Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Jim Fernandes]

Mervyn,
It does not look like you can hold a debate to its scope. When forced to a 
corner, you begin to employ tricks such as selective 'cut and paste' and other 
esoteric methods, such as creating entirely new threads to throw your readers 
off track. Those games won't work with me.

Mervyn states:
Jim F,
I do not think the US will default on its bonds. In any case, it is of little 
interest to me. What I am really interested in, is examining the current 
economic jungle and finding a way to benefit from it. If you know a way, can 
you share it with us?  Else, we can waste the next five years debating the 
finer economic theories while others get richer.   

My response:
You are the one who brought up the topic of US credit worthiness and 
questioning why America blows up precious resources to maintain its interests 
overseas. 

It appears that you are not able to hold a discussion to its topic in a 
cohesive manner. When challenged with a response to your points of contention, 
you claim it is of no interest to you. 

If you wanted to get rich, you could have bought Tesla stock - it has almost 
doubled in value from the time I dropped hints about it on GoaNet a few months 
ago. Had you bought gold in that time, you would probably be making zilch. 
There is zero chance of you getting rich when your brain is buried deep in crap 
!!!


>2. In an earlier reply you stated the below:
>"I am in one of the remote parts of the US where I can only get an internet 
>connection for a 
>few minutes a day. A few years ago, I had to book way in advance to get to 
>this area. Today, 
>business is so bad that they offer off-season rates during peak season. The 
>locals have no 
>money and are hurting."
>
>Do you refer to Washington DC as the remote part of the US? Do you think the 
>folks in DC 
>get INTERNET access only for a few minutes a day? Who on earth thinks 
>businesses are 
>hurting in DC? Have you recently checked how much it costs to purchase a 
>property over 
>there or how much rent people pay to live around the capital?


Mervyn states:
Ok, let me make this simpler so that you can understand it. When I say I am in 
a remote part, I have gone there for a break. I am at the place while writing 
the email. When you get to read it, I may be at a totally different place. By 
the time I get to read your reply, I could be in a different country. If this 
is clear now, I am very surprised that the thought would even cross your mind 
that Washington DC is a remote part of the country. It is the nations capital. 
It is the center of power, the exact opposite of remote. 

My response:
This is a stupidest thing I am reading coming out of your head. Please re-read 
your own email when you quoted you were in a remote part of the US and then 
later stating that that remote place happened to be Washington DC. Clearly, the 
neurons aren't firing right.


Mervyn states:
Lastly, returning to the issue in the subject line, here is a picture of how 
some of the people who live in the remote part of the US I was in, think of 
their President.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45002663@N00/9837342855/


My response:
I have not checked this link. Regardless, I give rats ass about what people 
have to say about a US president. The current president is doing excellent job 
and his priorities are entirely in line with mine. If I was asked to choose 
between putting food on the table or a gun in my holster - I would choose the 
food.

Only stupid people would choose a gun!
 
I am OK with how president Obama is running the country.

Jim F.
New York.

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Mervyn Lobo]

Jim Fernandes wrote:
>Do you know what interest rate the US is paying on its bonds? Based on the 
>interest rate the 
>US is currently paying, does it look to you that the US is about to default?


Jim F,
I do not think the US will default on its bonds. In any case, it is of little 
interest to me. What I am really interested in, is examining the current 
economic jungle and finding a way to benefit from it. If you know a way, can 
you share it with us?  Else, we can waste the next five years debating the 
finer economic theories while others get richer.   


>2. In an earlier reply you stated the below:
>"I am in one of the remote parts of the US where I can only get an internet 
>connection for a 
>few minutes a day. A few years ago, I had to book way in advance to get to 
>this area. Today, 
>business is so bad that they offer off-season rates during peak season. The 
>locals have no 
>money and are hurting."
>
>Do you refer to Washington DC as the remote part of the US? Do you think the 
>folks in DC 
>get INTERNET access only for a few minutes a day? Who on earth thinks 
>businesses are 
>hurting in DC? Have you recently checked how much it costs to purchase a 
>property over 
>there or how much rent people pay to live around the capital?



