Home Home Home
Home
Translation Jobs
Скрыть панели
Войти в систему

Пользователь

Пароль
Щелкните для получения справки.
Язык интерфейса
RUРусский
ENEnglish
Обсуждения
Вы просматриваете обсуждения как гость. Зарегистрируйтесь, пожалуйста, чтобы получить больше возможностей.
Модераторы
Jacek K., Nanna Mercer
Формат сообщений
Информация о теме
Последнее сообщение November 23, 2009 3:37 PM

Ответов 409
Просмотров 8089

Поиск по сайту
Уведомления

Настройка уведомлений

XML RSS Feed
Социальные сети
stumbleupon|digg|del.icio.us|reddit|facebook
Обозначения
Опубликовано сообщений
5000 5000
2000 2000
1000 1000
500 500
100 100
25 25
Выделение цветом:
  • Администратор
  • Модератор форума
  • Зарегистрированный пользователь
Who’s Posting Answers on TranslatorsCafe.com/TCTerms
Il est d'étranges soirs où les fleurs ont une âme.Albert Samain
Страница: 135 36 37 38 39 40 41
Назад Ответить
« Тема »
Создано:
November 1, 2009 5:12 AM
Сообщение 188274 — ответ на №188264
Nanna Mercer
Photo
Expert
50002000200025
Родные языки: English, Danish
Сообщений: 9027
На форумах с: February 12, 2005
Местонахождение: Denmark
 
Politics and brainwashing...

Originally written by Jacek K. on November 1, 2009 9:39 AM

The role of ideology was to brainwash you to believe that now mankind has found a solution to all its troubles and it is the only solution acceptable ...

Seems to me that all political parties have the flavour of ideology. Many political parties, especially those in the "free" world, claim to be democratic or run along the notion of an almost absolute free will and ability to influence, via active participation in the political process, how best to live your life within the particular system. It isn't so!

Every morning while reading the news from various Danish sources I can only shake my head, for there is little (nothing?) one can do to influence the process of who gets what and why. 

You have hundreds of people and many organizations petitioning for AB, and with very good documentation showing why it is needed and the minister in charge rejects it out of hand. Later, when during yet another hearing, she is asked if she knows that XY official agency who receives tons of public money through taxes and heavy tariffs and who is supposed to actively promote AB, does not in fact do so. She doesn't know. Receiving the public money was conditional and the minister replies that she's surprised to discover that the reality is otherwise. DUH. No one bothered with the documentation.

The minister doesn't have a clue, she doesn't know and now a new law affecting millions of Danes is totally off-kilter for the next four years. No, she says, it cannot be changed now.

This is just one small instance of how it's almost useless to try to influence the political process.

Then there's brainwashing and mass hysteria. Last night the TV signals changed from analogue to digital. For the last six months, the hysteria has been almost total. The idea was that the future had arrived, etc. blah - blah - blah and to be part of the future you must purchase a new digital TV. Many people did just that - brainwashed into supporting the ailing economy - and all stores selling electronic gear have been sending out adverts that unless you buy or rent of subscribe or --- your TV signal would completely disappear last night. The state, the cable giants and the TV stores had the only viable solution to this terrible personal dilemma

I refused to join the unwashed and the brainwashed and guess what happened to my old TV?

Nanna, on a Sunday morning rant...



[Отредактировано Nanna Mercer, November 1, 2009 5:14 AM]

Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 1, 2009 11:03 AM
Сообщение 188291 — ответ на №188274
John Bunch
Photo
Expert
1000500100100100
Родной язык: English
Сообщений: 1812
На форумах с: February 1, 2008
Местонахождение: United States
 
RE: Politics and brainwashing...
Hi Jacek, once again we are back to "damned if you do, damned if you don't". You like to have it both ways: when America intervenes, it is the aggressive "hyperpower". When it doesn't, it is abandoning peoples and nations (Yalta) to their fate. So which is it ? You can't take every position simultaneously and then claim moral clarity and superiority.
Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 1, 2009 11:50 AM
Сообщение 188297 — ответ на №188291
Jacek K.
Мастер TC
Photo
Родной язык: Polish
На форумах с: February 18, 2003
Местонахождение: Poland
 
RE: Politics and brainwashing...

