Comments on: What’s wrong with Michael Roberts’ enthusiasm for a “knock-out blow?” http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/ Groundviews is an award winning Sri Lankan citizen journalism initiative Fri, 25 May 2012 05:42:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dayan Jayatilleka http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/#comment-4937 Dayan Jayatilleka Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:38:32 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1113#comment-4937 That's true of serious politics as well. Lenin identified the central issue of politics as "Kto-Kogo?" meaning literally "Who-whom?" ("Who wins, who prevails over whom?") Carl Schmitt demarcates 'the political' as a field defined by "the friend/enemy distinction". Mao identified the main question as "who are our friends? who are our enemies?" That's true of serious politics as well. Lenin identified the central issue of politics as "Kto-Kogo?" meaning literally "Who-whom?" ("Who wins, who prevails over whom?") Carl Schmitt demarcates 'the political' as a field defined by "the friend/enemy distinction". Mao identified the main question as "who are our friends? who are our enemies?"

]]> By: Observer http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/#comment-4923 Observer Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:51:00 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1113#comment-4923 I have in the past worked for an intelligence agency in limited capacity. And let me tell you during times of engagement, there is ALWAYS US & THEM. In my experience there are never neutrals – no matter how neutral they seem. Part of the intelligence’ job is to accurately clarify who are us and who are them. I totally understand what Prof. Roberts is trying to say and I also understand why some of ya’ll are peeved at his sentiments. In fact the very reason for this rebuttal is for you to clarify whether Prof. Roberts is with “us or them”. Most of you haven’t been in the midst of a battle to feel the intensity and stress to understand this. When battle lines are drawn and enemies are clearly identified, armies get to work that they have been training all their life for. And it ends when the job is done. And here’s the point most of you don’t understand. There is an option to save lives. It is called surrender. It entitles absolute impunity from harm to the surrendering party and in fact sometimes it is enough grounds to call upon an independent force to ensure their safety during the surrender. So across a clearly defined battle line, the attacking army can and will exert force (without the need for a ceasefire) upon the enemy until such time there is surrender. Welcome to war. Most of you will never work in the defence establishment. I have in the past worked for an intelligence agency in limited capacity. And let me tell you during times of engagement, there is ALWAYS US & THEM. In my experience there are never neutrals – no matter how neutral they seem. Part of the intelligence’ job is to accurately clarify who are us and who are them. I totally understand what Prof. Roberts is trying to say and I also understand why some of ya’ll are peeved at his sentiments. In fact the very reason for this rebuttal is for you to clarify whether Prof. Roberts is with “us or them”.

Most of you haven’t been in the midst of a battle to feel the intensity and stress to understand this. When battle lines are drawn and enemies are clearly identified, armies get to work that they have been training all their life for. And it ends when the job is done. And here’s the point most of you don’t understand. There is an option to save lives. It is called surrender. It entitles absolute impunity from harm to the surrendering party and in fact sometimes it is enough grounds to call upon an independent force to ensure their safety during the surrender.

So across a clearly defined battle line, the attacking army can and will exert force (without the need for a ceasefire) upon the enemy until such time there is surrender. Welcome to war. Most of you will never work in the defence establishment.

]]> By: informer http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/#comment-4913 informer Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:58:16 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1113#comment-4913 It seems that you have left the country over 20 years ago and don't know the situation clearly. Too bad. You are like the blind guy who caught the tale of an elephant. It seems that you have left the country over 20 years ago and don't know the situation clearly. Too bad. You are like the blind guy who caught the tale of an elephant.

]]> By: Justin http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/#comment-4910 Justin Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:37:49 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1113#comment-4910 The Nazis or fascists here are the Sinhalese Buddhists and their state. "Buddhists don't kill a dog but can kill a Tamil" is the philosophy behind the killing, murder, genocide and cluster bombings. Sri Lanka(SL) is broadcasting this Buddhist cult philosophy to the world by its brutal actions on Tamils. And there are paid personnel by the state to defend this philosophy. The Sri Lankan state is following this policy with a clenched fist. It is defiant and arrogant to requests by the world to stop this brutality because the state is drunk with thirst for Tamil blood. The attitude of the state to the others is "shut up". This matter is at such a worse state because Britain and India have been "humbugging" to Tamils and supporting the genocidal activities. Both India and Britain are happy with second class treatment of Tamils, human rights violations and genocide. Tamil Eelam is the only solution for this problem. Political and true history supports this. But India and Britain are against the freedom of Tamils. Why? Historians know the reason. The Nazis or fascists here are the Sinhalese Buddhists and their state.

"Buddhists don't kill a dog but can kill a Tamil" is the philosophy behind the killing, murder, genocide and cluster bombings. Sri Lanka(SL) is broadcasting this Buddhist cult philosophy to the world by its brutal actions on Tamils. And there are paid personnel by the state to defend this philosophy.

The Sri Lankan state is following this policy with a clenched fist. It is defiant and arrogant to requests by the world to stop this brutality because the state is drunk with thirst for Tamil blood. The attitude of the state to the others is "shut up".

This matter is at such a worse state because Britain and India have been "humbugging" to Tamils and supporting the genocidal activities. Both India and Britain are happy with second class treatment of Tamils, human rights violations and genocide.

Tamil Eelam is the only solution for this problem. Political and true history supports this. But India and Britain are against the freedom of Tamils. Why? Historians know the reason.

]]> By: ishan http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/#comment-4909 ishan Thu, 19 Feb 2009 07:41:17 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1113#comment-4909 for once and for all,, please get this to your head. NO MORE NEGOCIATIONS WITH LTTE>>> you guys dont get the point... for once and for all,, please get this to your head. NO MORE NEGOCIATIONS WITH LTTE>>> you guys dont get the point…

]]> By: Dayan Jayatilleka http://groundviews.org/2009/02/18/what%e2%80%99s-wrong-with-michael-roberts%e2%80%99-enthusiasm-for-a-%e2%80%9cknock-out-blow%e2%80%9d/#comment-4908 Dayan Jayatilleka Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:30:01 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1113#comment-4908 How did "fascist tendencies" become "on its way to full fledged fascism"? A "tendency" isn't evidence of an inevitable transition. Furthermore, how did "fascist tendencies " become "semi-fascist"? I wonder whether Prof Roberts would prefer to revise his assessment from "fascist tendencies" to "fascistic elements"or "elements with fascist tendencies"? And how does the fact of aerial bombing become evidence of the nondemocratic or undemocratic nature of the administration or state doing the bombing? Is the argument that democracies do not bomb while fighting back against secessionist and or terrorist armies/militia? C'mon guys, one of the first acts of President Obama was to sanction a Predator drone strike that killed some Taliban fighters, but also accounted for some civilians...... How did "fascist tendencies" become "on its way to full fledged fascism"? A "tendency" isn't evidence of an inevitable transition. Furthermore, how did "fascist tendencies " become "semi-fascist"? I wonder whether Prof Roberts would prefer to revise his assessment from "fascist tendencies" to "fascistic elements"or "elements with fascist tendencies"? And how does the fact of aerial bombing become evidence of the nondemocratic or undemocratic nature of the administration or state doing the bombing? Is the argument that democracies do not bomb while fighting back against secessionist and or terrorist armies/militia? C'mon guys, one of the first acts of President Obama was to sanction a Predator drone strike that killed some Taliban fighters, but also accounted for some civilians……

]]>
canakkale canakkale canakkale balik tutma search canakkale vergi mevzuati bagimsiz denetim vergi mevzuati ozurlu engelliler