To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 19041
19040  |  19042
Subject: 
Re: What about the first?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 17 Feb 2003 22:03:33 GMT
Viewed: 
920 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
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?

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 been, given the same
circumstances.


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?

The cost of rebuilding the Iraqi oil production infrastructure would be about
200 billion.  Iraqi oil production only generates about 10 billion a year. Do
the math.

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?

Stealing oil is not an objective. If it was it would be easier to just nuke the
country without regard to the innocent cilivians.


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?

Didn't feel one was necesary considering only 47 percent of the US supports
action without the approval of the UN.


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?

Yeah one of the supporters of ANSWER.

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”?

See the 'other' thread for why socialism is bad and capitalism is not.

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?

Hence earlier point that the UN (not just the US acting alone) should stop all
that crap and rebuild the countries without the dictators. I think you
misunderstand my position with that of total agreement with Bush/Blair.  I only
agree with about 60 percent of what they are saying.

-Mike Petrucelli



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: What about the first?
 
(...) But what about Israeli terrorism? See: (URL) Arafat is (...) ...and Sharon is wanted on war crime charges: (URL) are others in the Israeli “military”. (...) A number of countries have come under sustained terrorist attacks without resorting to (...) (21 years ago, 18-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: What about the first?
 
(...) Relevance? [BTW: They’d have been right; he did not have nukes ;) ] (...) Don't make me laugh. Does supporting Israeli belligerence make the USA a safer place? (...) Can you justify that? (...) Did you answer my question? Will stealing Iraq’s (...) (21 years ago, 17-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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR