Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Insult to Both Tolkien and America
Oregon Magazine ^ | December 4, 2002 | Larry Leonard

Posted on 12/04/2002 6:59:43 AM PST by WaterDragon

December 4, 2002, Charlie Rose (PBS) -- Viggo Mortenson. He is the actor who plays Strider (Aragorn of Arathorn) in the Ring Trilogy. He is, he says, an American. He appeared on this program with Peter Jackson, the director and Elijah Wood, who is Frodo. Wearing a t-shirt that he made himself, which said "No more blood for oil....(snip)

For Complete Article, Please Click Here.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Alaska; US: California; US: Idaho; US: Oregon; US: Texas; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: antiwar; oil; ring; tolkien; viggo; viggomoronsen; viggomortensen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 241-256 next last
To: RMDupree
2. The war against Saddam Hussein, regardless of its motivation, is absolutely necessary. This beast would LOVE to kill Americans, any Americans, innocent or not. He will and probably has provided support to terrorists and will continue to do so until his death or the destruction of his enemies. It's a kill or be killed situation - to think otherwise is to be naive at best and incredibly stupid at worst.

Why did deterrence, the threat of swift and total nuclear annihiliation, work for arguably history's most bloodthirsty tyrant - Stalin, but won't work for Hussien?

I'm all for cheaper oil, drilling ANWAR, whatever. I'm also for creating new sources of energy altogether. But the reality is, right now we need oil and we need it at a reasonable price to avoid serious economic consequences. If we bomb out Saddam and take over the Iraqi oil fields, that's fine by me. At least I know we will share it and Americans will benefit from it.

The price of oil isn't 'reasonable', it's simply the price. The price is simply a reflection of supply and demand. The Unites States only buys ~23 billion dollars worth of oil each year from the Middle East. What's the price of our latest excursion, not to mention the yearly recurring costs of our heavy gulf presence?

Freedom isn't free, it isn't even cheap. If men didn't risk and give their lives to create and protect this country, where would we be today? The voices of cowardice I read on this thread are pathetic. What quality of life is there for your families if we live in fear of Saddam acquiring WMD? Take him out, problem solved, life goes on and lessons learned.

You figure that's it? Just kill him then what? What of the WMD held by Syria and Iran? The nukes in Pakistan and the fact their government is trending toward extremists, with only the military standing between the creators and supporters of the Taliban and nukes. Our nukes kept Stalin out of Western Europe, why do you think the threat of their use wouldn't deter a decidedly secular arab tyrant?

121 posted on 12/04/2002 9:52:23 AM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

Comment #122 Removed by Moderator

To: The Iguana
I think of it more as shedding blood to keep Saddam Hussein from using force to acquire control of a large chunk of the world's proven oil reserves to finance the building of a truly formidable military machine and weapons of mass destruction.

It's not the oil. It's what he'd do with it.

He'd be able to do more than Stalin? Build an even greater war machine while new oil reserves are discovered all over the world? Where would he take this war machine? Do you think he'd overrun the Israeli's and their nukes? Calling Hussien the next Hitler is really an insult the horrors Hitler accomplished.

123 posted on 12/04/2002 9:55:25 AM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
The guy who plays Elrond is the agent from the Matrix.

Also, Gandalf is gay???
124 posted on 12/04/2002 9:57:42 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon
"No more liberals on television."
125 posted on 12/04/2002 9:59:13 AM PST by proust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #126 Removed by Moderator

To: WaterDragon
Most of those in Hollywood are complete morons. What's new?
127 posted on 12/04/2002 10:02:39 AM PST by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jjm2111
Also, Gandalf is gay???

Yes, Sir Ian McKellen is gay. He even had his "friend" at the academy awards. There were several interviews pre:FOTR that talked about how great he thought it was that a gay actor had been cast in that movie.

Most recent articles about him talk about the fact that when he's in a hotel, he rips out the page from Leviticus (in the Gideon Bibles) that calls homosexuality an "abomination."

128 posted on 12/04/2002 10:03:18 AM PST by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: My back yard; OsricBoy
Tolkien was a comitted Royalist.
129 posted on 12/04/2002 10:06:01 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: MattinNJ
What did the dixie chicks say about Tobey Keith?
130 posted on 12/04/2002 10:07:03 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: My back yard
Directed at whomever suggest otherwise -- I have no doubt, whatsoever, that Tolkien would have been a Margaret Thatcher/Ronald Reagan conservative, and supported George Bush now on this war against terror. My personal opinion here is based on the reading of the book The Inklings, specifically the sections where Tolkien and C.S. Lewis have their discussions on religion, and good and evil.

I would exercise caution in claiming Tolkien for any specific position or sentiment about the present day.

Reading The Letters of JRR Tolkien as well as some of the extent biographies gives a deeper look at his views on war, politics and society.

