Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

> JDG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I wrote: > >> [Gautam wrote:] > >>Anyways, yes, getting them to intervene is > >> good, but their intervention has been illegal and > >> unapproved by the UN. You can be in favor of > >> intervention to stop genocide in Rwanda/Darfur > >>_or_ > >> you can say

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Back on 11 May 2005, Warren Ockrassa repeated a question: ... why ... was Afghanistan not democratized and stabilized entirely? He said: Assuming that: 1. The US is interested in spreading the idea/blessing/gift/[whatever] of democracy to the other nations of the world;

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

The Newsweek story is being Rathergated in the conservative controlled media. Even though the substance of the story was accurate and the source stands by his statements the documentation cannot be verified so the conservatives jump up and down and say 'see - no story the media just lies.' Pro

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 02:03 PM Monday 5/16/2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote: Of course now it's beginning to look like even Afghanistan's a lost cause. Messing with the Koran was a stupid, stupid move. Does that mean that you believe that the assertions in the _Newsweek_ story was accurate, even though they have appare

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 16, 2005, at 9:20 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, that is your choice. I would not even be arguing about this if I did not feel strongly about freedom and democracy, of which America is a great champion. Ah yes, the rote statement. You just think,

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On 5/15/05, JDG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 07:34 PM 5/12/2005 -0700,Nick Arnett wrote: > >> Again, Nick, after all, Saddam Hussein's regime was one of the 5 > >> worst regimes on Earth. > > > >Whose ranking? > > I said one of the top 5, because I think that it would be difficult to > place

RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons

--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gautam Mukunda wrote: > > No, the question is the exact opposite. Why is it > > that you claim that it's _only_ America that acts > only > > in its self-interest, and everyone else gets a > pass? > > Point out where I said that. No one else gets a free

RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Gautam Mukunda wrote: > > --- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Gautam, why is it that only other countries have > > self-interested > > agendas? > > Is it possible that now and then, America does too? > > I think it is, and > > that's why I think it is worthwhile getting a second > > opi

RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons

JDG wrote: > > At 11:27 PM 5/11/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote: > >Are you of the opinion that American Foreign Policy is always led by > selfless morality, > >or are there times when they too stoop to the level of the scummy French > or the sneaky, dirty > >Germans, and do things where the self i

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 15, 2005, at 9:09 PM, Dave Land wrote: I didn't say that they *are* getting their instructions from Jesus, only that *they* believe so, and act as though they had that authority. You may disagree. I suspect it is the case. Bush seems to believe in some kind of phantasmal effect... "I love

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 15, 2005, at 11:03 AM, JDG wrote: At 03:43 PM 5/12/2005 -0700, Dave Land wrote: Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 03:43 PM 5/12/2005 -0700, Dave Land wrote: >> Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, >> unemployment >> insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not >> hear of >> that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter >> group, >

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 07:34 PM 5/12/2005 -0700,Nick Arnett wrote: >> Again, Nick, after all, Saddam Hussein's regime was one of the 5 >> worst regimes on Earth. > >Whose ranking? I said one of the top 5, because I think that it would be difficult to place Saddam Hussein's Iraq lower than 5 among the worst regimes o

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 03:26 PM 5/13/2005 -0700, Deborah wrote: >>Anyways, yes, getting them to intervene is >> good, but their intervention has been illegal and >> unapproved by the UN. You can be in favor of >> intervention to stop genocide in Rwanda/Darfur _or_ >> you can say that intervention on moral principles

Re: Hard decisions (Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

--- Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 13 May 2005 15:26:50 -0700 (PDT), Deborah Harrell wrote > > > who has made difficult choices, when a life was in the balance I have. Twice. -k- __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail ha

Hard decisions (Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Fri, 13 May 2005 15:26:50 -0700 (PDT), Deborah Harrell wrote > who has made difficult choices, when a life was in the balance That certainly hit me. I find myself feeling a bit angry. Nothing like a few triage decisions or mistakes to make one realize that life throws us decisions that are

RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons

> Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Deborah Harrell wrote: > > > As others have pointed out, he _is_ calling for > > > action > > > WRT Darfur, which is laudable. From what I've > > > learned, it is not possible for the US alone to > > > intervene there militarily, as our forces ar