Ok, let me make this simpler so that you can understand it. When I say I am in 
a remote part, I have gone there for a break. I am at the place while writing 
the email. When you get to read it, I may be at a totally different place. By 
the time I get to read your reply, I could be in a different country. If this 
is clear now, I am very surprised that the thought would even cross your mind 
that Washington DC is a remote part of the country. It is the nations capital. 
It is the center of power, the exact opposite of remote. 

Lastly, returning to the issue in the subject line, here is a picture of how 
some of the people who live in the remote part of the US I was in, think of 
their President.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45002663@N00/9837342855/

Mervyn

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Jim Fernandes]

Mervyn,
 
Now you have resorted to playing tricks on us.

Please do not change the subject line without mentioning why you are doing so, 
in the body of your post. Not only did you change the subject line, you also 
selectively cut and paste material that suits your agenda and created an 
entirely new thread. People aren't that stupid to fall for it. I have manually, 
lifted stuff from your other post and plugged it here so that the thread stays 
the way it should be.

Now let's get down to business:
1. You switched the discussion to the credit worthiness of the US in your reply 
below.
Let me explain to you that I work in finance and I perfectly understand how 
credit ratings are supposed to work. The ratings are supposed to indicate a 
borrowers financial wherewithal along with a chance of a default by that 
borrower. The lower the rating, the higher the interest rate the lender would 
demand because of the associated risk.

Do you know what interest rate the US is paying on its bonds? Based on the 
interest rate the US is currently paying, does it look to you that the US is 
about to default?

2. In an earlier reply you stated the below:
"I am in one of the remote parts of the US where I can only get an internet 
connection for a few minutes a day. A few years ago, I had to book way in 
advance to get to this area. Today, business is so bad that they offer 
off-season rates during peak season. The locals have no money and are hurting."

Do you refer to Washington DC as the remote part of the US? Do you think the 
folks in DC get INTERNET access only for a few minutes a day? Who on earth 
thinks businesses are hurting in DC? Have you recently checked how much it 
costs to purchase a property over there or how much rent people pay to live 
around the capital?
 
You are stooping so low that now you are really beginning to look like a one 
trick dog. Come on my friend, learn some new tricks.

Jim F
New York.


Jim Fernandes wrote: 
> You sound like the US is about to go around with a begging bowl for alms. 

Jim F, 
Clearly you have no idea what the credit rating of the US is or how it has not 
been able to balance its budget this century. 

> In the meantime, please enjoy your near-free vacation in the remote rat hole 
> you 
> happened to be in!

I find it almost unbelievable that you would call Washington, D.C. a rat hole. 
Despite your sour opinion, it is the nations capital and very righteous people 
live here. Regardless of the dozen+ people killed here today, it is a much, 
much safer place than New York City.

Mervyn


- Original Message -
From: Jim Fernandes 
To: "goa...@goanet.org" 
Cc: 
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal 
on chemical weapons

Mervyn,

You sound like the US is about to go around with a begging bowl for alms. 

If the country is about to go bust, please explain why millions of people from 
around the world would want to drop everything behind at the blink of any eye, 
just to get a foot in the door to America.

Every year, the US takes in 65,000 people on H-1B work visa's alone. This year, 
they are expected to take in 85,000 (the extra 20K claim to be under non H1-cap 
situations). Are these people coming into the US because there are no jobs?

Demand to get a job in the US is so high, that this year alone, the US received 
double the number of 65K annual quote for H1-B visas - which means these 
foreigners are going to be subjected to the lottery system!

In the meantime, please enjoy your near-free vacation in the remote rat hole 
you happened to be in!

Jim F
New York.

Note: I don't want to deviate from the subject line - the fact of the matter is 
that the US is the only country in the world that has balls to do something 
worthwhile. But they will do so, only if there is American skin in the game. In 
the Syrian crises, I see three main reasons for Obama to get involved:
1. He wants a back door entry to attack Iran's nuclear plants
2. Israel is next door and the US would not want their friend to get hurt if 
these chemicals get into wrong hands.
3. It makes reasonably good PR to go after a dictator who kills his own using 
banned weapons of mass destruction.



- Original Message -
From: Mervyn Lobo 
To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" 
Cc: 
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal 
on chemical weapons

Jim Fernandes wrote:  

> I perfectly understand some folks may be upset with the Americans for 
> involving 
> themselves in other countries' internal affairs. On the other hand, do you 
> have any idea how may Goans and Indians should be thankful to the Americans 
> for 
> freeing up Kuwait from Iraqi clutches? If it hadn't been for the Americans 
> (the rest of 

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Jim Fernandes]

Mervyn,

You sound like the US is about to go around with a begging bowl for alms. 

If the country is about to go bust, please explain why millions of people from 
around the world would want to drop everything behind at the blink of any eye, 
just to get a foot in the door to America.

Every year, the US takes in 65,000 people on H-1B work visa's alone. This year, 
they are expected to take in 85,000 (the extra 20K claim to be under non H1-cap 
situations). Are these people coming into the US because there are no jobs?

Demand to get a job in the US is so high, that this year alone, the US received 
double the number of 65K annual quote for H1-B visas - which means these 
foreigners are going to be subjected to the lottery system!

In the meantime, please enjoy your near-free vacation in the remote rat hole 
you happened to be in!

Jim F
New York.

Note: I don't want to deviate from the subject line - the fact of the matter is 
that the US is the only country in the world that has balls to do something 
worthwhile. But they will do so, only if there is American skin in the game. In 
the Syrian crises, I see three main reasons for Obama to get involved:
1. He wants a back door entry to attack Iran's nuclear plants
2. Israel is next door and the US would not want their friend to get hurt if 
these chemicals get into wrong hands.
3. It makes reasonably good PR to go after a dictator who kills his own using 
banned weapons of mass destruction.



- Original Message -
From: Mervyn Lobo 
To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" 
Cc: 
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal 
on chemical weapons

Jim Fernandes wrote:  

> I perfectly understand some folks may be upset with the Americans for 
> involving 
> themselves in other countries' internal affairs. On the other hand, do you 
> have any idea how may Goans and Indians should be thankful to the Americans 
> for 
> freeing up Kuwait from Iraqi clutches? If it hadn't been for the Americans 
> (the rest of the coalition was just a small puppy show), Kuwait would still 
> be 
> under Iraqi control. My gut says, if left unchecked, Saddam would have 
> gobbled up Saudi Arabia as well. Can you imagine how many Goans / Indians 
> would 
> have been uprooted from those countries along with their lively hood? That's 
> not all - Saddam would have exerted control over a significant amount of 
> world 
> oil - forcing the rest of the world to pay through their noses after the 
> annexation of Kuwait / Saudi !


Jim F,
I am in one of the remote parts of the US where I can only get an internet 
connection for a few minutes a day. A few years ago, I had to book way in 
advance to get to this area. Today, business is so bad that they offer 
off-season rates during peak season. The locals have no money and are hurting.

Their government, however, behaves as though they have money to waste. Taxes 
are er, blown up in the Middle East. To make this even more bitter, the US 
borrows money from the Chinese to make ends meet. In a short time (had I the 
internet I would have provided the exact year) the interest the US pays to 
service its debt will be more than the amount it currently spends on its 
military adventures.

Until that happens, have fun being "Mr Nice Guy" to all Goans and Indians. I am 
glad there are people who benefit from the taxes trusted on US citizens.

Mervyn

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Gabe Menezes]

Excerpt

The president sought congressional approval for a military strike against
Syria for a suspected poison gas attack against rebels, only to meet
resistance from within his own Democratic ranks as well as from Republican
lawmakers. He averted the possibility of a humiliating defeat in Congress
by embracing a Russia n proposal for
destroying Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons.

Ends
Full read @
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/09/16/uk-usa-fed-summers-idUKBRE98E0FU20130916

COMMENT:
The above article is w.r.t. Larry Summers pulling out of the race for Fed
Chairman.

Having chosen the path of seeking approval from Congress, Obama could not
then ignore the outcome, if negative. P.M. David Cameron too had to bend to
the will of Parliament.

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Bosco D]

-Original Message-
From: Mervyn Lobo

2) George Bush (43) came pretty close to being arrested when he visited
Canada a few years ago. He only escaped because the right wing was running
the govt then.

RESPONSE: KoolAid!!! Lots of it!!! Almost daily attempts to convert bakwas
into facts noted.

- B

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Tim de Mello]

Jim says: : ". . . vaporize Iranian nuclear capabilities - which is probably 
the ultimate goal of the US military."

Very simple and naïve conclusion.

Tim de Mello


> Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:23:20 -0700
> From: amigo...@att.net
> To: goanet@lists.goanet.org
> Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian 
> proposal on chemical weapons
>
> Here's my response:
>
> Mervyn states:
> 1) The US does not have veto powers at the International Court of Justice at 
> the Hague.
>
> My response:
> Please do some read up my friend before responding back on how the 
> International Court of Justice at the Hague operates.
> The International Court of Justice is one of the arms of the United Nations 
> that is charged with settling legal disputes between its member nations.
> The UN charter authorizes the UN Security Council to enforce the court's 
> rulings. But the joke is that any one of the permanent Security Council 
> members could still veto and the judgement can never be enforced.
>
> There is zero chance of a resolution ever getting past the UN Security 
> Council to prosecute a US President in the first place. So forget about any 
> US President (whether current or past) ever getting prosecuted on war crimes.
>
> Mervyn states:
> 2) George Bush (43) came pretty close to being arrested when he visited 
> Canada a few years ago. He only escaped because the right wing was running 
> the govt then.
>
> My response:
> Arrest for what? War crimes?
> Come on my friend! Are you serious? The Americans would mobilize their big 
> guns and they wouldn't care if the folks next door are friends or foes ...
>
> I perfectly understand some folks may be upset with the Americans for 
> involving themselves in other countries' internal affairs. On the other hand, 
> do you have any idea how may Goans and Indians should be thankful to the 
> Americans for freeing up Kuwait from Iraqi clutches? If it hadn't been for 
> the Americans (the rest of the coalition was just a small puppy show), Kuwait 
> would still be under Iraqi control. My gut says, if left unchecked, Saddam 
> would have gobbled up Saudi Arabia as well. Can you imagine how many Goans / 
> Indians would have been uprooted from those countries along with their lively 
> hood? That's not all - Saddam would have exerted control over a significant 
> amount of world oil - forcing the rest of the world to pay through their 
> noses after the annexation of Kuwait / Saudi !
>
> After seeing the documentation presented by President Obama, some Americans 
> think the president should go ahead and strike Syria. Their thinking is that 
> this would likely bring in the Iranian puppies into the war. That would in 
> turn give a perfect opportunity for the Americans to go ahead and vaporize 
> Iranian nuclear capabilities - which is probably the ultimate goal of the US 
> military.
>
> Sounds scary, right?
>
> Let's keep our fingers crossed.
>
> Jim F
> New York.
>
> ________
> From: Mervyn Lobo 
> To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" 
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 10:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian 
> proposal on chemical weapons
>
>
> Jim Fernandes wrote:
>> Does anyone honestly believe that a group of nations could come together to 
>> take
>
>> an ex US president to court at the Hague on charges of war crimes? I can 
>> understand
>
>> if the guy happened to be a ex president of former Yugoslavia or Burundi or 
>> some
>
>> such obscure nation ...
>>
>> And anyway, how would the UN get its resolution passed to take a former US
>
>> president to court for war crimes, when the Americans have a veto power?
>
>
>
>
> Jim F,
> 1) The US does not have veto powers at the International Court of Justice at 
> the Hague.
> 2) George Bush (43) came pretty close to being arrested when he visited 
> Canada a few years ago. He only escaped because the right wing was running 
> the govt then.
> 3) The US is the only country that insists it has the right to mine any area 
> that it feels like. Kids under 10 years old are still getting killed and 
> maimed by mines left behind in Vietnam last century.
> 4) We live in a "1984" world where 5 nations are equal, but have veto powers 
> at the UN.
>
> 5) To answer your first question, above, I do not believe that there is a 
> group of nations that has the balls to prosecute a President or ex-President 
> of the USA. I also believe that there are individuals (US residents included) 
> who are adamant enough to bring all war criminals to justice.
> 6) I must congratulate the bunch of clowns who awarded BHO the Nobel Peace 
> Prize years ago. His current policy is that the US is the accuser, the judge 
> and the jury for any interest of the US's any where in the world.
>
> Mervyn  

