Getting Messy
RSHaas
Tim Hanke
> Looks like some of our POW's were executed.
Yes, they were shot in the forehead according to video footage broadcast on
Arab TV.
And you can bet the American females will be systematically raped. That is
what the Iraqis did to American females captured during the 1991 Gulf War.
Let's face it, the Iraqis are scum, just like the Serbs. I am ashamed to
live on the same planet with people like them.
Tim Hanke
--
I am a candidate for the U.S. Chess Federation Executive Board in the 2003
election. Please visit my website at http://www.timothyhanke.net.
RSHaas
Nothing like Tarawa or Iwo Jima, however. Now bloodied in battle, I look for
the Marines to press hard and take a heavy toll of the enemy. (RSHaas)
Tim Hanke
It's not so easy; politics gets in the way. The Brits had an Iraqi military
installation dead in their sights, but were refused permission to attack
because the Iraqis were seen herding women and children into the
installation to serve as human shields. Clear violation of Geneva
Convention.
Meanwhile, we have reports from an American general that on at least two
occasions so far, Iraqi troops have pretended to surrender to American
forces and then attacked them. Clear violation of Geneva Convention.
Arab TV has broadcast video of several captured American soldiers shot in
the forehead. Clear violation of Geneva Convention.
We know the Iraqis are going to rape the female soldiers they have already
captured, because that is their past practice. Clear violation of Geneva
Convention.
We're supposed to play by the rules, but they don't.
No doubt about it. We are fighting against scum.
RSHaas
===============
Reminds me of an incident I read about regarding Iwo Jima. That island
was governed by the Tokyo perfectorate. A high school botany class from Tokyo
was visiting Iwo as part of a class project at the time of the Marine landing.
In the latter stages of the battle the Japanese armed the school kids with
grenades and sent them out to sacrifice themselves against the advancing
Marines. I've never found out how the Marines handled that situation but I'd
guess they shot them all. (RSHaas)
RSHaas
occasions so far, Iraqi troops have pretended to surrender to American
Hanke)
==================
A practice also seen among the Japanese is WWII, one reason why the Marines
took relatively few prisoners in the Pacific. (RSHaas)
Sam Sloan
Is this story really true? It seems unlikely.
Incidently, my uncle, Edward H. Sloan was a US Marine who fought in
the Invasion of Iwo Jima. He was a Captain in the Fifth Service
Battalion.
Sam Sloan
RSHaas
Japanese HQ blockhouse and moved men to the top of it including several with
flame throwers. Unknown to the Marines at that moment about 200 members of the
HQ staff was committing ceremonial hari-kari, slitting open their abdomens,
etc. Moments later the Marines began shooting their flame throwers into the
ventilator shafts on the roof. Even though the Japanese had self-inflicted
abdominal wounds they fled from the flames and ran out the back door, slipping
and sliding on their intestines which were falling out of their body cavities.
In a wild scene lasting only a few minutes, the Marines on top of the
blockhouse shot them all dead with BAR's and M1's. The blockhouse still stands
to this day and is a tourist attraction on Tarawa. (RSHaas)
RSHaas
===============
Yes, it is part of the recorded history of the battle at Iwo Jima. (RSHaas)
RSHaas
When I was a stock broker in Sarasota I had a client who was in a P-38
squadron whom I would pester for WWII stories. One day he came into the office
with a neighbor... who had been a Marine officer on Iwo Jima, his only battle.
Because he was late arriving into the war his time in the Marines extended to
several post war years. While stationed in Washington after the war it so
happened that he had access to the planning documents for Iwo Jima. He told me
he was suprised to discover that the Marines had planned to use gas on Iwo
Jima. For some reason they never did use it. (RSHaas)
Damir Ulovec
Geneva
Convention, and playing by the rules?
What are you talking about? Open your eyes.
Tim Hanke
> More than half of the world are against your war, and you telling here
about
> Geneva Convention, and playing by the rules?
More than half the world is ruled by tyrants. More than half the world can't
read. More than half the world tramples on women's rights. More than half
the world can't tell its ass from its elbow.
Fortunately, the U.S. is here to square you away when you need it.
By the way, if you would like to take this public opportunity to thank us
for helping you get rid of your tyrant Milosevic, be my guest.
