the Islamic faith caling foir Shariah law , and not all of them either. Many people of the Islamic faith emigrated to Britain and Australia to get away from all that.

Greta, finally your attacking the Jewish faith by quote: 'someone's idea of a "holy book" says that a big super hero in the sky promised it to them? You can't be serious! ' attacks Christianity and Islam as they both believe they are descendents of Abraham, or refer to Abraham as part of their religion.

You reallly need to take stock of your comments, and remove the rhetoric and anti-Semitism from your comments. 'You keep referring to 'The Jews', which sounds like something out of the discredited 'protocols of Zion'. Please keep the argument on the facts, without name calling, or putting your words as coming from the mouths of other people.

May I ask, have you ever studied, or been affiliated with Harvard, because your comments really do not reflect well on the people from all sides of the argument from my time there. I never heard such vitirol, and I was present and sometimes involved in some vigorous debates and conferences, most of which had nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:39:51 -0000

ThorsProvoni. I take your arguments on board except there are a few holes in them you could drive a tank division through, Isareli or otherwise.

Blogspots are not genrally not a reference that I would let an undergraduate use, they are personal opinions of an individual. Of course, if one were examining blogspots.....

I generally believe Mearshiemer to be excellent at what he does, military and operational level strategy and there is at least one recent international relations professor with a military background. I have crossed swords, metaphorically speaking with Walt, and disagree with many things he says on military strategy. However, I believe the issue of an 'Israeli Lobby' is one of many 'Zionist Conspiracy' theories taht abound, but one could argue equally there is a 'Saudi lobby' extant in Britain, given the contrevosry over the government closing an investigations into bribes for military contracts. on the grounds of 'national interest'.

Guilt by association seems to be the basis of Walt and Mearshimer's book and I have no doubt that Israel lobbies sections of the United States government ,as do countries from all over the world including Arab ones. That is the nature of the game of politcs in Washington other capitals around the world. Perhaps the Israeli's do it smarter, or just perhaps, because it is the only democracy in the Middle East it gets the support of the general population in the United States.

I have seen many anti-Israeli comments by speakers at Harvard, and taken one individual to task in a seminar, as it would appear that some of Israel's most vocal critics in academia, even if from arab backgrounds, live in the West. Perhaps they prefer the ability to speak freely, and not get a knock on the door at 2 a.m. from their own governments. Freedom of expression, thought and action are not a strong point in Arab countries, nor is the rule of law.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:05:31 -0000

Thorsprovini- You accuse people of being Zionist as if it is an insult. I am neither Jewish, Christian or Muslim as I am Buddhist, and I take the view that Israel has the right to exist. If that makes me a Zionist, I proudly wear the tag. I also take the view that Xinjiang and Tibet should be independent nations so I that makes me a 'separatist' in Chinese eyes.

You have failed to answer my questions however you quick with the hyperbole and low on the facts. Greta, bachouti and Thorsprovni all forget two salient points.

Firstly, when Israel was founded, one of the first acts of the IDF formed from the Haganah was to disarm the Irgun. This was so there was only one group holding weapons representing the stste of Israel. The Irgun wanted to carry on fighting and the Israeli government wanted no part of it as it had to get the country running etc.

At present Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO all claim to represent the Palestinian people, the first two through continued violence. There can only be one group representing the Palestinian people, so the other two are illegitimate if the Palestinians say they are an independent country.

Secondly my argument was not answered. Why is Hamas firing rockets into Israel when all it does is get retalitory action back? Israel is responding to rocket attacks against its country, and as a result of this action by Hamas, cannot develop the area near Gaza for that reason. Weapons instead of food and medicine. A functioning Gaza will only occur if it stops firing ordnance into Israel, as Israel has the right to self defence under the charter of the United Nations.

Gaza with a functioning civil administration of schools, hospitals etc, because it is concerned with the welfare of its people and not continuing the conflict, would show the world that Hamas truly wants peace. Instead, all it does is continue the bloodshed.

Re: Masturbation is an Honor Code Violation | FlyByBlog | Harvard Life. To Go.

gizhou — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:52:16 -0000

Dianakat,

I agree. Heaven forbid that Harvard alumni breed and then become students at Yale, which of course rhymes with jail.

Re: Defending the Indefensible | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:47:03 -0000

It would appear a course in ordnance 101 is in order. Chinese designed and manufactured rockets and guided missiles, courtesy of Iran, have been fired by Hamas, as well as the locally manufactured ones. Most of the rockets were not manufactured locally, as there isn't a solid propellant factory in Gaza capable of making sufficient proplellant, let alone the chemicals being smuggled in. The munitions or engines are coming in pre-made via tunnels etc. Rockets instead of food and medicine, now there is a recipe for trouble and wasted resources.

