Subject:
|
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 22 Mar 2003 02:51:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
740 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> > Setting them up to fail/fall would not decrease their misery. But I think it
> > might decrease the net misery, and I also think they're not dumb enough to
> > fall. If we made them get in line, they'd do it. In a few generations the
> > monsters like Sharon would be gone and there would be peace. There's no
> > Earthly reason that there can't be peace over there.
>
> What you are failing to place into the Israeli question is Palestinian
> terrorism. Most if not all of Israeli aggression is in retaliation for
> terrorism.
And most if not all of the Palestinian aggression is in retaliation for Israeli
terrorism.
I'm not even saying that you're wrong. I think you're right. But that doesn't
change the rightness of what I said. They are in a cycle of violence together.
Now let me ask you something. Who do you think should step up and eschew
violence (assuming that one side must do so in the face of their enemy)...the
rag-tag band of homeless countryless ignorant hate-mongers, or the well
organized, well educated, nationally and culturally secure band of hate-mongers?
I think the burden of extraordinary works of peace falls on the Israelis. Once
they are toeing the line, the international community _must_ take their side.
That would greatly ease the peace process.
> Civil liberties have always been curtailed in times of war.
And we look back and nod our collective head in disgust. We all realize that
Japanese Americans shouldn't have been concentrated. We all realize that the
draft is immoral. We look back at that nasty things we've done in the past and
as soon as our head is facing back into the future, we start down that same
path. I still don't get it.
> > > Seriously, does anyone doubt for a second that, had OBL access to a nuke, he
> > > would denotate it in Washington D.C.? I don't. And that is not a happy
> > > thought.
> >
> > I don't doubt it for a second.
>
> And that doesn't scare you?
In the abstract, sure. I'm well within the danger zone of big attacks on
either NYC of Philly. It could be bad, but I'm not kept up nights about it.
> And the fact that a supporter of terrorism had
> chemical and biological weapons and was pursuing nukes doesn't scare you?
How has he supported terrorism that I should be worried about? Don't just use
that at a catch phrase because as far as I'm concerned the US uses terrorism
too and I'm not convinced that it's wholly inappropriate. You do what you can.
> How
> closely are you willing to flirt with disaster? What would you give to be able
> to take back a terrorist nuclear attack?
Not our precious freedom. If we have to give that up to be safe, then we've
already lost. This nation, absent all that makes it great, is nothing worth
saving. It's not the land or the people that make this a pretty good place.
It is our history and our institutions and our way of life.
> > Like I said. We have the option to make this a good thing. I just fear that
> > we shant.
>
> And I am confident we will. What is interesting to me is that one's perception
> on this issue tends to break along party lines.
I'm curious about the "party" with which you think I am affiliated. I've never
voted for a Demopublican presidential candidate though I tend to favor
republicans over democrats in my local elections (but I also seem to favor
women over men, for whatever reason). It seems to me that those of you who
identify with one of the parties closely, think that the rest of us must too,
and if we're not with you we're against you.
I'm just worried that our motives are not pure. Is that so odd?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
164 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
