The message I am responding to had errors in format so this is a corrected repeat...
___________________________
Message 20101513
I define civilization as mainly consensual too. The use of force is not the rule, it is the exception.
do you also believe in self determination of the different countries?
or do you take exception to certain countries taking a different approach to the so much quoted "American interest" in which case, damn all rules let the CIA handle it ?
I think our troops will be there for at least several more years, in order to prevent either a take over by Shi'ite clerics, or a civil war. I think we have a perfectly viable plan, although it depends on the Iraqis being able to take a far greater role in security.
I am sorry to disappoint you but short of a REAL (and soon) decision to leave, the US will be there for a while at a stupid (and unnecessary ) cost both $$ & human of young American soldiers.
The US simply cannot be the world's police.
Who ever said anything about a vastly expanded American military presence all over the planet? Whose sovereignty do I deny? I would be happy to have a much lower residual force in Iraq; I would be happy enough to have the EU take over more of its defense, and pare down our bases in Europe; I would be ecstatic if the fall of the North Korean regime permitted us to cease policing the DMZ. I acknowledge the sovereignty of most all of the nations on the planet.
Well then, unless it is actually done, you are merely dreaming, since the reality is different.
I consider the sovereignty of brutal dictatorships to be dubious, since there is no possibility of a reasonable consent of the governed, but that is about it.
So then.... why is it that the US has not only 'consented' such dictatorships but trained their brutal leaders... I already mentioned the names of the Latin American paid capos that run their respective countries as if they were their private armies, piggybanks, etc, etc...
talk is cheap, the rest is.... "against American Interest"
Do you really....
1. not see the obvious or
2. is it not convenient to acknowledge what goes on or
3. do you really think we the outsiders are really that dumb not to see through the US government veil of lies, or
3. you just simply not know ?
or is it a case of... repeat it enough times until you believe in it then ?
I consider the increase in government spending to be temporary, and normal during time of war. I support reating suspected terrorists differently from ordinary criminal suspects. I believe in a strong executive, but I also believe in congressional oversight and a robust systemn of courts. I do not by any means support all power being concentrated in the hands of the president, just most power having to do with foreign affairs, especially security.
my, my... so then... do you approve of King George latest crusade and diversion of funds for other causes... is that "ok", it is an impeachable offence? or do we need some sex into the mix?
Actually, I have not said much about Islam; I recently posted criticism of Meir Kahane and his followers; and if you will show me some Christians who are blowing people up, I will denounce them.
hmm an interesting question....
Not that I am an Islam lover... (I actually despise all religions), BUT he main difference with me is...
so long you do not come to force it down my throat, or those near me... you can worship a sacred cow for all i care...
however, when I hear that a president of a country talks to god ('the-man-in-the-sky-theory') and on that basis he sends young people to die in a senseless war AND lies about the reasons why...
You bet I have a BIG F' problem with religious fanatics, i do not give a rat's rear end what flavor it is
Do you go out of your way to misrepresent me, or do you merely misunderstand?
I doubt you intended to address that question at me in your reference, but just in case...
no i do not misrepresent you, this particular exchange is about your comment 'justifying' the decision to nuke two Japanese cities...
not only do i consider that the act of an irrational savage, but it actually pisses me off to read such blindness after 59 years of history and subsequent knowledge that there was 'more to it than they led people know'... AND the trumpeting of the American demagoguery machine in terms of the actual events in the same years of history... i.e. preach peace and kindness blah blah blah.... yet in actuality support brutal dictatorships, train expert assassins and when they turn against the US play dumb and say...
who me ?
after all... who trained Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden...
NOW...
I will turn it around to you and I will say this...
I am not opposed to the war on terror, provided it is done in a rational manner and in a way that it is NOT used as a means to pass certain laws that the neo-conservatives see fit to have in place... or to use it as an excuse to do things like the war in Iraq... (and the lies that attempted to excuse it) |
