Subject:
|
Re: What about the first?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 Feb 2003 17:17:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
946 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> > > > > The only
> > > > > thing we can do is make sure it happens on our terms. Why in the heck would • we
> > > > > wait till after he has the ability to nuke half the world?
> > > >
> > > > Is that really a risk?
> > >
> > > Are you kidding me? The whole rest of that was completely irrelevant if you
> > > don't see this.
> > > >
> > > > Scott A
> >
> > Right now he does not have the nukes, and he does not have a conventional
> > delivery system. He is a long way from getting them... and he is getting
>
> That's what the members of the League of Nations thought about the German
> military in the 1930s.
Relevance?
[BTW: They’d have been right; he did not have nukes ;) ]
>
> > weaker
> > by the day. So, what risk does he pose? What risk does he pose to world peace • &
> > security when compared to Israel, Pakistan, North Korea or even Bush/Blair?
>
> Oh yeah, Israel is such a threat defending itself and all.
Don't make me laugh. Does supporting Israeli belligerence make the USA a safer
place?
> >
> > Will stealing Iraq’s oil make the USA a safer place?
>
> It would take about 20 years for Iraq's oil production pay for the cost of
> making it usable the way the left-wing extremists keep saying it will.
Can you justify that?
> Obviously Iraq's oil has little to do it anything with the possiblity of war.
Did you answer my question? Will stealing Iraq’s oil make the USA a safer place?
> >
> > After your assertion that there were scary similarities between the current
> > situation and 1930’s Europe, how about this one:
> >
> > A world leader takes advantage of nationalism, jingoism and xenophobia to take
> > his nation on an ill-advised military adventure in order to strengthen his
> > country, but in the end actually weakens it.
> > ;)
No answer?
>
> I heard a funny thing on the news about the Protest in Washington. It was
> organized by ANSWER. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism)
> http://www.InternationalANSWER.org/
> Right on their page is the following statement: "Support Self Determination for
> the People of the Middle East"
Perhaps they should work on Self Determination for the people of the USA 1st? ;)
> So by stopping the war and preserving a
> dictatorship that publicly executes civilians who voice disagreement is how we
> "Support Self Determination for the People of the Middle East"
Has Bush picked a stooge to replace SH yet? Or will Mr Franks just run the
country? Mr Exxon? No mention of human rights or democracy here:
http://www.sundayherald.com/27735
> Digging around the ANSWER site a little you will come across this site:
> http://www.workers.org/wwp.php
Looks like a different site to me?
> Now everything makes perfect sense. This whole thing isn't about whats best for
> the people of Iraq it is about instituting the great ideal of communistic
> socialism on everyone and fighting the evil capitalist US. (yes sarcasm was
> intended)
What is “communistic socialism”, and why is it worse for the people of Iraq
than the “evil capitalist US”?
What's your point? [Would you feel better if the Coca Cola company sponsored
the march?] Does all this mean the war would be right? What does Bush care
about "what’s best for the people of Iraq"? What respect does he have for "Self
Determination"? In fact what is your country’s record on supporting "Self
Determination" since WW2? It certainly has a poor record in the Middle East
[Saudi Arabia, Israel/Palestine etc]. But what about the wider world? Need I
mention Central America?
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: What about the first?
|
| (...) would (...) you (...) peace (...) No but supporting Israeli defence against Palestinian Terrorism does. Arafat is just another dictator that needs to go. I highly doubt the US or most other "Western" countries would be as patient as Israel has (...) (22 years ago, 17-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: What about the first?
|
| (...) That's what the members of the League of Nations thought about the German military in the 1930s. (...) & (...) Oh yeah, Israel is such a threat defending itself and all. (...) It would take about 20 years for Iraq's oil production pay for the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
91 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
|
|
|
|