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

> Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As... noted already, a 'moral imperative' > > should be essentially unimpeachable, because it is > > a softer reason than, say, the other guy has > > missiles pointed at your capital. > Yeah, but

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

> Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > JDG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Deborah Harrell wrote: > > > >Agreed, but if one is going to claim _moral_ > > > >justification in pursuing war, one had better > > > ensure > > > >that citizens

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Fri, 13 May 2005 12:13:35 -0500, Gary Denton wrote > we were not welcomed by cheering Iraqi crowds as we were > told; Not quite. Wes (who was with the very first troops into Baghdad and later, Tikrit) told me that in Baghdad they were greeted with cheers from small groups... at first. Ho

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On May 13, 2005, at 10:47 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 12:13 PM Friday 5/13/2005, Gary Denton wrote: Republican libertarian Ron Paul answered the question is Iraq better off on the floor of Congress. Does it fit? An Iraqi's place is in the house. Dave

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 12:13 PM Friday 5/13/2005, Gary Denton wrote: Republican libertarian Ron Paul answered the question is Iraq better off on the floor of Congress. Does it fit? They Might Have To Remove Some Of The Representatives' Desks Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

Republican libertarian Ron Paul answered the question is Iraq better off on the floor of Congress. Whenever the administration is challenged regarding the success of the Iraq war, or regarding the false information used to justify the war, the retort is: "Aren't the people of Iraq better off?"

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 10:43 PM 5/12/2005 -0500, Dan M. wrote: >> Then again, you recently offered to compare economic growth >> during the Great Depression to that of World War II.. so I'm not sure >> what you are thinking here. > >I'm thinking data are. We should fit theory to data, not pidgen hole data >into w

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On 5/13/05, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 12 May 2005 22:01:20 -0500, Dan Minette wrote > > > Here's one example. Karbala and is buried there. For Shiites, his > > tomb is the holiest site outside of Mecca and Medina, Among other > > things, Hussein prohibited the pilgrimages to

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 22:01:20 -0500, Dan Minette wrote > Here's one example. Karbala and is buried there. For Shiites, his > tomb is the holiest site outside of Mecca and Medina, Among other > things, Hussein prohibited the pilgrimages to Karbala, on the > anniversary of Husayn's (the Prophet's

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Dan wrote: OK, but I was specificly referring to the leverage our government had with other governments. We clearly have a strong cultural influence in Arab countrieseven one of the Palestinians celebrating 9-11 was wearing a US sports tee shirt. Yet, that is an area where we have little l

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On May 12, 2005, at 7:12 PM, JDG wrote: I have to wonder, isn't withholding such evidence - indeed withholding that you have a priori knowledge of this evidence - in those circumstances the equivalent of baiting? Considering the source, this question's pretty damn funny. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publi

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

- Original Message - From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 9:12 PM Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons) > Dan M. wrote: > > Right, and I have a very recent one in my h

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

Dan M. wrote: > Right, and I have a very recent one in my hip pocket, so to speak. > I just wanted to see if folks would assign it a value before seeing > the results. :-) I suspect as much when I read your original message and I have to wonder, isn't withholding such evidence - indeed wit

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

- Original Message - From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 9:34 PM Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons) > Hmmm. I guess. I don't know what Saddam's track re

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 21:55:07 -0400, JDG wrote > Well, let me help you out: Thank you. I was asking *because* I was having a hard time with it. More below. > -number of political prisoners Definitely. > -number of people subjected to torture (yes, even *with* Abu Ghraib) Indeed. > -number

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 09:09 PM 5/11/2005 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: >> Instead, I am just expressing my confidence that if you have even a modicum >> of honesty you can come up with something that is measurably better >> in Iraq today than it was under Saddam Hussein. After all, Saddam >> Hussein's >> regime was o

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 4:28 PM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > Dan wrote: > > >> I think its arguable that many of the mentioned countries,

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

- Original Message - From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 4:22 PM Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons) > On Thu, 12 May 2005 12:57:28 -0500, Dan Minette wrote >

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 12, 2005, at 9:44 AM, Gary Denton wrote: Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that b

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Dan wrote: I think its arguable that many of the mentioned countries, the the Philippians frex as well as many others (such as Iran) were able to move away from their dictatorial governments _despite_ the U.S., not because of its influence. If this were true, then one should look at countries with