Incidentally, you wrote in one of your other posts: "You heard only about
Serbs over the CNN, and you was not here when war was in progress."
Wrong. I was in Serbia and Montenegro in 1992. I talked to many people,
including workers, students, and soldiers.
Fifiela
It was a unneccessary war; The blood is on Your Hands.
Fifiela
(RSHaas)>>>
Ok, then source please.
Fifiela
was governed by the Tokyo perfectorate. "A high school botany class from Tokyo
was visiting Iwo as part of a class project at the time of the Marine landing.
In the latter stages of the battle the Japanese armed the school kids with
grenades and sent them out to sacrifice themselves against the advancing
Marines. I've never found out how the Marines handled that situation but I'd
guess they shot them all. (RSHaas)"
Certainly not mentioned in "Flag of Our Fathers"; Source please....
Fifiela
American Super-psuedo-patriots; They like to play John Wayne.
RSHaas
===============
The incident was mentioned in one of the books I read about Iwo Jima several
years ago. I can't remember which one but I'll dig around and find it for you.
(RSHaas)
Tim Hanke
> American Super-psuedo-patriots; They like to play John Wayne.
No, not really.
I served in the Army Infantry; Haas and Booz were Marines; Nemmers is Navy.
Probably all of us had things we'd rather do, in a perfect world.
But it's far from a perfect world. We decided to help make it a better
world, in our own small way, by putting ourselves on the line.
Meanwhile, fools like you stand on street corners, defending the right of
tyrants like Saddam Hussein to make the world a hell-hole. As long as I
live, I'll never figure out what motivates people like you. You are not
worth the sacrifices other people make for you.
Wickdeer3
The legitimacy of the war on Iraq under international war and UN resolutions is
certainly debatable, but the provisions of the Geneva Convention apply whether
the war is just or not.
Let's assume hypothetically, that a country called Serbia waged a war of
aggression on its neighbors. Even if Serbia's hypothetical attacks were
illegal, Serbia's opponents would still be bound by the Geneva Convention.
Violations of the Geneva Convention are wrong, whether the fighters are on the
"side of good."
BTW, by your "logic", it would be perfectly fine to attack Iraq because they
violated the Geneva Convention in gassing the Kurds.
Your post is simply incorrect.
Wick Deer,
who is quietly chuckling at the notion of defending Tim Hanke using the phrase
"simply incorrect."
StanB
"RSHaas" <rsh...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030323164142...@mb-cj.aol.com...
We win when the Marines raise the colors over Baghdad.
StanB
StanB
Probably a contingency plan.
StanB
RSHaas
===============
I think the book was titled "Suribachi" but I'm not sure. I read it more than
10 years ago. I'm still checking around. (RSHaas)
Fifiela
years ago. I can't remember which one but I'll dig around and find it for
you.>>>
That's good enough for me.
RSHaas
Geneva Convention, and playing by the rules? What are you talking about? Open
===============
Iraq said they'd abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention. If they don't,
should we? (RSHaas)
RSHaas
===========
Evidently in the case of the Iraq operation we can't raise our colors over
taken ground. Good thing that many Marines have Confederate flags stashed
away underneath their shirts.
Its good to see the Army of Northern Virginia on the move once again.
(RSHaas)
Sam Sloan
Leshaun Fossett has sent me a letter explaining the situation better.
Apparently, the high school biology class had arrived on Iwo Jima a
long time before, at least months and perhaps years earlier. Because
of the war, they had been stranded on the island and could not get
back to Japan. Not all Japanese fought to the death. A few surrendered
and among those were the high school biology students.
Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan
wrote:
At 08:53 PM 3/23/2003 -0600, Leshaun Fossett wrote:
>Hello Sam.
>Strangly, this story is true.
>http://www.northcoastjournal.com/feb95/COVER.HTM
>
>The specific passage is as follows:
>
>"Iwo, according to the admirals and generals, was to have been secured
>in four days, with an absolute maximum loss through death, wounds and
>combat fatigue, of no more than 4,000 Americans. It was assumed that the
>21,000 Japanese hidden in their miles of tunnels would fight to the
>death (1,083 were eventually captured, including some teen-age
>schoolboys who had gone on a botany trip to Iwo and were stranded. Each
>had been given two hand grenades - one for the enemy, one for himself)."