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Mervyn Lobo]

Jim Fernandes wrote:  

> I perfectly understand some folks may be upset with the Americans for 
> involving 
> themselves in other countries' internal affairs. On the other hand, do you 
> have any idea how may Goans and Indians should be thankful to the Americans 
> for 
> freeing up Kuwait from Iraqi clutches? If it hadn't been for the Americans 
> (the rest of the coalition was just a small puppy show), Kuwait would still 
> be 
> under Iraqi control. My gut says, if left unchecked, Saddam would have 
> gobbled up Saudi Arabia as well. Can you imagine how many Goans / Indians 
> would 
> have been uprooted from those countries along with their lively hood? That's 
> not all - Saddam would have exerted control over a significant amount of 
> world 
> oil - forcing the rest of the world to pay through their noses after the 
> annexation of Kuwait / Saudi !


Jim F,
I am in one of the remote parts of the US where I can only get an internet 
connection for a few minutes a day. A few years ago, I had to book way in 
advance to get to this area. Today, business is so bad that they offer 
off-season rates during peak season. The locals have no money and are hurting.

Their government, however, behaves as though they have money to waste. Taxes 
are er, blown up in the Middle East. To make this even more bitter, the US 
borrows money from the Chinese to make ends meet. In a short time (had I the 
internet I would have provided the exact year) the interest the US pays to 
service its debt will be more than the amount it currently spends on its 
military adventures.

Until that happens, have fun being "Mr Nice Guy" to all Goans and Indians. I am 
glad there are people who benefit from the taxes trusted on US citizens.

Mervyn

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Jim Fernandes]

Here's my response:

Mervyn states:
1) The US does not have veto powers at the International Court of Justice at 
the Hague.

My response:
Please do some read up my friend before responding back on how the 
International Court of Justice at the Hague operates.
The International Court of Justice is one of the arms of the United Nations 
that is charged with settling legal disputes between its member nations.
The UN charter authorizes the UN Security Council to enforce the court's 
rulings. But the joke is that any one of the permanent Security Council members 
could still veto and the judgement can never be enforced.

There is zero chance of a resolution ever getting past the UN Security Council 
to prosecute a US President in the first place. So forget about any US 
President (whether current or past) ever getting prosecuted on war crimes. 

Mervyn states:
2) George Bush (43) came pretty close to being arrested when he visited Canada 
a few years ago. He only escaped because the right wing was running the govt 
then.

My response:
Arrest for what? War crimes? 
Come on my friend! Are you serious? The Americans would mobilize their big guns 
and they wouldn't care if the folks next door are friends or foes ...
 
I perfectly understand some folks may be upset with the Americans for involving 
themselves in other countries' internal affairs. On the other hand, do you have 
any idea how may Goans and Indians should be thankful to the Americans for 
freeing up Kuwait from Iraqi clutches? If it hadn't been for the Americans (the 
rest of the coalition was just a small puppy show), Kuwait would still be under 
Iraqi control. My gut says, if left unchecked, Saddam would have gobbled up 
Saudi Arabia as well. Can you imagine how many Goans / Indians would have been 
uprooted from those countries along with their lively hood? That's not all - 
Saddam would have exerted control over a significant amount of world oil - 
forcing the rest of the world to pay through their noses after the annexation 
of Kuwait / Saudi !
 