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 13:26:19 -0500, Gary Denton wrote > "If you compare this to the situation in the 1980s, you will see a > major deterioration of the situation," said the newly-appointed > minister, pointing out that 75 percent of households had clean water > two decades ago. And to my sur

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 12:57:28 -0500, Dan Minette wrote > why would you suggest that attacks by some people > indicate that most people are worse off? I didn't suggest that. I suggested that those people, as well as the hundreds of thousands who demonstrated against our occupation on April 9th,

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

More seriously... On May 12, 2005, at 11:26 AM, Gary Denton wrote: "If you compare this to the situation in the 1980s, you will see a major deterioration of the situation," said the newly-appointed minister, pointing out that 75 percent of households had clean water two decades ago. http://www.m

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 1:34 PM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons >I am not sure how your hypothesis is able to be proved false. By showing that countri

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/12/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > - Original Message - > From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:41 AM > Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On May 12, 2005, at 11:26 AM, Gary Denton wrote: BAGHDAD - The Iraqi people are suffering from a desperate lack of jobs, housing, health care and electricity, according to a survey by Iraqi authorities and the United Nations released on Thursday. Wow. So Iraq really IS like the US now! Woot! Miss

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

BAGHDAD - The Iraqi people are suffering from a desperate lack of jobs, housing, health care and electricity, according to a survey by Iraqi authorities and the United Nations released on Thursday. Planning Minister Barham Saleh, during a ceremony in Baghdad, blamed the dire living condition

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 12, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Dan Minette wrote: From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Actually, Bush was in power...I mentioned it because the timing is actually important. I thought the reference was to Roosevelt and Panama: Not to anything the

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

- Original Message - From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 12:26 PM Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons) > On Thu, 12 May 2005 09:42:47 -0500, Dan Minette wrote >

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 10:07:09 -0500, Dan Minette wrote > Right, and I have a very recent one in my hip pocket, so to speak. > I just wanted to see if folks would assign it a value before seeing > the results. :-) I spoke too soon, apparently. Not the first time. Here's the most hopeful figure

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Thu, 12 May 2005 09:42:47 -0500, Dan Minette wrote > The interpretation of such a poll will be dependant on where it is > taken, of course, but, at the very least, the changes in these > numbers over time should reflect changes in attitude. Would you and > Nick consider this at least some m

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:41 AM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > On May 12, 2005, at 9:01 AM, Dan Minette wrote: > > >> We propped up, supp

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:31 AM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > > I think its arguable that many of the mentioned countries, the the > Philippians f

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 12, 2005, at 9:01 AM, Dan Minette wrote: What I've read indicates that the Greek democracies bore little resemblance to our own. The patriarchs of the families got to vote, not the free males. Missed that one. I don't believe that's wholly correct. There were cases argued, for instance,

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/12/05, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On May 12, 2005, at 9:01 AM, Dan Minette wrote: > > >> We propped up, supported and paid a dictator in Panama. When he began > >> not > >> following orders Reagan ordered him removed. > > > > Actually, Bush was in power...I mentioned it b

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 12, 2005, at 9:01 AM, Dan Minette wrote: We propped up, supported and paid a dictator in Panama. When he began not following orders Reagan ordered him removed. Actually, Bush was in power...I mentioned it because the timing is actually important. I thought the reference was to Roosevelt an

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/12/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > - Original Message - > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 9:57 AM > Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons >

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Dan wrote: For many long decades the US was willing to live with anti-communist dictatorships. Yet, if you look at the Phillipeines, Taiwan, and South Korea, they are, after Japan, the best examples of strong representative government. If you want to argue that the US cut these dictatorships too

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 9:57 AM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons >> Well, there's the Phillipeans, Tawain, and South Korea, and Panama, to >&g

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

- Original Message - From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 10:00 AM Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons) >> The interpretation of such a poll will be dependant on

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On 5/12/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > - Original Message - > From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 10:30 PM > Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n:

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/11/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > - Original Message - > From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 4:22 PM > Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

- Original Message - From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 10:30 PM Subject: Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons) > At 07:54 PM 5/11/2005 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: > >> I'

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Ray Ludenia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 7:41 AM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > > On 12/05/2005, at 8:15 AM, Dan Minette wrote: > > > But, there were pro-Nazi te

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 12/05/2005, at 8:15 AM, Dan Minette wrote: But, there were pro-Nazi terrorists for a couple of years. We had a lot tighter control there than in Iraq, so I don't think they could hide a camp, but there were terrorists. Any cites on this Dan (or anyone else)? This is not something I've heard a

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 09:24 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Robert Seeberger wrote: Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > At 12:07 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Nick Arnett wrote: >> On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:23:08 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote >> >>> Ah, the _perfect_ leftist stance. I have no idea what >>> to do, but I know that you're wr

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Wed, 11 May 2005 23:30:47 -0400, JDG wrote > You misunderstand. I'm not referring to anything you've said > before. If I were, I could probably cite the disdain you expressed > for "provable likelihood of success" in an earlier post this week, I didn't intend disdain. A provable likeli

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 07:54 PM 5/11/2005 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: >> I'm quite confident that you can handle this one on your own. > >Oh, please. > >I can't think of what I've said that is a measurement of this. I wasn't >asking to argue about it or play games about it -- I really would like to know >if there is

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Wed, 11 May 2005 20:25:08 -0400, JDG wrote > I'm quite confident that you can handle this one on your own. Oh, please. I can't think of what I've said that is a measurement of this. I wasn't asking to argue about it or play games about it -- I really would like to know if there is somethin

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 3:15 PM, Dan Minette wrote: [interventions of various types] But, it has worked a number of times, as well as not having worked a number of times. Has it? Apart from Germany and Japan post WWII, when in the history of the US have we been successful in installing a democratic mod

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > At 12:07 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Nick Arnett wrote: >> On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:23:08 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote >> >>> Ah, the _perfect_ leftist stance. I have no idea what >>> to do, but I know that you're wrong, so that makes me >>> better than you, >> >> Are you

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 05:16 PM 5/11/2005 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: >Enlighten me, please. > >I've been thinking about this one a fair bit today. > >If it's not clear, I did mean quantitative measures, not qualitative things >like "Saddam is under arrest." I'm quite confident that you can handle this one on your own

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On Wed, 11 May 2005 20:10:06 -0400, JDG wrote > At 07:56 AM 5/11/2005 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: > >Does anybody have a measure by which life is better in Iraq today than it > was > >before we invaded? > > Not only does anybody have such a measure, but I can state the > precise person who does.

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

At 07:56 AM 5/11/2005 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote: >Does anybody have a measure by which life is better in Iraq today than it was >before we invaded? Not only does anybody have such a measure, but I can state the precise person who does. You do. JDG _

RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 11:27 PM 5/11/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote: >Are you of the opinion that American Foreign Policy is always led by selfless morality, >or are there times when they too stoop to the level of the scummy French or the sneaky, dirty >Germans, and do things where the self interest of the USA outwei

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 4:22 PM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > On May 11, 2005, at 2:06 PM, Dan Minette wrote: > > > From: "Warren Ock

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

"Stick of broom it is." At 04:42 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Maru Dubshinki wrote: On 5/11/05, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2005 12:47:45 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote > > > Not really, no. "Those who criticize?" No. People > > who pontificate endlessly but suggest not

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/11/05, Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2005 12:47:45 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote > > > Not really, no. "Those who criticize?" No. People > > who pontificate endlessly but suggest nothing, who > > attack any idea but provide none of their own, who > > preen con

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On Wed, 11 May 2005 12:47:45 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote > Not really, no. "Those who criticize?" No. People > who pontificate endlessly but suggest nothing, who > attack any idea but provide none of their own, who > preen constantly but contribute nothing - them, yes, I > think that abou

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 2:06 PM, Dan Minette wrote: From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On May 11, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: I just wonder what can be done to solve the plight of those millions of human beings Nothing. [...] But, it has worked a number of times, as well as not

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 3:53 PM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > On May 11, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > > > I'm not s

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 4:05 PM Subject: Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons > Since you asked... ;) > > On May 11, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: &

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 03:53 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 11, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: I'm not sure I saw an answer to my question in there . . . Not from me; I was lobbing a tangent. Did its path make it an arctangent? -- Ronn! :) ___