>
>Leshaun Fossett
Thank you. That explains the situation a lot better, I believe.
Sam Sloan
RSHaas
Damir Ulovec
[...]
read. More than half the world tramples on women's rights. More than half the
world can't tell its ass from its elbow.
So you are here to choose who will live (by your rules), and who will die...
Such a nobel thoughts by your politicians.
...
Once upon a time there was a Roman empire...
Once upon a time there was a Egypt empire...
...
Once upon a time there was a Germany empire...
Once upon a time there was a U.S. empire...
...
[...]
Fortunately, the U.S. is here to square you away when you need it.
[...]
Yeah with thousands and thousands of bombs (of all kind). Well, thanks a lot!
[...]
By the way, if you would like to take this public opportunity to thank us for
helping you get rid of your tyrant Milosevic, be my guest.
[...]
Well, you got me there... I don't like Milosevic eather, and this is the first
thing (is it one and only?) you and I agree.
But... It was such a help... All country bombed and destroyed because of few
mighty peoples... I let this this public opportunity to all countries who now
can't work normally because (among other) our bridges are crumbled in NATO
invasion in 1999. Thank you, thank you, thank you...
Would you like me to polish your shoes as well? :o|
[...]
Incidentally, you wrote in one of your other posts: "You heard only about
Serbs over the CNN, and you was not here when war was in progress."
Wrong. I was in Serbia and Montenegro in 1992. I talked to many people,
including workers, students, and soldiers.
[...]
War here was in spring of 1999, and it's nothing to do with (civil) wars in
Bosina&Herzegovina and Croatia (both in 1992).
Today is anniversary... 4 years of first throwed bomb in Novi Sad "second
largest town in Kosovo" (by the CNN)...
Ops, where do I live? I was thinking that my Novi Sad isn't in state Kosovo, but
Vojvodina! Let's see what geography says about that... Yes, I'm right.
However, please, tell me here what are you talking about?
And ask him now, what they think about NATO invasion here. You will certainly
hear similar thoughts as you read here, believe me.
Damir Ulovec
[...]
Let's assume hypothetically, that a country called Serbia waged a war of
aggression on its neighbors. Even if Serbia's hypothetical attacks were
illegal, Serbia's opponents would still be bound by the Geneva Convention.
By this, U.S. is also like Serbia... Peoples from Albania comes into Kosovo
(guess how many Albanian peoples live in Kosovo in 1950 and in 1990), and in the
"one moment" he try to rip off Kosovo from Serbia by terrorists attacks, raping,
and similar. The, Serbia, like all other countries in the world try to strangle
eith it, and as a reward he gets NATO bombs, because you only see civilians(!)
tortured. Now, when Saddam arms civilians, this is perfectly normal for you to
kill them, because you know that is actually soldiers.
Hey, U.S. capture, torture and kill Iraq's civilians! Lets bomb them! Who can
thinl like that? Only U.S. military and they lakeys.
Better for U.S. is to solve his long problem with Texas...
[...]
Violations of the Geneva Convention are wrong, whether the fighters are on the
"side of good."
[...]
Who are "the good guys" in this U.S-Iraq war? U.S., who came thousand miles from
home to grab somebody's oil, or Iraq people (who U.S. military generally calls
"terrorists"), or them, who try to stay alive in it's own country?
[...]
Your post is simply incorrect.
[...]
Incorrect by you and several guys here, who didn't read or see all about.
Cheers.
Damir Ulovec
[...]
Iraq said they'd abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention. If they don't,
should we? (RSHaas)
I can't tell... Will you abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention when
somebody stronger attacks your country?
Damir Ulovec
[...]
It was a unneccessary war; The blood is on Your Hands.
War for peace... Such a nobel thing to do... So sad.
Matt Nemmers
news:b5n9el$rif$5...@news.eunet.yu...
> I can't tell... Will you abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention when
> somebody stronger attacks your country?
Can you name a stronger country?
Regards,
Matt
Tim Hanke
> "Damir Ulovec" <dam...@eunet.yu> wrote ...
