Subject:
|
Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 Jul 2003 02:53:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
425 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
| |
No, Mike, I mean as in protecting oil fields so that they may be marketed to
us and the world freely.
|
Well that is about the only thing we have accomplished thus far, except for
the “world freely” part.
| |
Or deposing tyrannts who fund/and or harbor terrorists to the US.
|
Right so after Afganistan, Saudi Arabia was the only country that we can
actually prove did that.
|
We know Saudis perpetrated it; whether they were government sponsored or not is
unclear. I tend to think not. OBL is a criminal in Saudi Arabia, and the
Wahabi sect of Islam is just as dangerous to their way of life as it is to ours.
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
That’s a good answer for anyone that is not obsessed with Israel. Me, I
don’t give a damn if the Palestinians and the Israelis engage in a mutual
genocide pact. I mean, it would be sad -- but at the end of the day I’d
rather make fewer enemies by not taking sides.
|
Good example. Do you doubt for 1 second that if we withdrew support of
Israel and the Arabs decided to launch an all-out assault her, she
wouldn’t nuke the living crap out of them?
|
Which would end the conflict.
|
And possibly Israel as well. Are you really so willing to accept a middle
eastern limited (hopefully) nuclear war as a potential scenario?
|
Well given that there are more Isralies and Palestinians living in peace in
the U.S. than there are fighting each other in the middle east, who cares. If
they kill each other then there won’t be a problem will there.
| |
| |
| |
And your isolationist policy would bring
such a conflict about, and a nuclear one at that! Our support of Israel
actually is a stabilizing effect over there.
|
No it is simply prolonging a war. The U.S. actually gives more to the
Palestinians than it does to the Isralies.
|
Say again?
|
We give more monetary aid to Palestinians than we give weapons to the
Isralies.
| |
I need a cite for that assertion. Actually, it is Israel
herself who has prolonged the conflict due to her restraint of not wiping
out the Palestinians long ago...
|
Or vice versa.
|
We can agree to disagree here, but I am still waiting for a cite to your
assertion about US aid to Palestinians compared to Israel.
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
I’d rather a thousand instances of my uncertainty, nay-saying, doubt, and
inaction than the actual results of your
psycho-apocalyptic-Xtian-manifest-destiny nonsense.
|
You attitude is the wet dream of a terrorists.
|
No it is the fear mongers version of what the “wet dream of terrorits” is.
|
What does that mean?
|
I mean the U.S. propaganda mass media make the public think they are in
danger so they can control them, fear mongers.
|
What are you talking about here? US government propaganda, or mass media
propaganda, or are they in concert together? And who is doing the controlling--
the US government or the mass media?
| |
| |
| |
| |
Inaction enboldens terrorism;
uncertainty strengthens terrorist resolve; doubt leads to capitulation.
Your path would lead us to ruin.
|
Do you honestly swallow all that propaganda? You do realize that it is far
more likely that the Government let the 9/11 attacks succed so they have a
scapegoat for stealing our rights via the patriot act right?
|
Who is swallowing what propaganda?!! You are talking crazy!
|
Oh yeah thats it I am just crazy. Look at actions not words. Bush and company
keep saying they are fighting for freedom and liberty and yet they are trying
to push through stuff like Patriot Act which goes against both. Why do you
think they keep saying just go on about your daliy routine? Maybe so we don’t
see what big brother is doing?
|
If it is the Patriot Act that has your undies in a bunch, then I respectfully
submit that that is another debate topic, although a good one: How does a free
society protect itself against terrorism while preserving free rights for all.
It is a very difficult question to answer I will freely admit, and I don’t
necessarily defend the Patriot Act myself.
| |
| |
But don’t
believe me; consult an expert, someone who has dealt with more terrorism
than anyone. Ask virtually any Israeli.
| |
| |
You would rather absorb a nuclear attack rather
than pre-emptively trying to disarm those who would attack us in such a
manner? Fine.
|
That wouldn’t happen (or at worst only happen once) you know. Because then
we would flatten half the world (without using nukes) in retaliation. That
would make the whole problem go away.
|
Let’s suppose that the attack on 9-11 was actually a nuclear bomb
denotation. How would we have reacted differently than we did?
|
We probably would have wiped out most of the middle east.
|
I think you are just plain wrong in that assessment.
| |
| |
Your response doesn’t make any sense.
| |
Of course people would be whining about the
innoccent lives, even though they didn’t care how badly they were suffering
before hand.
| |
I guess we just agree to disagree on that issue. But I’ll say
this-- I’d bet my LEGO collection that your POV isn’t shared by the
overwhelming majority of Americans-- right or left.
We are the most powerful nation on the earth. What is so wrong with
wielding that power to spread the concepts of freedom and liberty?
|
Nothing. The problem is we are not doing that. I mean you see how free
Afganistan and Iraq are right now don’t you. Sure they are better off now
but they are still not free.
|
Dude, what more can we do for those countries??? You can only lead a
horse to water!
|
Oh gee I don’t know how about actually educating them about what democracy is
and such.
|
What do you suppose we are doing over there? It is not as if there aren’t
1,000s of Iraqi expatriots who have been educated in the US and know all about
freedom and democracy. Afganistan might be a different story though...
| |
| |
| |
| |
We didn’t invent
them; they are inalienable rights for everyone. It would be evil to
allow others to suffer under the tyranny of oppression while burying our
collective head in the sands of indifference.
|
The problem is we need a consistent foreign policy regardless of what that
policy is.
|
The problem is that the enemy isn’t even a country. How does one
formulate a foreign policy based on groups or individuals? One doesn’t, by
definition. But you serve notice to countries who *do* harbor and/or sponsor
terrorists. We never would have attacked Iraq had SH simply left the
country. All we wanted was him-- his head on a platter.
|
Why? The only thing he did differnt than many other “evil dictators” that we
don’t care about is possess oil.
|
You are correct that if he didn’t control a vast percentage of the world’s oil
fields, we wouldn’t have cared as much. We need that oil. The Iraqi people
need the money we pay them for that oil. It is actually in both our interests
that that flow continues.
| |
| |
He refused and we did what we
had to do to depose him and his corrupt government, and nothing more. Once
a stable democracy is up and running in Iraq, we will leave.
|
I would belive that if we were actually trying to educate the people rather
than simply control and/or contain them. Really that is only a few levels
above what Saddam was doing.
|
You are mistaken as to what our mission is in that country.
| |
Anyways all of it is a scam, much like the whole Y2K “problem” was. It is a
method of keeping people in a state of fear. Not so much that they don’t go
about their daily routine, but enough to keep most of them from asking
questions. It is population control so the masses do not threaten those in
power. Actions speak far louder than words, you just have to pay attention.
The greatest threat to our country comes from our government not some
mysterious phantom “terrorists.” We are no safer from terrorist attack today
than we were 3 years ago but we are far more susceptible to blatant violation
of the constitution by government agencies and police.
|
Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it sounds like paranoia
and conspiracy theories to me.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
81 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
|
|
|
|
