From: mmeron on 1 Oct 2006 19:55 In article <35ydnZvRUoF4z73YRVny2A(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> writes: ><mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message >news:0lYTg.4$45.126(a)news.uchicago.edu... >> In article <45205022.CCB68B6B(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> writes: >>> >>> >>>mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>> >>>> "Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> writes: >>>> >"Gordon" <gordonlr(a)DELETEswbell.net> wrote in message >>>> > >>>> >>>So you are saying they are NOT better Xtians than everyone else? >>>> >>> >>>> >> No, I'm saying that this war on terrorism started long before >>>> >> President Bush and the present Republican administration was >>>> >> involved in any way. >>>> > >>>> >But it isn't a war. >>>> >>>> It is a war. Refusing to recognize it as such will not make it go >>>> away. >>> >>>It's not a meaningful war since the 'enemy' isn't an identifiable entity >>>but a 'view'. >>> >> That just makes it a far worse and more dangerous war. > >I think you have too broad a definition of the term "war." I fight a war >against grass in my garden every week. I seem to be losing. > How about cracking open Clausevitz and checking his definition. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, meron(a)cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
From: Eeyore on 1 Oct 2006 20:11 T Wake wrote: > <mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message > > > I'll say again, it is a war, refusing to recognize it as such will not > > make it go away. > > I disagree. It is not a war. This is not a case of "refusing to recognise it > as such." Wars are wars. Soldiers are notoriously bad at fighting terrorism. > Terrorists are criminals. Indeed. And no War on Crime has ever been won. Graham
From: Eeyore on 1 Oct 2006 20:12 mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> writes: > >mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: > >> "Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> writes: > >> >"Gordon" <gordonlr(a)DELETEswbell.net> wrote in message > >> > > >> >>>So you are saying they are NOT better Xtians than everyone else? > >> >>> > >> >> No, I'm saying that this war on terrorism started long before > >> >> President Bush and the present Republican administration was > >> >> involved in any way. > >> > > >> >But it isn't a war. > >> > >> It is a war. Refusing to recognize it as such will not make it go > >> away. > > > >It's not a meaningful war since the 'enemy' isn't an identifiable entity but a 'view'. > > That just makes it a far worse and more dangerous war. Far more dangerous to us in the West for sure ! It is making Radical Islamist thinking more popular. Graham
From: John Fields on 1 Oct 2006 20:17 On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:28:08 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > ><mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message >news:tGXTg.2$45.154(a)news.uchicago.edu... > >> Indeed, quite true. Yet, in this case, it is a real war. > >What is the uniform of the other side and how do you distinguish them from >the non combatants? --- So the American Revolutionary War wasn't a real war because the Americans didn't wear uniforms? -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: John Fields on 1 Oct 2006 20:18
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:36:07 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:14:02 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" wrote: >> >"Gordon" <gordonlr(a)DELETEswbell.net> wrote >> > >> >> No, I'm saying that this war on terrorism started long before >> >> President Bush and the present Republican administration was >> >> involved in any way. >> > >> >But it isn't a war. It is a problem for a police force that requires >> >international cooperation, something the US is notoriously unable or >> >unwilling to be involved in. >> >> --- >> I see. You think that we've isolated ourselves and that we're >> pursuing a strictly military solution to the problem. > >It looks pretty military to me for sure. --- What you see is. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer |