 | | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) Note - the word "hit" needs to be qualified here. Errant missiles have not made it to their targets, but they basically crash-landed. Tomahawks are not fully armed until just before reaching their targets, so errant missiles may cause small (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | It has been done before! :-O
|
|
Yes, that's right! The war now raging in Iraq has a precedent... and noone talks about it! Otherwise, what exactly happened in Vietnam/Cambodja in 1979? Wasn't Cambodja "liberated" from the rule of a madman by Vietnam? And, irony of ironies, wasn't (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) It is broken--that much you convinced me (though it didn't take too long a trip for me to see that...) But, again, just brainstorming here... Price per citizen, or any other scale of paying, tends to favour capitalist societies ("western"), (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pigs... was Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Two words, baby: Roger Waters. Three more words: Dogs of War (ugh!) David Gilmour is a swell guitarist, but as a lyricist (which is actually more my interest) he doesn't seem to convey the same oomph as Roger (though he can definitely run off (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Marillion.com, was Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Arlo Guthrie? Steve Martin doing "Ramblin' Man"? Anything from "Dr Demento"? Supertramp (as I may have mentioned), Elton John, Journey, Michael W. Smith, Allison Kraus, Over the Rhine, and yes, I liked 'Genie in a bottle' by whazzername, (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Everyone pays whatever they want and then votes in direct proportion to how much they paid in order to decide what to do. So to implement the onion-vision all the US has to do is pay 51% (and that will work as long as the whole rest of the (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Pigs... was Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Floyd-- wow. Why is "Animals" such an appreciated Floyd album and "Momentary Lapse" is not... That one makes me wonder.... Dave K (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Marillion.com, was Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) You described my tastes (well they';re actually a bit broader than that) so yes. Marillion is good stuff. I had a chance to see them live at The Chance in Poughkeepsie NY in the mid 80s... amazing show (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Is this 'payment' to a "revamped" UN dependant on number of citizens in the country? GNP? Or just a flat rate? What payment scale would you set up to a 'better' United Nations so that all countries would be represented fairly? (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Uh, I thought that was "Pigs, Three Different Ones" from Pink Floyd's animals? Dave! Bibble Babble Burble Brouhaha (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) Oh absolutely--if my friend was mean enuf to pick on someone, a la 'bullying', I woudn't hesitate to try and stop that particular fight. That said, usually my 'friend' in this particular instance isn't a huge bully, though sometimes I am (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Marillion.com, was Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) Is it good music? would a guy whose musical tastes include everything from Bach to Beatles, from Chopin to CCR appreciate Marillion? Just wondering. Goggled them and found their site--will do more research tonite. Dave K (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) That's part of the original argument. If we don't get a vote unless we're paid up, we (and other nations as well) will be falling all over ourselves to pay up. ESPECIALLY if we get a 25% or so vote because of it. I think there are a lot of (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) I'm really touched that you said that. It means a lot to this American to hear you say so. And I mostly agree but did want to point out that if your friend was instead of taking on a bully, but were actively bullying an innocent victim, it (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
(...) One of the things I find amazing about .debate in general - that people like Larry and Richard can be at odds about so many things in life, yet both like Marillion (as do I) ;-) -- | Tom Stangl, Sun ONE Internet Technical Support, Sun (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Break Out the Cristal (trickle-down economics explained with champagne!)