Hamas controls Gaza and knows that by firing missiles near hospitals, schools and places of worship that retalitory fire will damage these buildings due to the size of the incoming warheads. If Israel were using the same type of rockets as Hamas, the death toll amongst the Palestinians would be much worse. Israeli weapons are accurate, Hamas ones are not by design and poor manufacture, and I have no doubt that some accidentally explode on launch creating 'acts of Israeli genocide' as it has been reported more times than I care to believe. Even Al Jazeera reports Hamas are using rockets near protected places. Interestingly the report also mentioned the use of anti-personnel fragmentation warheads by Hamas being fired into Israel., as well as white phosphorous use by the Israeli Defence Force. Neither white phosphorous, or are the Hamas anti-personnel fragmentation warheads are banned under the Geneva Conventions, so that really is a nil argument under international treaty law.

The crux of the argument is that if Hamas didn't fire rockets into Israel, they wouldn't have retaliated. Under nourished and sick children being denied assistance as politicians prefer 'playing soldier to builder', deliberatley affecting the future of their citizens.

Thorsprovoni, free speech which you will no doubt use to counter my comments, brings with it responsibilites along with rights. Alluding to some 'Zionist conspiracy' at Harvard really is quite low, is not worthy of comment, lowers the tone of the discussion, and destroys the power of your argument. Using the 'race card' belittles the achievements that Harvard, and its students over the centuries, have done to make the place a better world. Similarly, insulting an ambassador, from a democratically elected country, shows your complete lack of the issues behind Middle East politcs. If you can't argue with facts your contributions and comments just turn it into a 'forum for insluts' which is the last thing the children of Gaza need.

Re: Scrambling in Africa | The Harvard Crimson

gizhou — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:54:32 -0000

You should have mentioned that China is damming the sources of nine of Asia's ten major river sytems, primarily in Tibet. If this is not interfering with the internal affairs of other nations by restricting the waterflows, I don't know what is. When challenged at an international conference over this, the Chinese Communist Party's spokesperson's carefully prepared and stage managed facade broke down completely. She angrily informed the conference that China does what it wants to and doesn't care what other nations or people think. I asked the question of the panel she was involved in and it finished the conference on a positive note, not.

Re: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/25/coffee-theres-black-drink/

gizhou — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 05:18:33 -0000

If made correctly, black coffee releases the true essence of the beans. It takes a half an hour to do it properly and who has the time?

Re: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/23/troops-afghanistan-afghan-american/

gizhou — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:55:47 -0000

Futher to my comments, I sent my email address to the Crimson as I would like to send some of my pieces to you, both publiashed and unpublished.

Re: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/23/troops-afghanistan-afghan-american/

gizhou — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:17:18 -0000

Without trying to sound patronising, you do realise you are talking about stationing troops year round at altitudes over 4,000 metres; in extremely dangerous weather with triple sub-zero temperatures in Winter, to be fired upon by 107mm rockets at will by people knowing that they can't be shot back at, due to their firing from inside Pakistan.

In Winter, the Taliban would be the least of the troops' worries as erratic resupply and trying to survive the climate would be higher on the priority list. Best you study the work of Les Grau from the US Army's Foreign Military Studies Office, and talk to some of the Military Fellows about high-altitude warfare, before writing on military matters about Afghanistan or anywhere for that matter.

Re: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/18/out-coming-one-gay/

gizhou — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:57:06 -0000

Silpa, he offered to tell me and I really don't care about my friends' sexuality, as it is none of my business. I accept people for who they are, not what they are, and this is coming from someone witha stronmg conservative background so again you can't generalise. He wanted to tell me he was gay as he had been grappling with his sexuality for many years. He also came out on Face Book to tell the wrorld.

My generation (he just turned 50) is very different and his 'coming out' was a joy to him, please don't try and read anything else into his or my actions. When you finish college, and join the real world, people often feel obligated to tell you and just rejoice in their feelings.

Re: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/18/out-coming-one-gay/

gizhou — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:16:52 -0000

An old friend of mine 'came out' the other day and was surprised, almost upset, when I wasn't shocked. I told him I had known for quite a while about his sexuality, but it was of no concern to me, as after all, he is a friend. Many people generally know before a friend 'comes out' of their friend's sexuality, but accept that when they feel comfortable they will tell you.