Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
So, America is powerful, that is a fact of history and I can think of nations in whose hands that power would much more need to be feared. I have no particular brief for American foreign policy, in the past they have done wise and generous things, like the Marshal Plan, and foolish and even shameful things, like their complicity in the overthrow and murder of Chile's Allende, and the bringing to power of that butcher Pinochete. However, the nearest that the US ever came to being led by a megalomaniac was Nixon, and the system defeated him. Many such have ruled in other countries in the world. Hitler, Stalin, Miloshevic, Hussein etc, and Africa seems to be full of them, so perhaps we should thank our lucky stars that the US, rather that any of these tyrants has the upper hand. Don From: Peter Michael Bacchus [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 08:07:40 +1200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Which country in the world has the most weapons of mass destruction? Which country has initiated the most strikes on other nations? Why havn't other countries initiated pre emptive strikes on U.S.A.??? Peter.
Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
From: D S Chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 11:06:22 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast - Original Message - From: Eve Cruse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 26 August 2002 12:40 AM Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Hi David, I agree that my comparison was insulting to the snakes, and I am not promoting war, which is always an indication of the failure of more rational methods of problem solving. I am not even a Bush fan. If I lived in the US I would have voted democrat. What I do say, is that in this less-than-perfect world there are times when pre-emptive strikes are necessary, and even desirable, rather than risk a far worse outcome. Pre-emptive strikes, motivated by fear of the unknown, that kill the innocent are murder, War is not the sanitised pictures you see on TV or the Stallone bullshit Hollywood loves, it's coming too after the explosion, laying in your own shit and slowly realising that the mud on your face is your best friends guts. War is little kids petrified with fear and screaming, screaming and screaming because their mother was just blown apart in front of them. War is pieces of little kids all around you. Ask a vet of front line action, war doesn't hurt the leaders who start them only the little people who have no say. Yes, I've been through it. London was not exactly pleasant during the blitz, followed by the rain V1's and V2's. As for spin doctors, they work on both sides. Hitler, Goebbels et al were all masters at propaganda, as Hussein also seems to be. And we as individuals simply do not have the reliable information needed to make the difficult decisions. If military action is contemplated, whether 'declared' or not, then secrecy is essential. I grew up in London during WW11 and remember everywhere signs saying loose lips sink ships and the like. And it also was used to cover the stuff ups, the time you speak of was different to now, there was in fact a war on, now we are being manipulated by all manner of interests who claim knowledge without producing the evidence, secretcy is the wall they hide behind. If a pre-emptive strike is made against Iraq, which seems likely, what would we think if after it weapons of mass destruction were found there in an advanced state of development? Remember, Hussein like Hitler is a megalomaniac, and as such he is very likely to use such weapons. Don More to the point what if there were no weapons of mass destruction? All just bad luck? Do you think we would be told the truth? In the overall scheme of things Hussein is a piss ant, if they so badly want to take him out then turn their resources to getting just him, don't slaughter the innocent as well. David C Still more to the point is that if Hussein is not stopped, and does have such weapons at his disposal, then millions could die in a nuclear and germ warfare holocast led by a madman who has absolutely no respect for human life. Don From: D S Chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 11:27:23 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Don: I live where there are numerous varieties of poisonous snakes most of which have their myths on their power to strike and bite. My experience with them is that in most cases they just want to go about their business and help me by eating the mice and rats. Occasionally we do kill one that gets into our living room but we don't run around slaughtering them all, just in case they do come into our living room We will never know the what the outcome of Churchill's plan. Not all of his plans were as good as we are wont to remember, the outcome could have been worse. Can you or any of us believe what the spin doctors feed us? Right now there are reports that the invasion has begun, yet our erstwhile leaders are denying this, why? If it is so then the Iraqi's would certainly know about it, so it can't be security reasons. It can only be an attempt to mislead our own people. Sorry I can't trust liars, who wish to kill thousands of people for dubious reasons. Then again I suppose they are just Iraqis not Americans so it is probably OK. David C - Original Message - From: Eve Cruse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 25 August 2002 3:08 AM Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast From: Roger Pye [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Earthcare Environmental Solutions Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 11:05:57 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why suppress the inevitable. All sides in power want the war. The powers that be want the war. The steps are in motion
Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
Hi David, I agree that my comparison was insulting to the snakes, and I am not promoting war, which is always an indication of the failure of more rational methods of problem solving. I am not even a Bush fan. If I lived in the US I would have voted democrat. What I do say, is that in this less-than-perfect world there are times when pre-emptive strikes are necessary, and even desirable, rather than risk a far worse outcome. As for spin doctors, they work on both sides. Hitler, Goebbels et al were all masters at propaganda, as Hussein also seems to be. And we as individuals simply do not have the reliable information needed to make these difficult decisions. If military action is contemplated, whether 'declared' or not, then secrecy is essential. I grew up in London during WW11 and remember everywhere signs saying loose lips sink ships and the like. If a pre-emptive strike is made against Iraq, which seems likely, what would we think if after it weapons of mass destruction were found there in an advanced state of development? Remember, Hussein like Hitler is a megalomaniac, and as such he is very likely to use such weapons. Don From: D S Chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 11:27:23 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Don: I live where there are numerous varieties of poisonous snakes most of which have their myths on their power to strike and bite. My experience with them is that in most cases they just want to go about their business and help me by eating the mice and rats. Occasionally we do kill one that gets into our living room but we don't run around slaughtering them all, just in case they do come into our living room We will never know the what the outcome of Churchill's plan. Not all of his plans were as good as we are wont to remember, the outcome could have been worse. Can you or any of us believe what the spin doctors feed us? Right now there are reports that the invasion has begun, yet our erstwhile leaders are denying this, why? If it is so then the Iraqi's would certainly know about it, so it can't be security reasons. It can only be an attempt to mislead our own people. Sorry I can't trust liars, who wish to kill thousands of people for dubious reasons. Then again I suppose they are just Iraqis not Americans so it is probably OK. David C - Original Message - From: Eve Cruse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 25 August 2002 3:08 AM Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast From: Roger Pye [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Earthcare Environmental Solutions Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 11:05:57 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why suppress the inevitable. All sides in power want the war. The powers that be want the war. The steps are in motion already. On some level the war has already begun. Bring it on, let's get it over with. SStorch I have been following this debate, and it leads me to the following thoughts: Reverence for life is a most worthy principle which asks of us, as Tolkien put it, that we do not destroy that which we cannot create. Most people, however draw the line somewhere in its application. What, for example, would you allow to establish a habitat in your living room? Flies? Mice or Rats? How about an Egyptian Krat, a small and very poisonous snake that coils into a spring and can leap ten feet? Now, in our 'global village' everything is, in a sense, in our living room. Hitler was a Krat, and Neville Chamberlin tried to find room for him in Europe by 'turning the other cheek'. No doubt Chamberlin was, in this respect at least, a better Christian than Churchill. On the the other hand if Churchill had been allowed to confront Hitler earlier, as he very much wanted to do, perhaps WWII might have been averted and millions of lives saved. Now, is Saddam Hussein a Krat? Yes, you may bet your life that he is. Don
Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
*** ATTACHMENT AUTOMATICALLY REMOVED! **
Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
Isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Which country in the world has the most weapons of mass destruction? Which country has initiated the most strikes on other nations? Why havn't other countries initiated pre emptive strikes on U.S.A.??? Peter.
Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
In a message dated 8/25/02 8:02:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why havn't other countries initiated pre emptive strikes on U.S.A.??? Peter. They finally did Peter. Though BinLaden is a rogue, a man without a country he represents the way things will be done to deal with a power like the usa. If I understand correctly, BinLaden, unlike Bush, has openly declared war...sstorch
Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
- Original Message - From: Eve Cruse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 26 August 2002 12:40 AM Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Hi David, I agree that my comparison was insulting to the snakes, and I am not promoting war, which is always an indication of the failure of more rational methods of problem solving. I am not even a Bush fan. If I lived in the US I would have voted democrat. What I do say, is that in this less-than-perfect world there are times when pre-emptive strikes are necessary, and even desirable, rather than risk a far worse outcome. Pre-emptive strikes, motivated by fear of the unknown, that kill the innocent are murder, War is not the sanitised pictures you see on TV or the Stallone bullshit Hollywood loves, it's coming too after the explosion, laying in your own shit and slowly realising that the mud on your face is your best friends guts. War is little kids petrified with fear and screaming, screaming and screaming because their mother was just blown apart in front of them. War is pieces of little kids all around you. Ask a vet of front line action, war doesn't hurt the leaders who start them only the little people who have no say. As for spin doctors, they work on both sides. Hitler, Goebbels et al were all masters at propaganda, as Hussein also seems to be. And we as individuals simply do not have the reliable information needed to make the difficult decisions. If military action is contemplated, whether 'declared' or not, then secrecy is essential. I grew up in London during WW11 and remember everywhere signs saying loose lips sink ships and the like. And it also was used to cover the stuff ups, the time you speak of was different to now, there was in fact a war on, now we are being manipulated by all manner of interests who claim knowledge without producing the evidence, secretcy is the wall they hide behind. If a pre-emptive strike is made against Iraq, which seems likely, what would we think if after it weapons of mass destruction were found there in an advanced state of development? Remember, Hussein like Hitler is a megalomaniac, and as such he is very likely to use such weapons. Don More to the point what if there were no weapons of mass destruction? All just bad luck? Do you think we would be told the truth? In the overall scheme of things Hussein is a piss ant, if they so badly want to take him out then turn their resources to getting just him, don't slaughter the innocent as well. David C From: D S Chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 11:27:23 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Don: I live where there are numerous varieties of poisonous snakes most of which have their myths on their power to strike and bite. My experience with them is that in most cases they just want to go about their business and help me by eating the mice and rats. Occasionally we do kill one that gets into our living room but we don't run around slaughtering them all, just in case they do come into our living room We will never know the what the outcome of Churchill's plan. Not all of his plans were as good as we are wont to remember, the outcome could have been worse. Can you or any of us believe what the spin doctors feed us? Right now there are reports that the invasion has begun, yet our erstwhile leaders are denying this, why? If it is so then the Iraqi's would certainly know about it, so it can't be security reasons. It can only be an attempt to mislead our own people. Sorry I can't trust liars, who wish to kill thousands of people for dubious reasons. Then again I suppose they are just Iraqis not Americans so it is probably OK. David C - Original Message - From: Eve Cruse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 25 August 2002 3:08 AM Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast From: Roger Pye [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Earthcare Environmental Solutions Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 11:05:57 +1000 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why suppress the inevitable. All sides in power want the war. The powers that be want the war. The steps are in motion already. On some level the war has already begun. Bring it on, let's get it over with. SStorch I have been following this debate, and it leads me to the following thoughts: Reverence for life is a most worthy principle which asks of us, as Tolkien put it, that we do not destroy that which we cannot create. Most people, however draw the line somewhere in its application. What, for example, would you allow to establish a habitat in your living room? Flies? Mice or Rats? How about an Egyptian Krat, a small and very poisonous snake
ReOFF/ : [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
Please note a few things: 1. The US controls the UN. So, who decides to bomb who? 2. The latest treaty to serve the Internation War Court is NOT supported by the US, along with a only a few other countries. Why? They'd be hauling American generals and presidents by the dozen. So, Might is Right. 3. The victims of 9/11 were NOT allowed to sue the American Gov't. Why was that? Michael - Original Message - From: Peter Michael Bacchus [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 1:07 PM Subject: Re: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast Isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Which country in the world has the most weapons of mass destruction? Which country has initiated the most strikes on other nations? Why havn't other countries initiated pre emptive strikes on U.S.A.??? Peter.
FW: [globalnews] War on Iraq? Not so fast
*** ATTACHMENT AUTOMATICALLY REMOVED! **
