Subject:
|
Re: Looking for Motives
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:50:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
250 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> So you admit you are a conspiracy nut...
John, try to be a bit more serious... you'll never get him to ADMIT it.
Normally I ignore him but he's gone too far this time.
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
"Please show me where I claimed the work of some hidden conspiracy?"
What would any sane person call this whole post?
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=19690
Or this quote: "We are under the thumb of the most evil "corporatocracy" we
have yet seen."
Richard's clearly foaming about conspiracies. (after snidely saying he had
no intention of debating, then blathering on and on and on... and on... how
many posts later?)
If he doesn't like a taste of his own medicine (in the form of a little
ridicule directed at his silly theories, a tactic he uses quite often, here
and elsewhere, but in our case, much milder than *his* usual stuff), perhaps
*he's* the one that ought to "pick up his marbles and go home".
Or perhaps he's going to try to incite a mob here too as he did elsewhere?
As as for this cite that he makes so much of: "banned weapons that
Washington says it is holding.", that's just CNN reporters being snide and
keeping their head firmly in the sand about reality, nothing more.
I know Richard admires snideness, and prides himself on his repeatedly
demonstrated inability to understand reality, but CNN has been notably
absent in pointing out that some of the Iraqi missiles launched just happen
to be the ones that are banned by one or another of the 17 resolutions Iraq
is in violation of. But of course it makes for better press if one leaves
that inconvenient fact out.
Perhaps there is a conspiracy there after all???
He keeps repeating WE want the oil. Repeating it won't make it true, as you
and I and just about everyone else knows.
I wonder, did he ever think that the reason the troops are working so hard
to get the southern oil fields secured was just maybe, maybe they wanted to
avoid the ecological disaster that Saddam gifted the world with last time?
Is there any chance in his world view that the Iraqi people are going to be
the ones ending up with the oil? That just maybe, we're going to do the same
thing we did with Germany, Japan, Italy, and the other Axis countries, and
help turn oppressed people ruled by dictatorship into semi free people who
sort of rule themselves? Any chance at all?
Or is he 100% certain of the outcome already?
It must be nice to have such a certain view, so smug in one's knowledge of
who the bad guys are. Nice... or ridiculous.
My view hasn't changed. This war shouldn't have happened. It wasn't our mess
to clean up and we shouldn't have started it. There are other problems to
worry about first.
But now that it's on I want to kick butt as quickly as possible, and I'm
hopeful (but not at all certain, lots can go wrong) that we can win the
peace too. Lots has to happen for that to come to pass... we have to avoid
UN interference, we have to keep Turkey from going in and offing
inconvenient Kurds and etc. etc. etc. It might not happen. Compared to Iraq,
Germany was easy.
But at least I give it a CHANCE. I'm not CERTAIN that there's some vast
conspiracy between Halliburton and Enron and who knows who, all set to grab
everything to themselves. Does Richard even give that outcome a chance, or
is it all preordained?
Now who has the simplistic view?
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Looking for Motives
|
| Look, this is just counterproductive. There is no on-point discussion being advanced. If you were looking at my resume you would absolutely assume that my past record had at least some relationship to the trajectory of my present and future career (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
7 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
|
|
|
|
