Your comment might make sense if one assumes no sarcasm... You might error in higher logic functioning to make an assumption resting on this... Oh my bad, I am not supposed to play word games to divert and channel a "serious discussion" into that great fun category "how many angels on the pinhead"...
When the question of which POV you use, you bob, shuck, and jive around the definition "war"... You want a serious discussion, then act like it... You want little word play??? OK I will assume you are not into serious discussion... BTW, my point about Japan has since be raised by a number of thoughtful writers... Do not assume Japanese willingness to live or die under circumstances they do not control... Would Obama defend Japan AT THE COST of a nuked LA??? That sir is a serious question... Likewise Bush's assumption the we are at war is a correct one IMHO... That you disagree is clear... Sorry, I will go back letting you play that game "how many angels on the pinhead"... On Jun 2, 5:02 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > jgg, > > It would only be "clever" to someone not very bright. My statement was > obvious and logical. > Please point out anything I said that was untrue or illogical. > > On Jun 2, 3:30 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What a clever wit... At the expense of clarity in serious > > debate... Still Bush was right that we are at war with Radical > > Islamic... Despite you weaving and denials... And at the end of > > this discussion, that is the point isn't it... > > > On Jun 2, 2:23 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > jgg, > > > > Yep, laws and tactics were changed to combat organized crime. Now you > > > wish to talk about law enforcement and NOT war? I wish you'd make up > > > your mind. > > > > On Jun 2, 11:47 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Why is it so hard for you to acept that this is not about policing, > > > > but about groups who wish to overthrow various governments.... Just > > > > as laws and tactics were changed to deal with organized crime because > > > > the then law was incapable of dealing with it, laws and tactics HAD TO > > > > BE changed for dealing with Radical Islams... They are stateless > > > > transnational groups seeking to overthrow existing governments, often > > > > backed by drug money, who existing law, national or inational have > > > > adequete means to deal with... > > > > > Perhaps I should ask, "why the hard on to avoid using the narrower > > > > definition of war here?"... > > > > > As to Korea "Police Action" was employed for political reasons... > > > > Frankly after 1953, there was not much fighting... That was done > > > > only for 2-3 years... > > > > > On Jun 2, 12:34 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > Use "armed conflict" or whatever. "Police action" was used for the > > > > > Korean War for freakin' decades. WHY is it so important to you what > > > > > word is used, why the hard-on for that particular word? > > > > > > On Jun 2, 10:41 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I agree the term "war" is overused.... However to suggest BECAUSE > > > > > > it > > > > > > is overused there is no war is a straw-man... Using the more > > > > > > restrictive definitions for war, the question remains "Are we at > > > > > > war?".... We disagree on the answer even as you refuse to affirm > > > > > > your position that we are NOT at war... > > > > > > > I will note that you here are guilty of selectively seeking to > > > > > > dilute > > > > > > the definition of war because of political correctness... > > > > > > > On Jun 2, 10:57 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > I'm telling you what happened, I am talking about the direct > > > > > > > results > > > > > > > of using proper law enforcement investigative techniques. > > > > > > > War is a armed conflict between nations. The word has become a > > > > > > > political buzzword "war on drugs", "war on poverty", etc. etc. The > > > > > > > word war is used when politically convient. > > > > > > > > On Jun 2, 8:35 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>> I merely pointed out that by using proper law enforcement > > > > > > > > >>> techniques the criminals/terrorists/bad guys/whatever were > > > > > > > > >>> captured, tried and imprisoned. > > > > > > > > > Can war be dealt with long term by "law enforcement > > > > > > > > techniques??? A > > > > > > > > fundamental disagreement.... The underling unstated > > > > > > > > assumption one > > > > > > > > hears is "We are NOT at war with Islamic Fundamentalism"... > > > > > > > > > After 9/11, Bush precieved the fundamental truth - we ARE at > > > > > > > > war with > > > > > > > > Islamic Radicalism because of their choice to wage war with us > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > other nations (China, Russia, India, Spain, Saudi Arabia, > > > > > > > > Kenya,,,,) > > > > > > > > Even though not a nation state, AQ precieved itself as it were > > > > > > > > 7th > > > > > > > > century Islam on the path to worldly conquest.... I note that > > > > > > > > Bush > > > > > > > > pre 9/11, Clinton, and the CIA all misunderstood the nature of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > conflict prior to 2001... And not unlike 1948-52 with Russia, > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > Americans still misunderstand the nature of the conflict... > > > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 7:21 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > > > > > Don't care if it was the I.R.A. or the Boy Scouts. I merely > > > > > > > > > pointed > > > > > > > > > out that by using proper law enforcement techniques the > > > > > > > > > criminals/ > > > > > > > > > terrorists/bad guys/whatever were captured, tried and > > > > > > > > > imprisoned. > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 12:01 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The first WTC bombing was an al Queda action. Omar Abdel > > > > > > > > > > Rahman acted > > > > > > > > > > on orders of al Queda commanders (bin Laden) and the guys > > > > > > > > > > who were > > > > > > > > > > convicted with him were stupid pawns who not only rented > > > > > > > > > > the van used > > > > > > > > > > in the bombing in their own name, they went back and tried > > > > > > > > > > to claim it > > > > > > > > > > was stolen. You call this "getting it done", when it comes > > > > > > > > > > to bringing > > > > > > > > > > the guys responsible for the bombing to justice? Worse than > > > > > > > > > > that, > > > > > > > > > > Clinton's people were so fixated on keeping intelligence > > > > > > > > > > and law > > > > > > > > > > enforcement from talking to each other for fear that it > > > > > > > > > > would harass > > > > > > > > > > illegal immigrants that they missed the seriousness and > > > > > > > > > > implications > > > > > > > > > > of the increasing frequency and ferocity of al Queda's > > > > > > > > > > attacks on our > > > > > > > > > > country. > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 12:31 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah he did treat it as a law enforcement problems. The > > > > > > > > > > > result being > > > > > > > > > > > catching, trying and jailing the men who did the first > > > > > > > > > > > WTC bombing. > > > > > > > > > > > Where's Osama? > > > > > > > > > > > Certainly not rotting in a U.S. Federal prison. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 11:27 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I give credit where credit is due. Clinton gets credit > > > > > > > > > > > > for signing > > > > > > > > > > > > welfare reform (something which Obama is currently > > > > > > > > > > > > looking to > > > > > > > > > > > > reverse). I give Clinton credit for negotiating a much > > > > > > > > > > > > needed peace in > > > > > > > > > > > > Northern Ireland. But Clinton also treated an Islamic > > > > > > > > > > > > jihad against > > > > > > > > > > > > our country like it was an international law > > > > > > > > > > > > enforcement problem. One > > > > > > > > > > > > of his administrators, Jamie Gorelik, actively sought > > > > > > > > > > > > to deter various > > > > > > > > > > > > US law enforcement and intelligence agencies from > > > > > > > > > > > > sharing information. > > > > > > > > > > > > Clinton's justice department threatened banks that > > > > > > > > > > > > resisted making > > > > > > > > > > > > risky loans and his administration pressured Fannie Mae > > > > > > > > > > > > and Freddie > > > > > > > > > > > > Mac to lower lending standards, which allowed > > > > > > > > > > > > poisonous, risky loans > > > > > > > > > > > > to be packaged with good loans into mortgage backed > > > > > > > > > > > > securities that > > > > > > > > > > > > would eventually collapse and bring the world financial > > > > > > > > > > > > industry down > > > > > > > > > > > > with them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 11:45 am, Hollywood > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anything you DON'T wish you could blame Bill Clinton > > > > > > > > > > > > > for? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 8:59 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How about this; what if terrorists hijack some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planes and ram them in buildings? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can thank Mr. Clinton for inviting these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > terrorists into our > > > > > > > > > > > > > > country and letting them train > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here.....................right after we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thank him and his perverted henchmen Franks and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dodd for causing a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > worldwide financial meltdown. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 29, 4:13 pm, studio <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 28, 5:06 pm, jgg1000a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do not under estimate Japan's willingness to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > build nukes IF they think > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > America will not be there in 5 years... And > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Obama if he follows some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the Democratic Left's thought will do just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that... And there is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some in Japan openly questioning just that... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who is under estimating Japan's ability to build > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nukes? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Obama and/or the democratic party according to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you and the article? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get real. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, they'll sacrifice Japan and South Korea for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > better China and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > North Korea relations....you're living in a world > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of fantasy paranoia. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can thank Bush Jr. for that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What if this, what if that....and none of your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what if's ever come > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > true. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How about this; what if terrorists hijack some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planes and ram them in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > buildings? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ops, sorry, that already happened on Bush Jr's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > watch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What if the economy suffered a meltdown? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My bad, that already happened on Bush Jr's watch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take the ABM technology. If Obama cuts thats > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that budget, Japan may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think the US is NOT serious about the defense > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Japan... Many in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Democratic Party want to cut this out of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > budget... Problem is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > they just do not think in geo-political > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strategic terms... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > More paranoia fear mongering from the right as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > far as I can see. > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