>
when
> > somebody stronger attacks your country?
>
> Can you name a stronger country?
Fortunately for humanity, there is no stronger country than the U.S.
Imagine if Iraq were the world's strongest country, and we all had to play
by their rules?
Interesting article in the latest "Sports Illustrated," about how Saddam's
son is in charge of Iraqi sports, and how he runs a torture and murder
operation for Iraqi athletes who don't win, and referees who refuse to rig
events. One of the mildest things they do is beat the athletes' feet till
the small bones are broken and they can't walk. Then it gets worse.
Thank goodness for the clear thinkers in the world, who perceive evil and
have the courage to oppose it. Shame on the people who close their eyes or
look away.
John Fernandez
>Interesting article in the latest "Sports Illustrated," about how Saddam's
>son is in charge of Iraqi sports, and how he runs a torture and murder
>operation for Iraqi athletes who don't win, and referees who refuse to rig
>events. One of the mildest things they do is beat the athletes' feet till
>the small bones are broken and they can't walk. Then it gets worse.
>
>Thank goodness for the clear thinkers in the world, who perceive evil and
>have the courage to oppose it. Shame on the people who close their eyes or
>look away.
>
>Tim Hanke
This has been well known for years. People have been lobbying the IOC to
actually take some official action on Iraq and to decouple the regime from the
sporting body. The IOC really dragged their feet on that one and it wasn't
until the ESPN documentary that people actually started taking the allegations
seriously.
John Fernandez
StanB
"Matt Nemmers" <qcc...@NOSPAMmchsi.com> wrote in message
news:PDGfa.219928$6b3.6...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> > I can't tell... Will you abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention
when
> > somebody stronger attacks your country?
>
> Can you name a stronger country?
Serbia. It has very strong odor. People no wash.
StanB
Fifiela
We tore up the Geneva convention with our treatment of Afghani POW's in
Guatanomo <sp>.
I supported the invasion of Afghanistan; I was repulsed by the hogtieing and
hooding of prisoners of war. This adminstration's lies and word games on that
issue repulsed me.
Fifiela
son is in charge of Iraqi sports, and how he runs a torture and murder
operation for Iraqi athletes who don't win, and referees who refuse to rig
events. One of the mildest things they do is beat the athletes' feet till
the small bones are broken and they can't walk. Then it gets worse.>>>
Maybe true; maybe not (ala babies being tossed out of incubators in Kuwait in
1991.) I supported the first Gulf War; Saddam ivnades a neighbor then Saddam
goes home.
"Truth is The First Casualty of War".
Kevin L. Bachler
wick...@cs.comKillSpam says...
SNIP
>Your post is simply incorrect.
>
>Wick Deer,
>who is quietly chuckling at the notion of defending Tim Hanke using the phrase
>"simply incorrect."
>
Your appreciation of the irony is simply correct.
Kevin L. Bachler
WinWinscenario
>Probably all of us had things we'd rather do, in a perfect world.
Booz was in the Air Force, dummy.
Regards,
Tom Dorsch
drahmiel
>rules of the Geneva Convention when
>> somebody stronger attacks your country?
>
>Can you name a stronger country?
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt
>
It's this kind of typical a--holic jingoistic thinking that makes people want
to blow up big US buildings in the first place.
Damir Ulovec
[...]
Serbia. It has very strong odor. People no wash.
Here is another one... "StanB", who paused on scale of evolution.
Damir Ulovec
[...]
Can you name a stronger country?
At this moment? ... Nope. But that was not my point.
Damir Ulovec
[...]
Well, look who's talking about humanity. Country with most nuclear bombs. How
kind. How kind indeed.
[...]
Imagine if Iraq were the world's strongest country, and we all had to play by
their rules?
[...]
We already play by your rules, and that is not an imagination. Not at all.
Damir Ulovec
[...]
That was in Somalia also, remember?
Why you people can't make your own business?
Why you like to peer in neighbourhood's courtyard?
Where is your good manner? You losted him when putting indians into
reservations?
Why can you use your improved technology to really ease your lives (and ours, at
the same time)?
Matt Nemmers
Exactly what WAS your point then?