Tolkien was of course a conservative - but a rather specific kind of conservative. He was a man of the past, or at least of a way of life that was being slowly but shabbily destroyed by industrialization and war. He seems to have been a Tory by default, not out of any love for the party as it existed in his lifetime. He probably would have been a Whig had they still existed. We are after all talking about a guy who thought it all started going downhill in 1066.

Tolkien had some rather acerbic views on war and on some of the less attractive aspects of freebooting capitalism as practiced in Britain and especially America which lead one to believe that he would of course support the War on Terror, but be terribly depressed about its likely effects on his society - and not exactly enthusiastic about those aspects of Thatcherism (though certainly more so than of Labour and its high-tax ways - which he particularly resented as LOTR began to sell well - and social engineering fetishes). His view of World War II was that it was certainly necessary but certainly also an evil, a terrible waste of lives, treasure and social capital. He thought little of the military mind but then in fairness most of his direct exposure was in the WWI British Army.

If he shared any sentiments with lefty actors like Mortenson or McKellen at all it might be his disdain for the rapcious, coarsening and homogenizing effects of modernity - a sentiment which one can find in some quarters on both the Right and Left these days. He would have little little truck with their moral relativism and libertinism.

But then there's probably quite a lot about the present day he would not care much for.

131 posted on 12/04/2002 10:08:52 AM PST by The Iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: anymouse
. Other than the ocassional free speaking engagement at the odd leftist rally, this tacky political statement may end up being quite costly to him. Free speech is not with out a price.

Look at Alec Baldwin. He's talked so much trash he has a hard time getting a role. (Not that he's broke, of course).

132 posted on 12/04/2002 10:08:59 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: OsricBoy
"There is, however, a rather freaky site that seems to make him out to be also a poet and also an artist and an all around magic kind of guy."

Yeah, it was probably put together by himself. LOL

133 posted on 12/04/2002 10:12:52 AM PST by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ; Gunslingr3
"Last time I looked, there weren't any African nationals flying planes into buildings (like the terrorists) or rolling their tanks into other nations to take them over for THEIR oil (like Saddam in 1990)."

Very true, but I think the U.S. Gov't handling of the region would be much different if it weren't for the oil. (Like we wouldn't be kissing the Saudi's behinds right now.)

However, if all we really wanted was oil, we could kiss every Arab despots backside until they did business with us. What they did to their own citizens was their problem.
134 posted on 12/04/2002 10:14:40 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

Comment #135 Removed by Moderator

To: Gunslingr3
Why did deterrence, the threat of swift and total nuclear annihiliation, work for arguably history's most bloodthirsty tyrant - Stalin, but won't work for Hussien?

Because we cannot trust his neighbors and our supposed allies, that's why. And the nuclear fallout would hurt all of us and especially our friends in Isreal. I don't think we need to use a sledgehammer to kill a gnat.

The price of oil isn't 'reasonable', it's simply the price. The price is simply a reflection of supply and demand. The Unites States only buys ~23 billion dollars worth of oil each year from the Middle East. What's the price of our latest excursion, not to mention the yearly recurring costs of our heavy gulf presence?

You mean to tell me that if we owned our own oil fields, the price wouldn't be less? That makes no sense. As for what we spend on our presence in the Gulf, that wouldn't be necessary if we stabilized the region and needed only a skeleton crew to keep things in order.

You figure that's it? Just kill him then what? What of the WMD held by Syria and Iran? The nukes in Pakistan and the fact their government is trending toward extremists, with only the military standing between the creators and supporters of the Taliban and nukes. Our nukes kept Stalin out of Western Europe, why do you think the threat of their use wouldn't deter a decidedly secular arab tyrant?

One enemy at a time and each attack cannot be cookie cutter in its strategy. And, as I stated above, nukes would not earn us any friends in that area of the world and would kill the very people we are trying to save.

136 posted on 12/04/2002 10:18:04 AM PST by RMDupree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope
Last year it was Ian trying to trash the movie.

The image of Gandalf as fudgepacker was particularly disgusting and utterly unnecessary. Why can't these clowns understand that their political opinions don't mean diddly and businesswise, are better left unsaid.

137 posted on 12/04/2002 10:20:41 AM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
I bet he shows those Gideons who's the boss.

Thanks for the info.
138 posted on 12/04/2002 10:22:01 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: OsricBoy
I didn't know there was such a thing. But since it has a geocities address it must be even smaller than the LP. :)
139 posted on 12/04/2002 10:24:18 AM PST by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: jjm2111
What did the dixie chicks say about Tobey Keith?

Something to the effect that any idiot can write the lyrics "We'll put a boot up your ass, it's the American way." There was a thread on FR about the dispute a while ago. Apparently, the Dixie Chicks are real liberals and raise a ton of cash for Southern Dems. A few insightful FReepers pointed out that they had no problem singing "Earl's gotta die".

140 posted on 12/04/2002 10:32:49 AM PST by MattinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 241-256 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson