At 03:20 PM 1/15/03 -0800, Petro wrote: >On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 09:15:57AM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >> On the other hand, if the US were following the traditional model >> for defense rather than having a standing army stomping around the world, >> it's highly unlikely that somebody like Al Qaeda would have attacked >> the World Trade Center, because they wouldn't have had their grievances >> about the US infidel forces stationed in the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. >> They *might* have attacked Exxon headquarters because of Exxon mercs >> stationed in the Holy Land. > > Bullshit. > > First off, the same groups would have been torqued off that we were
> guilty of "cultural imperalism" by allowing (or assisting) american > companies to push product over there. They would simply have had a social-boycott or a government-imposed ban. Both are used in the US. (Only the government-imposed one uses force, but its generally invisible bureaucratic violence by Customs workers at borders.) > Secondly, other groups would have been just as pissed off at us for > *not* helping them. Not if the USG had no policy towards anyone. One more time, George, for Petro: Trade with all, make treaties with none, and beware of foreign entanglements. -George Washington I guess RTFF: RTF Fatwa