It was a joke in reply to your joke about the Germans, and all Europeans, being unable to forgive the Americans for having been liberated... 64 years ago. Frankly, fewer and fewer witnesses of those days are still alive so how about if we close that chapter and move on to Doris Lessing or other topics more likely to create a better, not worse, atmosphere for our work today?



[Отредактировано Jacek K., November 1, 2009 11:51 AM]

Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 2, 2009 12:12 AM
Сообщение 188318 — ответ на №188269
Ron Finney
Photo
Member
25
Сообщений: 44
На форумах с: October 13, 2009
Местонахождение: United States
 
RE: Situation in Iran

Originally written by Jacek K. on November 1, 2009 4:33 AM

Originally written by John Bunch on October 31, 2009 10:05 PM

Someone once said "The Germans will never forgive the Americans for liberating them". ... You might say that about all Europeans, too. 

Yes, John, you are right as usual. In your own perspective only. All Eastern Europeans will, indeed, never forgive the Americans for liberating them in Yalta.

Were you always this difficult? Ha-ha.

I suppose we could have nuked the Soviet Union when we had the chance. Seems like they had a few troops and tanks on the eastern front.


Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 2, 2009 1:08 AM
Сообщение 188320 — ответ на №188318
Jacek K.
Мастер TC
Photo
Родной язык: Polish
На форумах с: February 18, 2003
Местонахождение: Poland
 
RE: Situation in Iran

Originally written by Ron Finney on November 2, 2009 6:12 AM

I suppose we could have nuked the Soviet Union when we had the chance.

Hi, Ron,

That's the beauty of nukes. After just one Hiroshima lesson, man learned what he was unable to learn over millennia about conventional weapons: how not to use them for aggressive purposes. Nukes are the best and only deterrent against the human animal. Well, until the animal learns how to think, but that may take all the remaining cosmic time allotted to his species. 


Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 9, 2009 6:14 AM
Сообщение 189007 — ответ на №188320
Jacek K.
Мастер TC
Photo
Родной язык: Polish
На форумах с: February 18, 2003
Местонахождение: Poland
 
RE: Situation in Iran

The universality of extremists

Iranian "hard-liners" sound just like America's neocons when opposing negotiations.

The Washington Post's David Ignatius today notes the irony that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is being criticized by his country's "hard-liners" for supporting a deal with the U.S. over nuclear issues:

 

The prospect of a deal with the Great Satan produced a political frisson in Tehran. . . . Critics chided Ahmadinejad for giving away the nuclear store. . . . Khamenei joined in the attacks last week, warning that negotiating with America would be "naive and perverted."  The leader was implicitly criticizing Ahmadinejad, who had characterized the Geneva deal as an Iranian victory. . . .

But reading the Iranian press, you get the sense that for Iran's ruling elite, engagement with America remains a bridge too far. "America is still the Great Satan. Negotiations are meaningless," thundered the hard-line weekly Ya-Lesarat.

 

That, of course, is exactly what American neocons have long been screaming about negotiations with Iran -- that they're crazed, untrustworthy Persian Hitlers who shouldn't be negotiated with and that Obama is being "naive" or worse by trying.  It's so striking how identical is the mentality of America's "hard-line" right-wing extremists and those in Iran.

Ignatius also claims, correctly, that the Iranian regime relies on anti-Americanism to sustain its legitimacy because the constant demonization of a foreign enemy unites the population behind the government.  Of course, the continuous demonization of foreign enemies has also long been the favorite tool of America's political leaders for the same reasons.  That's because exploiting foreign threats for domestic political gain is a virtually universal tool of governments.  That, of course, is exactly why the belligerence and threats towards Iran long advocated by America's Right has as its prime beneficiary the very Iranian mullahs they claim to oppose. 


Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 9, 2009 7:50 PM
Сообщение 189078 — ответ на №189007
John Bunch
Photo
Expert
1000500100100100
Родной язык: English
Сообщений: 1812
На форумах с: February 1, 2008
Местонахождение: United States
 
RE: Situation in Iran
Actually, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela does that (uses a foreign threat - perceived - to justify holding onto and increasing power). I think he learned it from Fidel Castro. For instance, he is now stating that war with Columbia is more and more likely, and is massing troops on the border.

Regarding negotiation, I think it is a fine thing, as long it does not become an end in itself. The Europeans have been negotiating with Iran for at least 10 years, to no avail. There were 17 UN resolutions calling for Saddam Hussein to prove he did not have WMDS. That is the background for "neo-con" lack of faith in negotiation, but you didn't mention that.

The Europeans love negotiation. I probably would too if I had - combined - two older and smallish aircraft carriers, and mostly a - historically viewed - almost total aversion to losing any military lives in combat, or paying large sums to have any kind of military effect in the world. Of course the Europeans are then for negotiating. It is like the Kissinger line about an Iranian moderate being "one who has run out of ammunition". The bigger countries - Russia, China, the U.S., who actually can really change things using large-scale military units and aircraft carriers, view negotiation as one policy tool, to be used. But not the only one. Al Quida doesn't seem too keen on negotiation, when it can affect things by just blowing them up. And need I even mention the odious "UN Food Scandal", in which Saddam used bribes to pay French politicians to vote against the U.S. in the UN ? That must also fall under negotiation. Negotiation also seems to me to involve people in expensive suits, meeting in places like Geneva and Paris, while the Hutus are being hacked to death in Africa, or while Somalia is going to hell in a handbasket. There is thus zero chance that the Europeans will physically stop Iran from going nuclear, so of course they support the "negotiation" option. Israel and the U.S. have other "tools" in the box, and thus are not maybe always so keen on it as the only way. Negotiation is far less expensive than actually going out and doing things, physically. Better to have a conference in Geneva on non-violence, than actually have to send real soldiers to a real battlefield, where they might get hurt.

[Отредактировано John Bunch, November 9, 2009 7:54 PM]

Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 13, 2009 4:12 AM
Сообщение 189379 — ответ на №188223
Jacek K.
Мастер TC
Photo
Родной язык: Polish
На форумах с: February 18, 2003
Местонахождение: Poland
 
RE: OT

Originally written by Jacek K. on October 31, 2009 4:34 PM

I got interested in Maxi's chronology and possible origins of Enlightenment which took place in the 1700s while the major Arabic contribution to the Western culture happened at least 500 years earlier(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_contributions_to_Medieval_Europe). While the Islamic influence on the Renaissance is widely known (see the link above), it was less obvious for me in the case of the Enlightenment, yet the names such as John Locke or Isaac Newton confirm the connection mentioned by Maxi.

This may and should be an ongoing exchange:

U.S. Takes Steps to Use Science To Improve Ties to Muslim World

In a surprise announcement, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week named three prominent scientists as special envoys to assess the potential for scientific partnerships with Muslim-majority countries. The move is the first concrete step in a broader U.S. effort to expand the role of science in diplomacy. Speaking in Morocco on 3 November, Clinton announced the selection of Egyptian-born Ahmed H. Zewail, a chemistry Nobelist at the California Institute of Technology; Algerian-born Elias Zerhouni, a radiologist who stepped down last fall as director of the National Institutes of Health; and biochemist Bruce Alberts, former president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and current editor-in-chief of Sciencehttp://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol326/issue5955/news-summaries.dtl
 

 


Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 13, 2009 11:51 AM
Сообщение 189400 — ответ на №189007
Ron Finney
Photo
Member
25
Сообщений: 44
На форумах с: October 13, 2009
Местонахождение: United States
 
RE: Situation in Iran

Originally written by Jacek K. on November 9, 2009 6:14 AM

The universality of extremists

Iranian "hard-liners" sound just like America's neocons when opposing negotiations.