Regards,
Matt
Matt Nemmers
news:20030324170431...@mb-cd.aol.com...
It's not "asshole jingoistic thinking," pal. It's a FACT. If stating facts
makes people assholes, then Sam Sloan is the nicest guy on Usenet.
Regards,
Matt
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
Herr Haas was boasting about an army that fought for bond slavery in the period
1861-1865, just as the current U. S. armed forces are fighting for economic
slavery -- OF THE ENTIRE WORLD -- in 2003. He's proud of both armies,
precisely because he would have favored bond slavery in the 1860s and he does
favor economic slavery -- of the rest of the world --- in 2003. Sadly,
because he is too cowardly to "join up" and earn his just desserts -- he won't
be tried for war crimes when the world defeats the United States. Happily, he
is too cowardly, so he won't commit any war crimes directly.
Heute Uhmuhrikkka und Irak. Morgen die ganze Welt!
Uhmuhrikkka, Uhmuhrikkka uber Alles!
Fraternally,
Jerome Bibuld
(I opposed the genocidal attacks against Jugoslavia. I also enjoyed my work as
an arbiter at the Novi Sad Olympiad of 1990 -- and my walks around your lovely
city.)
gens una sumus
Matt Nemmers
news:20030324200412...@mb-mk.aol.com...
> Dear Mr. Ulovec,
>
> Heil Dubya!
>
> Herr Haas was boasting about an army that fought for bond slavery in the
period
> 1861-1865, just as the current U. S. armed forces are fighting for
economic
> slavery -- OF THE ENTIRE WORLD -- in 2003. He's proud of both armies,
> precisely because he would have favored bond slavery in the 1860s and he
does
> favor economic slavery -- of the rest of the world --- in 2003. Sadly,
> because he is too cowardly to "join up" and earn his just desserts -- he
won't
> be tried for war crimes when the world defeats the United States.
Happily, he
> is too cowardly, so he won't commit any war crimes directly.
Richard Haas has served his country, Jerry.
Have you?
Regards,
Matt
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
Mr. Haas may have been in the armed forces of the USA. Whether he served his
country or not is debatable.
I was in Uncle Samuel's armed forces, on active duty, for three years, three
weeks and five days. When I enlisted, in 1944, I thought I was going to fight
against fascism and, thus, serve my country. As it was, I missed "the
fighting", although I once was shot at -- by a partisan who had served his
country. Be that as it may, when I got overseas, I soon found out that I was
the fascist. This did not matter too much, because the fighting war was over,
but I recognized that I was serving my rulers, NOT my country.
I believe that you are on active duty in the Navy, as is one of my
grandchildren. Neither of you is serving your country. Both of you are
serving our rulers. The difference betweeen you is that I love my grandson and
fervently hope he is not hurt. I think the best thing he could do is resign
his commission, but have not mentioned it to him, because our fascist rulers
might take it out on him, if they ever found a message of that nature from me
to him.
(I don't worry too much about their taking it out on me, because I've had a
good life -- my children and their children; my Beautiful Beloved; my
associations with non-United Statesians, including many Afro-Americans, and my
participation in struggles for human rights; my associations with chess, opera
and photography. My association with struggles for national liberation have
earned me life memberships in the Jamaican, South African and Ugandan national
chess federations. As Ira Gershwin wrote, "They can't take that away from
me.")
Of course that parenthetical paragraph was boasting, but those who know me at
all know that I am not modest.
There are those who think I have served my country, but I'm sure Herr Haas and
you would disagree with them. I would rather be known as having served
humankind than the U. S. A.
Heute Uhmurikkka und Irak. Morgen die ganze Welt!
Uhmuhrikkka, Uhmuhrikkka uber Alles!
Not so fraternally,
MR. Bibuld, to you, Sonny Boy.
NoMoreChess
You try competing with the likes of Bill Gates and Sam Walton, pal!
>Why you like to peer in neighbourhood's courtyard?
Because, it's always greener, over there.
Well, okay, it's not all that green in Iraq, but they do have lots of rocks and
sand. Sand can be made into silicon chips, and rocks are handy ammunition for
catapults...
>Where is your good manner? You losted him when putting indians into
>reservations?