After seeing the documentation presented by President Obama, some Americans 
think the president should go ahead and strike Syria. Their thinking is that 
this would likely bring in the Iranian puppies into the war. That would in turn 
give a perfect opportunity for the Americans to go ahead and vaporize Iranian 
nuclear capabilities - which is probably the ultimate goal of the US military.
 
Sounds scary, right?
 
Let's keep our fingers crossed.
 
Jim F
New York.


From: Mervyn Lobo 
To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!"  
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal 
on chemical weapons


Jim Fernandes wrote:
> Does anyone honestly believe that a group of nations could come together to 
> take 

> an ex US president to court at the Hague on charges of war crimes? I can 
> understand 

> if the guy happened to be a ex president of former Yugoslavia or Burundi or 
> some 

> such obscure nation ...
> 
> And anyway, how would the UN get its resolution passed to take a former US 

> president to court for war crimes, when the Americans have a veto power?




Jim F,
1) The US does not have veto powers at the International Court of Justice at 
the Hague.
2) George Bush (43) came pretty close to being arrested when he visited Canada 
a few years ago. He only escaped because the right wing was running the govt 
then.
3) The US is the only country that insists it has the right to mine any area 
that it feels like. Kids under 10 years old are still getting killed and maimed 
by mines left behind in Vietnam last century.
4) We live in a "1984" world where 5 nations are equal, but have veto powers at 
the UN. 

5) To answer your first question, above, I do not believe that there is a group 
of nations that has the balls to prosecute a President or ex-President of the 
USA. I also believe that there are individuals (US residents included) who are 
adamant enough to bring all war criminals to justice.
6) I must congratulate the bunch of clowns who awarded BHO the Nobel Peace 
Prize years ago. His current policy is that the US is the accuser, the judge 
and the jury for any interest of the US's any where in the world.

Mervyn       

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Mervyn Lobo]

Jim Fernandes wrote:
> Does anyone honestly believe that a group of nations could come together to 
> take 

> an ex US president to court at the Hague on charges of war crimes? I can 
> understand 

> if the guy happened to be a ex president of former Yugoslavia or Burundi or 
> some 

> such obscure nation ...
> 
> And anyway, how would the UN get its resolution passed to take a former US 

> president to court for war crimes, when the Americans have a veto power?

 


Jim F,
1) The US does not have veto powers at the International Court of Justice at 
the Hague.
2) George Bush (43) came pretty close to being arrested when he visited Canada 
a few years ago. He only escaped because the right wing was running the govt 
then.
3) The US is the only country that insists it has the right to mine any area 
that it feels like. Kids under 10 years old are still getting killed and maimed 
by mines left behind in Vietnam last century.
4) We live in a "1984" world where 5 nations are equal, but have veto powers at 
the UN. 

5) To answer your first question, above, I do not believe that there is a group 
of nations that has the balls to prosecute a President or ex-President of the 
USA. I also believe that there are individuals (US residents included) who are 
adamant enough to bring all war criminals to justice.
6) I must congratulate the bunch of clowns who awarded BHO the Nobel Peace 
Prize years ago. His current policy is that the US is the accuser, the judge 
and the jury for any interest of the US's any where in the world.

Mervyn

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Jim Fernandes]

You raised a very interesting legality issue when you quoted the use of force 
without UN approval.
 
I am not an expert on international law, but I could list several situations 
where the US entered / crossed boundaries into other sovereign nations to 
conduct their "military business" and nobody could do crap about it at the UN. 
Here are some recent examples:
1. The US entered deep into Pakistan, killed and took back Osama Bin Laden's 
body. A few other's were also killed in that operation, right in the backyard 
of elite Pakistani military schools.
2. Countless drone attacks over Pakistan that eliminated both civilian and 
targeted terrorists.
3. Countless drone attacks over Yemen with similar results as Pakistan.
4. Similar such strikes though on a lesser extent against Libya and Somalia.
5. I am pretty certain the US (and its coalition partners) did not have UN 
mandate to attack Iraq in 2003. This war ended barely a couple of years ago. I 
have no track on how many hundreds of thousands (or perhaps millions) died in 
this war.
 