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote: <big snip>... (...) Uh, Lar, that may not be such a good idea - the US has a long history of failing to pay US dues. If the vote was based on current, true, paid-up dues, there would be many times when the US would have ZERO (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) Never assume that any overwhelming trend is due to ignorance. I don't know anyone who believes that Iraq was directly related to 9/11. Connected to terrorism yes, but not to that particular event. (...) Now this is downright herresy, Mike (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) Plain, collective dumbness. Pedro Silva (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) And if there was a democrat in the big chair, this wouldn't be happening right now, either, so, no, this war isn't 12 years in the making, it's Dubya's little fiasco that he started when he wanted to be president. If there were a war due to 12 (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) This is an easy one, when an organized military wearing the uniforms, and flags of the country they represent acts based on declared military intentions, that is "engagement". When men dressed as civilians feign surrender before they fire on a (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) If he kept going and took out the greater evil, Arafat the whole peace process would have a new spin on it. Scott (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Old news, but still relevant
|
|
"David Koudys" <dkoudys@redeemer.on.ca> wrote in message > Yea!!! (...) "O Lord. We beseech thee to bless thy Holy Handgrenade, that it may protect the righteous from the sharp pointy toothed beasts of the world. May your divine grace give us the (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) Mimicking U.S. foreign policy and strategies I was thinking that perhaps Iraq could invade Israel and "decapitate" the evil regime headed by known terrorist and war criminal Ariel Sharon. It all depends on one's perspective, doesn't it? -- (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don’t you just hate the pinko US media?
|
|
(...) Yeah, I go to CNN to read the propaganda and see what FOX's competition has to say about things. I go to the BBC for something approximating the truth. The real problem is how most americans just don't do ANY digging for the truth. If it's not (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) I think I read somewhere that the Russians claimed that the U.S. forces were just looking for an excuse as to why their overrated and expensive weapons were failing in their intended use. This excuse could give them good mileage when it comes (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) My Papa was at a 60th wedding anniversary on the weekend.. (60! wow!). It was for friends of the family--for us kids growing up, almost like godparents. Anyway, "Jim", husband of wife, Jean, was in the british forces during WW2 and was also (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) It makes about as much sense as the Palestinians asking that Saddam launch missiles (that he doesn't have) containing chemical weapons (that he doesn't have) at Israel, I guess... (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) Didn't some of those missiles (GPS guided) go awry while GPS jammers (sold and serviced by Russian companies, as it turns out... probably because they underbid the French) were being deployed? You can't fault the missiles directly for that. (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Old news, but still relevant
|
|
(...) (URL) there was much rejoicing! Dave K - (URL) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Old news, but still relevant
|
|
(URL) Dave! Proud LUGNET member since yesterday! (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Stating the obvious [or "HOME OF THE FREE: ARNETT JOINS MIRROR"]
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Yup. April 1st, is strange times indeed. I might be wrong, this has an impressive scope for an April Fool's joke, but anything I see this morning gets a couple extra runs through the skeptisism filter. "I've always (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) I think my favourite thus far is that "He will use the WoMD that don't exist when the forces close in on him." How does that sentence make sense at all? Dave K (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) But they missed the intended country *very* precisely. Actually, I thought I heard that (at least some of) the missiles that hit Iran had been identified as Iraqi in origin. Can anyone verify this? Granted, even if true, the Iraqis only fired (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
|
(...) No way! Are you saying that the word "terrorism" is misused to discredit the enemy? I am shocked! Another interesting term is "precision bombing". The US government has officially apologized to the Iranian government for US missiles hitting (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Hi Maggie..:-) Things are not pretty here. Although the "no to US troops" decision is mainly based on the usual misorganization of our government, it quite represents the public opinion about the whole mess. This opinion of course, has both (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Yes, now that I was reminded that this debate was discussed earlier, and that there will probably be no 'official' consensus as to what Truman knew, we can only go by official accounts--Truman didn't know exactly what the emporer said or (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) They didn't accept the call for unconditional surrender, war was continuing. I'm not sure why you aren't getting it, and I'm kinda tired of having to repeat it. (...) Go back to what Dave wrote: "recent evidence suggests that the Emperor was (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: ...so much for winning hearts and minds. [was Re: Outrageous ...]
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: <snip> can't comment on 'friendly fire'--Americans killed Canadians in same fashion in war games earlier... but this one-- (...) Was watching CNN all last night and this was the topic of concern-- (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) I agree, but I doubt he'll find the time to justify his argument. Scott A (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Stating the obvious [or "HOME OF THE FREE: ARNETT JOINS MIRROR"]
|
|
Poor Mr Arnett; sacked for sating the obvious one day: Veteran reporter sacked over TV claims (URL) national TV network, NBC, fired Arnett after he granted an impromptu interview to Iraq's state-run television, during which he echoed widespread (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) I agree with that. But hey, the Saudia Princes are a freedom loving bunch of guys; they need your support. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Don’t you just hate the pinko US media?
|
|
An interesting analysis of “patriotic” reporting the USA: Analysis: US media under fire (URL) like the retired Nato commander General Wesley Clark on CNN, argued that the Pentagon should have sent more troops to the Gulf, and perhaps waited longer (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | ...so much for winning hearts and minds. [was Re: Outrageous ...]
|
|
(...) The evidence suggests that your servicemen are not even look at flags: 'The Yank opened up. He had absolutely no regard for human life.' (URL) Alex MacEwen, 25, Lance Corporal of Horse Steven Gerrard, 33, and Trooper Chris Finney, 18, were (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) You asserted that "[japan's intentions] were that the war was going to continue to the absolute bitter end". What has that to do with US obligation to pause? (...) This may be your opinion, but again has nothing to do with your original (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Quite the contrary - see your quoted summary at the bottom. Japan had rejected the conditions of surrender (to whit, none) and the U.S. was under no obligation to pause in the war. In fact, it would have been a betrayal of the American people (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) This doesn't sound to me like a country whose intentions "were that the war was going to continue to the absolute bitter end" and Truman had full knowledge of it. --- begin quote --- July 1945 - Japan's peace messages Still, the messages from (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) 1: I read the site before I posted, and for that matter I read the site the previous time this came up. You may wish to actually quote the exact passage that you are refering to, since what I read would seem to support me. 2: Unsupported (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | serious vulnerability present. all doomed. over.
|
|
This was funny, coming from a well respected moderated vulnerability list :) FUT to off-topic.debate, if you want to talk about the contents :) ----- Forwarded message from "Security Experts, Liability Limited" <throwaway@dione.ids.pl> ----- (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) I happen to stuble upon this message and while commenting on this war is normally out of my personal fasion, i would like to point out my observations on the anti-war movement. As Scott divided the protestors into groups, so will I: 1. Those (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Hi Selçuk! I'm glad to see you posting-- over the past few weeks I would sometimes think how it would be good to have someone from Turkey post with their take on this whole mess, and of course you were the obvious person I thought of! It's (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Larry and Pedro, You both touch a chord, I desperately want this war to be done with. I married, and am raising children in a Quaker home, and I am comfortable with pacifism. Richard Nixon was a Quaker. I am a pragmatist. I want a quick ending (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Wrong. (URL) (which were that the war was going to (...) Wrong again. (...) Ah at last something approaching reality! 1 outta 3 aint bad. (...) Whatever you reckon. ROSCO (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Oh no! Not the "should we have dropped 'the bomb'" debate again?!? No, despite lame attempts at recent revisionism, we had no way to know what Japan intended beyond its action (which were that the war was going to continue to the absolute (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
Immediately before WW II, was Japan a straight out monarchy, or a constitutional monarchy? I don't think I have ever looked into that precise aspect of world history. If it were a flat out monarchy, then I'd agree that we have at least one or two (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) I'd say we pretty close to literally bombed Germany into submission also... (...) Whatever the truth is here, it certainly is a case of warring them into submission, and then going in and setting the groundwork for a respected, productive (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
Hi guys, a long time passed since I last posted anything here but be sure that I'm still lurking around. (...) Actually I still can't believe how "The Great American Startegy Makers" based their plans on such a stupid idea. I don't like my (...) (22 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) And even worse, this action sets a precedent for the above countries (along with India, Pakistan, etc, etc) to invade other countries (including US, UK, Australia, etc, etc), without international sanction, because they perceive a potential (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Maybe time to have it again then 8?) (URL) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Deja vu all over again. IIRC we had this debate already. I forget what the outcome was... but I don't recall that statement coming out a clear winner. (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) However, recent evidence suggests that the emporer was about to surrender, and that you yanks dropped the bomb to show the world your power. (...) Agreed Dave K (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Touche! Can we send them David Hasslehoff and call us even? Dave! (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) I assume that you are discounting the two blaringly obvious examples for a reason? Germany? Japan? The latter we did literally bomb into submission (WoMD, to add some