Whiner. We gave 'em everything we had to offer: disease, poverty, and to
top it off, Rattlesnake Cliffs, Utah! Why, the way you talk, you'd think them
injuns OWNED the place before "we" got here!
>Why can you use your improved technology to really ease your lives (and ours,
>at the same time)?
Well, when we are not busy improving our destructive capability, we sometimes
and quite by accident I'm sure, develop useful technologies like electricity,
for instance.
The problem here seems to be that in order to take full advantage of these
technologies, a country must have a certain standard of living or surplus of
wealth to put them into place so that the masses can benefit from them. Do you
expect spoiled, lazy Americans to simply GIVE you such things at their own
expense? Fool! Go and get them for yourself. Dig a well if you need water!
If you need power, build a windmill. If you need transportation, go to your
nearest Ford dealer before it's too late, and the rebates have all expired...
Okay, okay -- I recognize what you are saying. We Americans seem to spend a
bit too much time on sticking our noses where they don't belong, and on
bragging and strutting about, and pretending we are the greatest thing since
sliced bread.
It is dissapointing to think how little our superior technology has been used
for the overall benefit of mankind, in comparison to how much it has been used
for greed, for power.
Nevertheless, if you give careful study to Ronnie Reagan's VooDoo ec-- er, I
meant the Trickle-Down Theory of economics, you will see that, in due time, our
technologies will in fact, benefit everyone around the globe, not just
Americans. Hehe...
Not to change the subject, but you have a lot of nerve criticizing our misuse
of technology, after selling us those contraptions known as "Yugos," which
amounted to little more than *self-destructing* econocars.
>dam...@eunet.yu
I am guessing that the ".yu" stands for Yugoslavia.
Please stop the silly comparisons between the USA and Egypt, Greece, Rome,
etc. Those Empires were great, and this is quite nauseating to those of us
who know the difference between mere heft, and true greatness. :-)
And yes, we are aware that they all FELL, eventually...
Matt Nemmers
This is the reason I never discuss politics with my chess playing friends --
because like you, almost all of them are staunch left-wingers with bleeding
hearts who never let such minor matters as accuracy and ethics interfere
with their agenda.
<sigh> I like you much better discussing chess. I shall try to keep any
future correspondence with you on-topic.
Regards,
Matt
"Jerome Bibuld" <chess...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20030324215931...@mb-df.aol.com...
NoMoreChess
>because like you, almost all of them are staunch left-wingers with
>bleeding hearts who never let such minor matters as accuracy and ethics
interfere
>with their agenda.
You lunged at him in the blind hope that he *might* not have served in the
armed forces -- which was quite irrelevant, BTW -- and landed squarely on your
face. This is called -- apart from stupidity -- ad hominem. Yuck.
Now you have fallen back on a general derision of "left-wingers," accusing
"almost all" of them of inaccuracy and unethical behavior.
This sort of behavior could very well be the *real* reason you have such
trouble "discussing" politics.
>Be that as it may, when I got overseas, I soon found out that I
>was
>> the fascist.
How so, a "fascist," and not a mere capitalist pig, I wonder?
>> but I recognized that I was serving my rulers, NOT my country.
Interesting concept. Shall we delve deeper? Serving Caesar \= serving
Rome.
The Roman Senate agreed.
>I shall try to keep any
>future correspondence with you on-topic.
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt
Oh, the old Stay-on-topic Defense! Safe. Easy. Path-of-least-resistance.
Vegetables, anyone?
"You better watch what you say, or they'll be calling you a liberal. A
radical. Oh, fanatical. Criminal."
>As Ira Gershwin wrote, "They can't take that away from
>> me.")
Watch out -- music is off-topic, and the net-police are out in force, looking
for "bleeding-heart liberals" who might have some "agenda" which conflicts with
their own.
Another good area to steer clear of is religion, BTW.
But, getting back to chess, why on Earth did Matt fall into the scholars mate
at that Indiana scholastic tourney where he lost all his games?
Could it be that joepye is a left-winger radical, who is out to get him? Well,
take a look at this opening:
Joe Pye vs. Matt
1.b4! (left-wing radical opening)
... e5
2.Bb2! ( more rad stuff)
... Bxb4
3.Bxe5
... Nc6?
