Subject:
|
Re: The War That Never Ends
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 4 Aug 2003 16:10:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
400 times
|
| |
|
|
John wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> > > Further, and as I have mentioned elsewhere, the overthrow of SH is a warning
> > > to other tinpot dictators who might be considering harboring terrorists. We
> > > have {shown} that we aren't afraid to take action against such scum. Again,
> > > this denies the pukes places to organize, train, etc.
> >
> > There is zero proof Iraq was harboring anyone plotting moves against the U.S.
>
> http://www.efreedomnews.com/news%20archive/iraq/specialreportwaroniraq/W53IraqTerrorism.htm
> http://spiritoftruth.org.nz/iraqlinks.htm
>
> > AQ, in particular, is supra-national. Cells may exist in as many as 60
> > countries including the U.S. Are we going to go after them all, John?
>
> Certainly some. And convince and assist the other countries to purge them by
> themselves.
>
> > > Now you tell me what {specific} civil liberties {you} have had to sacrifice
> > > as a result of the Bush administration.
> >
> > Freedom from being summarily investigated and databased.
>
> Really? When were you summarily investigated and databased?
I don't have any cites, but my mom is sure wondering if there's any
connection between here peacefull war protests and the fact that
everytime she goes though airport security she gets the "full
treatment". I'm personally not convinced, but the current administration
certainly gives conspiracy theorists a lot of ammunition.
Personally, while I tend to discount conspiracy theories, I also feel
there is value to them. Everyone who is questioning things, whether
reasonably or not, decreases the likelyhood of a conspiracy actually
working. Full and open communication is the only reliable way to keep
things in control.
> > People are being
> > denied the right to travel by air on the flimsiest pretexts.
>
> Cites please.
I seem to remember people who looked arabic being chucked off planes
right after 9-11 because the person sitting next to them was
"uncomfortable".
> > There is
> > potential to be expatriated and denied basically all of my rights, which has
> > happened to some americans already.
>
> Who have been found to have aided and abated our enemy.
Is that justication for tossing our the constitution? Should we toss out
the constitution for anyone who does something wrong? I'm sorry, if we
can't apply the constitutional protections to the worst of the worst,
then they are meaningless. If we can't apply the constitutional
protections to our neighbors, they are worthless.
> > > It is no wonder that liberties get curtailed in times of war
> > > (always have), and when peace is restored, so are the liberties.
> >
> > That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what is under consideration --
> > this war against terrorism is not expected to end probably in my lifetime.
>
> That's hopefully a long time:-) Nobody knows for certain what will happen in 5
> years much less 50.
So we should toss out the consitution because we don't know what will
happen tomorrow?
> > May I take the "war on drugs" as a sign of the inability to stop a problem
> > emanating from a variety of sources? You part ways with reality to justify
> > your political leanings, John.
>
> I think that the outcome of the "war on drugs" would have been substantially
> different if we had committed the resources that we did to Iraq to ending it.
Yea, it certainly would have been different. I wonder how we would react
to the body count?
> I don't think you would be able to find {anyone} who would agree with you
> (including, if possible, FDR himself). Everything he did was what he thought
> necessary to defend our Constitution. Now, you may not agree with his actions,
> but he certainly didn't abhor the Constitution. I'm starting to sound like a
> broken record even to myself, but, {in the real world}, sometimes compromises
> need to be made. Events, political POVs, public opinion all ebb and flow
> through time, but the Constitution remains (with the obvious exceptions to
> admendments). In stressful times we may deviate from the ideal, but we never
> loose sight of that ideal. So we do what needs to be done so that we may live
> under the ideal once again.
If in stressefull times we loose sight of the ideal, then we have no
ideal.
> I meant your constant ranting is old. Instead of simply pointing out problems
> everywhere (which is in many cases stating the obvious), let's discuss
> {solutions}.
Pot kettle black.
I'd love to discuss solutions, but no one seems interested. Well ok,
some people have seemed interested. They have all been driven off.
Of course I suppose I'm not helping.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The War That Never Ends
|
| (...) (URL) AQ, in particular, is supra-national. Cells may exist in as many as 60 (...) Certainly some. And convince and assist the other countries to purge them by themselves. (...) Really? When were you summarily investigated and databased? (...) (...) (21 years ago, 2-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