So you get the gist 
 
Does anyone honestly believe that a group of nations could come together to 
take an ex US president to court at the Hague on charges of war crimes? I can 
understand if the guy happened to be a ex president of former Yugoslavia or 
Burundi or some such obscure nation ...
 
And anyway, how would the UN get its resolution passed to take a former US 
president to court for war crimes, when the Americans have a veto power?
 
Jim F
New York.
(By the way India took over Goa without UN approval. I am sure Nehru used 
force. Did anyone take Nehru to the Hague?)
 


 From: Tim de Mello 
To: Jim Fernandes ; "goanet@lists.goanet.org" 
; "goa...@groups.facebook.com" 
 
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal 
on chemical weapons
  

re: "If this issue goes to vote in US Congress and even he is looses it in the 
House (the Senate win is given), he could still go ahead and strike. There is 
nothing anybody can do about it."

For as long as he is President, yes.
Use of force without the approval of the UN is illegal.

Which means that after his term as President is over he could be arrested and 
tried at the Hague for war crimes.

BTW, same applies to Henry Kissinger 
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkKSPurwRvU) He has to be very careful where 
and how he travels.

Tim de Mello


> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:17:56 -0700
> From: amigo...@att.net
> To: goanet@lists.goanet.org; goa...@groups.facebook.com
> Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian 
> proposal on chemical weapons
>
> Thanks for the link Gabe. I am all about giving peace a chance. Many times 
> though, unless you show the stick, peace becomes elusive.
>
> I did see similar article in the US media as well. But let's quickly analyze 
> what this is about:
> 1. The US president is NOT required to take authorization from Congress to go 
> into battle. If he does so, that's is his prerogative.
> 2. If this issue goes to vote in US Congress and even he is looses it in the 
> House (the Senate win is given), he could still go ahead and strike. There is 
> nothing anybody can do about it.
> 3. The Russian proposal to force Syria to relinquish control of their 
> chemical weapons, only came about after the US President gave ample notice 
> that he is dead serious on going
 ahead with his plan. If Syria decides to give up the chemical weapons for 
destruction, without the US firing one missile, I think that would be truly 
awesome. However, it is worth noting that without American military threat, 
Syria would never voluntarily give up their chemicals. Whether this actually 
happens is something that remains to be seen.
>
> Like many Americans, I am still not 100% convinced as to who used the killer 
> gases - whether Assad used them or the rebels. If the rebels used them to 
> gain sympathy from the Americans, it is a very dangerous situation that could 
> quickly get out of hand. If Assad used the chemicals, then there is a fairly 
> straight forward solution to fix that - the US military (short of up giving 
> up the chemicals).
>
> I happen to be on the White House mailing list. Here are a couple links 
> President Obama sent out yesterday:
>
> 1. http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/syriavideo.html
>
 There are several snippets in this 13 minute video - the most disturbing (for 
me) begins at 10th minute 25th second.
>
> 2. 
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/syria?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=email238-text1&utm_campaign=Syria
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim F
> New York.
>
>
> _

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Tim de Mello]

re: "If this issue goes to vote in US Congress and even he is looses it in the 
House (the Senate win is given), he could still go ahead and strike. There is 
nothing anybody can do about it."

For as long as he is President, yes.
Use of force without the approval of the UN is illegal.

Which means that after his term as President is over he could be arrested and 
tried at the Hague for war crimes.

BTW, same applies to Henry Kissinger 
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkKSPurwRvU) He has to be very careful where 
and how he travels.