4.Bxg7 (Damned bleeding heart liberals! Why can't they play "normal chess?")
;-)
Fifiela
Have you?>>>
Ummm, did AWOL Bush? DIck Cheney?
Rush Limbaugh? And many other chicken hawks.
Fifiela
Saddam is a thug but Iraq is not Germany. He has been "our thug" in the past.
Iraq has not attacked anyone and is in no shape to attack anyone. I supported
the First Gulf war because of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait but this war is a
disgrace. There is no legitimate US policy goal that could not be achieved by
UN inspections combined with continuous diplomatic, economic & diplomatic
pressure.
No Iraq was among the 09/11 hijackers. There is no credible evidence of any
Iraqi involvement in 09/11. Our government has been caught in one lie after
another with the most recent being crudely forged Iraqi-African "nuclear"
documents.
We have violated international conventions with our treatment of Afghani POW's
in Guantanmo (hog-tied, hooded and forcibly shaved). We have shipped prisoners
off to other countries to be tortured. I supported the Afghani campaign
because it was reasonably linked to revenge for 09/11. I have never supported
the mistreatment of any POW's nor the attack on our own civil liberties by the
Patriot Act and John Ashcroft.
I do not wish to live in a country that launches "preventive" wars to
"liberate" other countries. I wish to live in a country that is protective of
its own liberties and respectful of international institutions. I hear talk
already of Iran next. The cost of Empire is too high to our own liberties.
This war is about:
1. "He tried to shoot my daddy." (Maybe; Maybe not; Who knows the truth of
anything with the regular use of torture in the Middle East?)
2. Oil, Oil, Oil. GWB states that blowing up your own oil wells on your own
territory as your retreat is now a war crime. Wake up and smell the crude.
3. Revenge for 09/11 against an innocent civilian population
4. And it's very good for business for CNN, Fox, MSNBC and the media
Stop the bombing. Stop the war.
Tim Hanke
This at least is more reasonable than anything else you have said so far.
My view? It may not have been a "necessary" war, in the sense that Saddam
was not actually about to invade the U.S. But it's a just war, absolutely.
His outlaw criminal regime had to go. If you believe as I do in the rights
of man, and the other founding principles of our country, Saddam's Iraq is a
stench in your nostrils.
That being said, I believe North Korea is much more dangerous to us. North
Korea may be close to having nuclear weapons AND ballistic missiles that
could reach our country. I hope we wipe up the desert with Saddam and his
sons in the next month or so, and then immediately take out North Korea's
military with a blizzard of tactical strikes. With the two Koreas united, a
major threat to world peace will be removed.
Pax Americana. That's what the world needs.
Briarroot
>
> Pax Americana. That's what the world needs.
Amen.
RSHaas
Actually, I was one of the few draftees in the Marines in 1966. I became a
supply clerk and served uneventully in a gun tube warehouse at Camp Lejeune.
My only "action" was to serve as the self-appointed warehouse snake remover.
In '67, I think, I drove over to Raleigh and played in the North Carolina
Open, ably directed by Don Schultz. I recall scoring only 50%, losing horribly
to Rusty Potter of Virginia. (RSHaas)
StanB
"Fifiela" <fif...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030325055428...@mb-fe.aol.com...
> Good people disagree. Here are my views on this un-necessary war.
> This war is about:
>
> 1. "He tried to shoot my daddy." (Maybe; Maybe not; Who knows the truth
of
> anything with the regular use of torture in the Middle East?)
> 2. Oil, Oil, Oil. GWB states that blowing up your own oil wells on your
own
> territory as your retreat is now a war crime. Wake up and smell the
crude.
> 3. Revenge for 09/11 against an innocent civilian population
> 4. And it's very good for business for CNN, Fox, MSNBC and the media
You talk like a man with a paper asshole.
StanB
Fifiela
I've enjoyed the dialoge with you.
Matt Nemmers
news:20030325010826...@mb-cj.wmconnect.com...
> >This is the reason I never discuss politics with my chess playing
friends --
> >because like you, almost all of them are staunch left-wingers with
> >bleeding hearts who never let such minor matters as accuracy and ethics
> interfere
> >with their agenda.
