Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 09:10 Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote: > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 17:07:30 -0500, John Fields wrote: > > > The 650,000 are simply casualties of war and have nothing to do with > > vengeance, Nazi style. > > So, Dubya's real motivation for ordering the carnage was to get personal > revenge for the time Saddam thumbed his nose at Dubya's dad? > > Thanks! That helps clear things up a lot! > > But that cavalier attitude "Oh, they're just casualties of war" - is > just so totally wrong it makes me want to puke. It appalls me that anyone could dismiss those lives with such a casual disregard. > It's a unilateral invasion, ordered by one man to satisfy a personal > vendetta, and 650,000 people have died as a result of his criminal > insanity. > > He must be stopped. Can he be impeached ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 09:11 Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote: > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:18:26 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 05:36:51 +0100, Eeyore > > > >>When does Bush get impeached ? > > > > Not worth the bother. His term expires in 2008. > > > >>When does the Republican Party get impeached ? > > > > Sorry, there's no provision for impeaching a party. > > > > But the real question is, why are you so obsessive about US politics? We > > ignore your politics, so it's only fair that you ignore ours. > > He's afraid of becoming a victim of "collateral damage", or maybe > "friendly fire". That and I also believe in ethical behavior. Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 09:18 T Wake wrote: > "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >>The big difference is that the UK actually *wins* the wars we take on ! > > > > Not the most important one of all, the one with us, LOL! > > Wasn't important at the time. When America got French assistance for it's > independance we[tinw] were fighting the French for domination of the rest of > the world. > > I dont think I have ever heard the American War of Independance described as > the "most important of all" before. > > > And probably not the two world wars, without our help. > > No way of knowing. Prior to the US overt involvement in WWII the Germans had > shelved their plans to invade the UK. They tried to defeat us and failed. Quite simple really ! > It is equally possible that the UK > would have been able to establish a treaty of some sort _or_ that Germany > would have decided to invade once more. Tricky with the Royal Navy around to stop it ! > In any way, the US "help" cost the > UK so much (lend-lease terms) it was almost a pyrrhic victory. It cost us the Empire effectively. > As far as WWI goes, well, waiting three years until the great European > powers have decimated their armies _then_ joining in, well that is help. > Certainly shortened the war by a good few months. Not sure it was "won" > though as an Armistice is a truce not a victory. > > What I said still stands and your counter examples only support it. The US > military is ten times the size of the UK's and was in WWII. In WWII the US > domestic economy was intact and the country had seen no conflict on it's > mainland. Has a foreign bomb ever dropped on the USA ? Pearl Harbor doesn't count btw as it was an independent country back then. > All the production facilities were still in place and all the > agriculture was functioning normally. Trying to score points by saying the > Army that country produced was more effective (eventually) than the one the > UK produced is strange to say the least. The very fact that the UK could > still field an effective combat force is something to be proud of. I think we did rather well in fact. Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 09:19 T Wake wrote: > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote > > > It's hard to give up the cop > > business after doing it for so long. > > Police are accountable to the people they police, right or wrong. The US is > accountable to no one. It is not a global police force. Not even accountable to the International Court in fact. I wonder why that is ? Something to do with being held to account maybe ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 09:22
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote > > >> Why do you think that the first goal of the US is to be liked by everyone? > > > >That's a strawman. Our goal should be not to be hated by everyone. > > That is wrong. Our goal should be to know what is in the > best interest of the nation and its people. Reacting to > threats to national security with growls instead of swift > and lethal bites is a sign of weakness; this becomes an open > invitation to anybody who would like to take over the real > estate. You reckon that 'radical Islam' wants to invade the USA ? Graham |