irony). (...) That we have committed this far (foolishly) it would seem a (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) I think it depends on how you spin the terms democracy and ideal. If you spin them the way I would, I'd say that Germany after WWII is an example. But they had sort of a democracy before. And I don't know about Japanese civics (except the (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) An American defeat is not an option (1); but the victory may be Pyrrhic if this thing goes on through the Summer and/or with an ever increasing rate of casualties - in many ways, that could be even worse than a defeat. :-/ Pedro (1) - Really, (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) We got Dezi Arnez out of the deal, can't be all bad... (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) One (somewhat) recent success story of US inteventionist warfare was the spectacular liberation of Cuba from the evil clutches of Spain. And look how well that turned out! Dave! (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Agreed (...) <snip> (...) I'd like to discuss where Saddam would be if the 'willing' stopped their war now. He's been saying "God is on our side!" and if the willing stop, SH will be, well, I don't know where he'll be, but I feel that it won't (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Can you cite even one example of where this has happened before? Where else have we bombed people into accepting democracy? True, the absence of precedence doesn't make the occurrence of such a democracy impossible, but I would suggest the (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) I'm not sure that's true. I think it's more of wanting to take the best next step from wherever you find yourself. Before the violence commenced, Larry thought the best step was not to start the violence. Now, given that we're going to be (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Well, it is a simplification of things -- but the pro-peace movement also needs its own soundbite. "No blood for oil!" has been a kind of code for larger issues, obviously. Ignoring ethical concerns for now, longer-term I can't see the (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) That's just being a pro-war accomplice after the fact. Sorry, no previous moral opposition gives anyone moral safety to now just go ahead and support this great evil. No one would delight in american defeat -- that's madness. I presume defeat (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
(...) Along those lines: (URL) opposed getting into this war but now that we're in it I want to win. Unlike some here, I suspect, who would delight in an American defeat. (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Maybe I'm getting my timeframe messed up, though I understand that bin Laden's particular beef is with the continued US military presence in the region (apparently greatly increased following Gulf War I). Dave! (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) Watching CNN all weekend, except Sunday when I watched PBS, and the other political shows on NBC and CBS... Constant theme now--"We tried the fast approach, and were hopeing that (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) I can’t find a cite , but I thought the US bases dated back to WW2? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | In the name of freedom
|
|
Iraq - In the shadow of war: backlash against human rights (URL) the military action by the USA, UK and their allies began in Iraq on 20 March, a backlash against certain human rights has been witnessed around the world. These include: * attacks on (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) I'm just not familiar enough with Blair to say, beyond I suspect he likes the idea of acting tough. Bush probably has several agendas, though the weight of each is unknown: Inherited hostility: The enemy of my father is my enemy. Though Bush (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Interestingly, there *IS* an undeniable link between Saddam and the actions and al-Qaeda; bin Laden has explicitly stated that his motives derive in part from his disgust at the overbearing presence of US military in Saudia Arabia. Of course, (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Don't you just love our freedom loving allies? Turkey: End sexual torture against women in custody! (URL) A (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Even that funded by Pakistan? (...) Me too. I'd love to hear what he has to say. Likewise for SH. Do you think Bush would want us to hear about their version of events? (...) Why just "to the United States and her citizens"? (...) Evidence? (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) I think he's much less dangerous than people like you, John. Because Richard, while often extremely annoying, is more interested in everyone's freedom from oppression. You, however, are one of the most oppressive people in this forum, and if (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) BuzzFlash asks Greg Palast: "What the Heck is Going on With Tony Blair?" (URL) Tony has figured out a way to shoot down a couple of enemies at once. All politics is local, including international relations. Tony Blair is using the war on (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
I actually do agree with you on a few points here. I agree that Bush’s diplomacy was imperfect. I, however, believe the other side. I think he spent far too much time in debate and discussion. I have little patience for diplomatic posturing and (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
(...) Bush's justifications for this war changed almost weekly, it seemed. Now, within the terms of diplomacy, this can be understandable to a point as you may find it advantagous to emphasize different aspects to different people, but it seems more (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My over-simplification of the anti-war movement
|
|
I don’t have the chance to respond with the same level of frequency here on OTD as many of the regulars, so this may sound like a hit and run, as I will voice my opinion and probably not respond to rebuttals in a timely fashion. I, however, desired (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The French Have Gone Too Far
|
|
(...) Um hello? "Before" what? 9-11, all the embassy bombings, WTC bombing #1....? (...) Peace?!?! You are the one single-mindedly attacking people for having differing views from you! (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Evidence? Who needs evidence?
|
|
"Special Search Operations Yield No Banned Weapons" (URL) the final word of course, but it doesn't speak well of american intelligence sources. Sure is great to mount a war on nothing more than suspicion and impatience. -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newspeak 2003
|
|
"Iraqi ultralights spotted over U.S. troops" (URL) Gen. Victor E. “Gene” Renuart Jr., director of operations for Central Command, was quick to label the bombing as an act of terrorism. “That kind of an activity is a symbol of an organization that is (...) (22 years ago, 30-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My Concession (for John mostly)
|
|
The 'Coalition of the willing' is *trying* to 'fight the good fight'--*trying* to stay on the moral high ground. SH, et al, have no such compunction. My point has always been that we don't always follow our ideals when they're "inconvenient". SH, as (...) (22 years ago, 30-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newsbit: Something I Hadn't Noticed About Patriot Act II
|
|
"Justice Dept. Drafts Sweeping Expansion of Anti- Terrorism Act" (URL) 501, “Expatriation of Terrorists”: This provision, the drafters say, would establish that an American citizen could be expatriated “if, with the intent to relinquish his (...) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newsbits: Defense Contractors and Water Barons
|
|
"Advisors of Influence: Nine Members of the Defense Policy Board Have Ties to Defense Contractors" (URL) How elected officials and registered lobbyists apportion your money. This would be why we must fear the military industrial complex (perhaps our (...) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Frog Apologizes and Shuts Up (at least for now)
|
|
(...) Whether any particular person has thick enough skin to not allow rudeness to effect his emotional state doesn't change the rudeness. Richard is traditionally much more clever in his responses to people than he has been in the past weeks when (...) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The French Have Gone Too Far
|
|
(...) I see no reason why the people of Iraq shouldn't wage war if they feel it's warranted. Even on the US, UK and Australia if they see them as a potential threat sometime in the future. ROSCO (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The French Have Gone Too Far
|
|
But without the war part, right Rosco? -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The French Have Gone Too Far
|
|
(...) to justify war against Saddam - a "nightmare scenario" in which he might eventually pass weapons of mass destruction to terrorists." Now go back and read my last link. ROSCO (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The French Have Gone Too Far
|
|
(...) Sounds fair to me. ROSCO (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newsbits
|
|
"First Stop, Iraq" (URL) Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. (...) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Conspiracy Theorists Regroup!
|
|
(URL) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The French Have Gone Too Far
|
|
(...) Your bigotry betrays you... (...) Because of their *own* self-interest. They don't give a rat's patootie about the Iraqi people. What say we let the people of Iraq decide their own destiny. (...) Or we liberate them, and create a valuable ally (...) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rats Leaving the Sinking Ship (Re: Just Teasing...)
|
|
(...) From the same article: "I found his resignation shocking," said one official closely involved in the domestic fight on terror. "And it might reflect a certain frustration over the allocation of resources. But I'm not positive that there's a (...) (22 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