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

Since you asked... ;) On May 11, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: I just wonder what can be done to solve the plight of those millions of human beings Nothing. There is no way to save the world. There is no way to change human nature. And what we define as a solution now might not apply

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 03:45 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 11, 2005, at 1:06 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe you think removing Saddam isn't worth the cost. But you can't say that opposing the invasion wasn't functionally a stand in favor of Saddam re

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: I'm not sure I saw an answer to my question in there . . . Not from me; I was lobbing a tangent. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.night

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 02:36 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Maru Dubshinki wrote: On 5/11/05, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 11, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > > > I just wonder what can be done to solve the plight of those millions > > of human beings, and so far haven't heard much in the

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 1:06 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe you think removing Saddam isn't worth the cost. But you can't say that opposing the invasion wasn't functionally a stand in favor of Saddam remaining in power, _because it was_. I think that oversta

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Maybe you think removing Saddam isn't > > worth the cost. But you can't say that opposing > the > > invasion wasn't functionally a stand in favor of > > Saddam remaining in power, _because it was_. > > I think that overstates the case a bit. I'll agr

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 12:36 PM, Maru Dubshinki wrote: On 5/11/05, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So why, given the above, was Afghanistan not democratized and stabilized entirely? With a good solid pro-US government there, couldn't pressure have been mounted on other nations to force ter

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

-- Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you sure that those who criticize your ideas > only care about feeling > "superior," not about other people, the millions of > human beings caught in > oppression, violence and poverty? Do you feel > inferior? > > Nick Not really, no. "Those who

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/11/05, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 11, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > > > I just wonder what can be done to solve the plight of those millions > > of human beings, and so far haven't heard much in the way of > > suggestions on how to save them, or an argu

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: I just wonder what can be done to solve the plight of those millions of human beings, and so far haven't heard much in the way of suggestions on how to save them, or an argument that the status quo is somehow the best of all possible scenario

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 9:08 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: [to Nick] Suggest something. Why should he? After several paragraphs of nearly ceaseless ad hominem attacks, why should ANYONE attempt to carry on a rational discussion with you? Gautam, there's a big difference between being passionate about s

Re: Is Iraq better off? (was Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons)

On May 11, 2005, at 7:56 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: Our leaders may have had noble intentions, but there's more to bringing freedom and peace than knowing how to destroy. Noble intentions are nullified by arrogance. Until we start seeing some genuine humility -- starting from the top down -- we won't

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On May 11, 2005, at 2:47 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: How much was right about it before GW2? Is the "average" Iraqi better off or worse off now than then? Or, for another measure, is the number of Iraqi people who are better off without SH in charge greater than the number who were better off

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

- Original Message - From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 11:16 AM Subject: RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons >Maybe you think removing Saddam isn't > worth the cost. But you can'

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

At 12:07 PM Wednesday 5/11/2005, Nick Arnett wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:23:08 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote > Ah, the _perfect_ leftist stance. I have no idea what > to do, but I know that you're wrong, so that makes me > better than you, Are you sure that those who criticize your ideas onl

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On Wed, 11 May 2005 09:23:08 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote > Ah, the _perfect_ leftist stance. I have no idea what > to do, but I know that you're wrong, so that makes me > better than you, Are you sure that those who criticize your ideas only care about feeling "superior," not about other

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

On 5/11/05, Ronn!Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 11:19 PM Tuesday 5/10/2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote: > >On May 10, 2005, at 7:33 PM, Dave Land wrote: > > >Oh, "history" will tell -- big f*cking deal. How does the interpretation > >of someone living 100 years form now matter to the pr

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

--- Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have never presumed to propose any specific > action. > > I merely questioned the certainty of my listmate's > assertion that > "the choice" is between presumably successful direct > action and > presumably unsuccessful indirect action. > > Dave Ah, t

Re: Br!n: Re: more neocons

--- Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sometimes I am so envious of conservatives' ability > to reduce everything > to black-and-white. Those damned shades of gray that > I have to deal with > as a progressive are such a pain in the ass. > > Dave Sometimes I'm envious of progressives abililty

RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons

--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gautam, why is it that only other countries have > self-interested > agendas? > Is it possible that now and then, America does too? > I think it is, and > that's why I think it is worthwhile getting a second > opinion. No, the question is the exact oppo

  1   2   >