Subject:
|
Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 1 Feb 2003 22:22:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
344 times
|
| |
|
|
"Bruce Schlickbernd" <corsair@schlickbernd.org> wrote in message
news:H9LEJC.7q@lugnet.com...
<snip> Middle East oil goes to Europe, where they drive their 5 liter V12
engines
> at 300kph, burning gas as fast as they can. ;-) I'm not a fan of the
> current fascination America has for the dangerous and inefficient SUV, but • I
> think this is going to be resolved by rising gas prices.</snip>
No, the point is we don't have 5 liter V12 engines. Normal family cars have
1.4 or 1.8 liter engines. The bigger executive cars have 2.5 or even 3
liter, but you're talking the top-class Beamers, Mercs and Jags. There are a
few nutters with 5 liter engines around, but they're nowhere near as common
as they are in America. There are two places in Europe where you can do
300kph: German motorways and race tracks. Anywhere else you'll find speed
limits of 100/120/130 km/h.
As far as I know the US use more oil per capita than anywhere else in the
world. Look here for example:
http://powerlab.fsb.hr/OsnoveEnergetike/1999/bpstat/pages/oilcon4.htm.
<snip> The guilty need to be punished, but if Canadians had bombed
Americans, it
> would have been the exact same scenario - it is up to the various allies • to
> police themselves. Do you feel that nothing has been done, or is this a
> case of you feeling the Netherlands has been slighted? The story you spin
> seems a bit, well, paranoid?</snip>
Paranoid eh? Read this: http://www.usaforicc.org/facts_ASPA_archive.html
In short the article says:
"On Wednesday, the Senate continued a U.S. multi-pronged attack on the ICC
by passing the anti-ICC American Servicemembers Protection Act (ASPA). "
(ICC = International Crime Court)
"The bill includes provisions that:
*Prohibit U.S. cooperation with the ICC,
*Restrict U.S. participation in U.N. peacekeeping,
*Prohibit sharing U.S. intelligence with the ICC,
*Prohibit military assistance to most countries that ratify the ICC Statute,
and authorizes the President to use "all means necessary and appropriate" to
free from captivity any U.S. or allied personnel held by or on behalf of the
ICC. "
"Many of America's allies have objected to the American Servicemembers'
Protection Act especially because of the latter provision. The bill is known
in Europe and around the world as "The Hague Invasion Act," as it gives the
President expansive authority to use force against the Netherlands, future
home of the ICC."
> > <snip> I think some support of Israel is worthwhile to the extent that it
> > would prevent nuclear war (because I have no doubt that if Israel feels
> > truly threatened that it will launch). I don't think they need as much
> > support as we are giving. I also don't think this is necessarily an
> > obligation, just a cost benefit issue.</snip>
> > Israel feeling truly threatened by a nation they've almost completely
> > destroyed? A nation that has nothing left but suicide attacks to defend
> > itself against one of the better equipped armies in the world? Give me a
> > break. Support the palestinians. Make sure no ammo of any form goes into
> > Israel, bomb Sharons village, his office, and a few random other towns in
> > Israel, just to get the situation levelled again.
>
> I'm sorry to say that I don't have much respect for the opinions you voice
> above - would you have the Netherlands engage in the activities you
advocate?
</snip>
Not the bombing in Israel bit, no. That was the 'slightly over the top to
make a point' bit. There are however political parties and other influential
people who openly support the Palestines and disagree with Israel handling
of the problems.
<snip> I would like to see some sort of final settlement made that had real
teeth
> against any further disrupting party and Israel would have to give up • major
> tracks of land, but let's be honest: the best way to diffuse the situation
> is for the various countries of Europe that persecuted the jews so that • they
> were inspired to migrate, pay to take them back and re-establish them in
> Europe. Not gonna happen? So, as usual, the US is stuck with a mess
> created by Europe. Not that I care for what we have done with it, mind
you.
</snip>
How is the US stuck with it? It's the Palestinians that are stuck at the
moment, because Ariel Sharon is getting away with murder (literally) using
the policical backing of the US in the name of George's war against
terrorism, while the Israeli's are the bigger terrorists. If George was
serious about doing something about terrorism anywhere in the world he would
do something to stop Israel. The main point I'm trying to make is that the
US are very selective in where they do and do not intervene.
<snip> The business is left unfinished with Bin Laden still at large, but
the
> unrestricted sanctuary for Al Qaeda is gone. It was not a complete • success
> by any means, but it was hardly a failure. The real failure is Bush • running
> off to a new conflict when he has yet to wrap this one up. I see no
> compelling evidence linking Al Qaeda and Iraq.
</snip>
Phew. At least we agree on something.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
69 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