The Washington Post's David Ignatius today notes the irony that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is being criticized by his country's "hard-liners" for supporting a deal with the U.S. over nuclear issues:

 But reading the Iranian press, you get the sense that for Iran's ruling elite, engagement with America remains a bridge too far. "America is still the Great Satan. Negotiations are meaningless," thundered the hard-line weekly Ya-Lesarat.

 

That, of course, is exactly what American neocons have long been screaming about negotiations with Iran -- that they're crazed, untrustworthy Persian Hitlers who shouldn't be negotiated with and that Obama is being "naive" or worse by trying.  It's so striking how identical is the mentality of America's "hard-line" right-wing extremists and those in Iran.

American conservatives have publicly acknowledged willingness to negotiate directly with Iran, but not without preconditions as opposed to Obama. If I remember correctly, there's been a flurry of diplomatic efforts, incentives, as well as meaningless ultimatums offered to the Iranians. I would not characterize Iran as showing good faith at the negotiating table. Sticky issues like the duplicity of their nuclear program, funding Hamas and Hezbollah (like a regional cold war) as they strive to dominate Lebanon and repeated threats to Israel (oh I forgot, they're just a throw-away state). Then there's the reminder of a nation violating the American embassy and holding our citizens hostage for over a year.

The United States of (Central-North) America (those other countries are American too I guess) and Europe must navigate the waters wisely. We know all too well that there are many opposing groups in Iran, including millions of educated, liberal-leaning citizens, and the ruling regime may be more fragile than we had believed. It's easy for the Iranian elite to point to America as the big Satan, the imminent threat, because she and Israel are the only nations willing to go beyond idle talk. If Europe grew some cajones, the possibilites for transformation in Iran would be more likely.  From the perspective of the top political minds in Olalla, Washington (USA), Europe is more driven by mercantilistic and utopian ideals. Europe gets about 10% of its oil from Iran, with no easy replacement. Iran has the 8th largest military in the world, comparable to the combined French-German military. Too bad Neville Chamberlain is no longer around... he'd fit right in.


Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Создано:
November 13, 2009 12:28 PM
Сообщение 189404 — ответ на №189400
Jacek K.
Мастер TC
Photo
Родной язык: Polish
На форумах с: February 18, 2003
Местонахождение: Poland
 
RE: Situation in Iran

Originally written by Ron Finney on November 13, 2009 5:51 PM

If Europe grew some cajones...

It did, it did, for thousands of years.

And then it grew up and started using its brains in addition to the cojones.

 



[Отредактировано Jacek K., November 13, 2009 12:37 PM]

Ответить|С цитированием|Правка|Удалить
Страница: 135 36 37 38 39 40 41
Назад Ответить
« Тема »
Главная | Форумы | Альбомы | Поиск
Недавние темы | Сегодня | На этой неделе | Лучшие 25 тем
Статистика форума | Сейчас на сайте | Цитаты
New Мобильная версия | Настройки форума | Вход
TranslatorsCafé.com

Язык интерфейса English | Español | Дополнительно...

© ANVICA Software Development 2002—2009. Все права защищены.
Конфиденциальность данных. Пользуясь сайтом, вы выражаете свое согласие с Правилами пользования сайтом.
Направляйте ваши замечания и предложения вебмастеру TranslatorsCafe.com.
База данных переводчиков и переводческих агентств.

Мнения, высказанные в форумах, отражают исключительно личные взгляды авторов и не обязательно совпадают с позицией администрации сайта и (или) его модераторов. Если читатель считает размещенное сообщение спорным, он может уведомить модератора форума. Подобная жалоба обычно рассматривается в течение 24 часов. Просьба учесть, однако, что модераторы могут жить в другом часовом поясе. Помните, что ваше присутствие на форумах означает согласие с Правилами публикации сообщений в форумах.