Tim de Mello


> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:17:56 -0700
> From: amigo...@att.net
> To: goanet@lists.goanet.org; goa...@groups.facebook.com
> Subject: Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian 
> proposal on chemical weapons
>
> Thanks for the link Gabe. I am all about giving peace a chance. Many times 
> though, unless you show the stick, peace becomes elusive.
>
> I did see similar article in the US media as well. But let's quickly analyze 
> what this is about:
> 1. The US president is NOT required to take authorization from Congress to go 
> into battle. If he does so, that's is his prerogative.
> 2. If this issue goes to vote in US Congress and even he is looses it in the 
> House (the Senate win is given), he could still go ahead and strike. There is 
> nothing anybody can do about it.
> 3. The Russian proposal to force Syria to relinquish control of their 
> chemical weapons, only came about after the US President gave ample notice 
> that he is dead serious on going ahead with his plan. If Syria decides to 
> give up the chemical weapons for destruction, without the US firing one 
> missile, I think that would be truly awesome. However, it is worth noting 
> that without American military threat, Syria would never voluntarily give up 
> their chemicals. Whether this actually happens is something that remains to 
> be seen.
>
> Like many Americans, I am still not 100% convinced as to who used the killer 
> gases - whether Assad used them or the rebels. If the rebels used them to 
> gain sympathy from the Americans, it is a very dangerous situation that could 
> quickly get out of hand. If Assad used the chemicals, then there is a fairly 
> straight forward solution to fix that - the US military (short of up giving 
> up the chemicals).
>
> I happen to be on the White House mailing list. Here are a couple links 
> President Obama sent out yesterday:
>
> 1. http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/syriavideo.html
> There are several snippets in this 13 minute video - the most disturbing (for 
> me) begins at 10th minute 25th second.
>
> 2. 
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/syria?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=email238-text1&utm_campaign=Syria
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim F
> New York.
>
>
> ________________
> From: Gabe Menezes 
> To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" ; 
> goa...@groups.facebook.com
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:41 AM
> Subject: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on 
> chemical weapons
>
>
> Give peace a chance...or avoid defeat by Congress? Full read @
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/omt4l7d*
>
> --
> DEV BOREM KORUM
>
> Gabe Menezes.   

Re: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Jim Fernandes]

Thanks for the link Gabe. I am all about giving peace a chance. Many times 
though, unless you show the stick, peace becomes elusive.
 
I did see similar article in the US media as well. But let's quickly analyze 
what this is about:
1. The US president is NOT required to take authorization from Congress to go 
into battle. If he does so, that's is his prerogative.
2. If this issue goes to vote in US Congress and even he is looses it in the 
House (the Senate win is given), he could still go ahead and strike. There is 
nothing anybody can do about it.
3. The Russian proposal to force Syria to relinquish control of their chemical 
weapons, only came about after the US President gave ample notice that he is 
dead serious on going ahead with his plan. If Syria decides to give up the 
chemical weapons for destruction, without the US firing one missile, I think 
that would be truly awesome. However, it is worth noting that without American 
military threat, Syria would never voluntarily give up their chemicals. Whether 
this actually happens is something that remains to be seen.
 
Like many Americans, I am still not 100% convinced as to who used the killer 
gases - whether Assad used them or the rebels. If the rebels used them to gain 
sympathy from the Americans, it is a very dangerous situation that could 
quickly get out of hand. If Assad used the chemicals, then there is a fairly 
straight forward solution to fix that - the US military (short of up giving up 
the chemicals).
 
I happen to be on the White House mailing list. Here are a couple links 
President Obama sent out yesterday:
 
1. http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/syriavideo.html
There are several snippets in this 13 minute video - the most disturbing (for 
me) begins at 10th minute 25th second.
 
2. 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/syria?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=email238-text1&utm_campaign=Syria
 
Regards,
 
Jim F
New York.
  


 From: Gabe Menezes 
To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" ; 
goa...@groups.facebook.com 
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:41 AM
Subject: [Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on 
chemical weapons
  

Give peace a chance...or avoid defeat by Congress? Full read @

*http://tinyurl.com/omt4l7d*

-- 
DEV BOREM KORUM

Gabe Menezes.

[Goanet] Syria crisis: US welcomes 'significant' Russian proposal on chemical weapons

[Gabe Menezes]

Give peace a chance...or avoid defeat by Congress? Full read @

*http://tinyurl.com/omt4l7d*

-- 
DEV BOREM KORUM

Gabe Menezes.