>
>
> You lunged at him in the blind hope that he *might* not have served in
the
> armed forces -- which was quite irrelevant, BTW -- and landed squarely on
your
> face. This is called -- apart from stupidity -- ad hominem. Yuck.
I would hardly call my question to Mister a "lunge." It was not stupid or
intended to be an ad hominem attack -- it was merely a question.
Unfortunately, you appear to have read too far into it.
> Now you have fallen back on a general derision of "left-wingers,"
accusing
> "almost all" of them of inaccuracy and unethical behavior.
I "accuse" left-wingers of inaccuracy because, for the most part, the bulk
of their argument rests on their opinion that this is "Bush's war for oil."
If any of these educated protestors had done their homework, they would know
that Iraq's oil (and the refinement of it) is not controlled by Iraq; France
lays claim to that particular contract and has for years. Hence their
opposition to us in this particular conflict.
I say they're unethical because they point-fingers without knowing or
considering all the facts, and are content to regurgitate what the liberal
media dishes out to them. It's fine to have an opinion and I don't begrudge
anyone who knows exactly what's going on to be against this war. But to
assign an unfounded motivation to our President without knowing what's what
is simply irresponsible.
> This sort of behavior could very well be the *real* reason you have such
> trouble "discussing" politics.
No, I don't discuss politics with friends unless they are willing to agree
to disagree without taking any opinions of mine personally.
> >I shall try to keep any
> >future correspondence with you on-topic.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Matt
>
>
> Oh, the old Stay-on-topic Defense! Safe. Easy.
Path-of-least-resistance.
> Vegetables, anyone?
Funny you should take the above as a resignation.
> But, getting back to chess, why on Earth did Matt fall into the scholars
mate
> at that Indiana scholastic tourney where he lost all his games?
> Could it be that joepye is a left-winger radical, who is out to get him?
Well,
> take a look at this opening:
>
> Joe Pye vs. Matt
>
> 1.b4! (left-wing radical opening)
> ... e5
>
> 2.Bb2! ( more rad stuff)
> ... Bxb4
>
> 3.Bxe5
> ... Nc6?
>
> 4.Bxg7 (Damned bleeding heart liberals! Why can't they play "normal
chess?")
>
> ;-)
LOL.
Regards,
Matt
drahmiel
>This is the reason I never discuss politics with my chess playing friends --
>because like you, almost all of them are staunch left-wingers with bleeding
>hearts who never let such minor matters as accuracy and ethics interfere
>with their agenda.
In other words, you dislike arguing with those who disagree with you. Just
keep that TV glued to FOX News bud, you'll get all the biased right wing
propaganda a growing jingoist needs.
drahmiel
>
>That being said, I believe North Korea is much more dangerous to us. North
>Korea may be close to having nuclear weapons AND ballistic missiles that
>could reach our country. I hope we wipe up the desert with Saddam and his
>sons in the next month or so, and then immediately take out North Korea's
>military with a blizzard of tactical strikes.
Believe me, we won't. Bullies only pick on those they are sure are
considerably weaker than they are. As a nuclear country, Korea doesn't
qualify.
drahmiel
>It's not "asshole jingoistic thinking," pal. It's a FACT. If stating facts
>makes people assholes, then Sam Sloan is the nicest guy on Usenet.
>
It was also a FACT that Great Britain was a stronger country than the US in
1776. Disappointed that they didn't win that war?
Damir Ulovec
[...]
to blow up big US buildings in the first place.
It's not "asshole jingoistic thinking," pal. It's a FACT. If stating facts
makes people assholes, then Sam Sloan is the nicest guy on Usenet.
I was attended to reply to your question to me (above), but here you say all I
need to know. I have nothing to discuss with you.
Damir Ulovec
Damir Ulovec
[...]
I've enjoyed the dialoge with you.
Tell me you secret. How can you be that sophisticated with disturbed persons?
:o)
Damir Ulovec
Damir Ulovec
Zig Heil creeps!
Don't you guys tell me about democracy anymore! You don't know meaning of the
word.
StanB
That analogy is so thin you can see through it.
StanB
StanB
"Damir Ulovec" <dam...@eunet.yu> wrote in message
And you do? Your studies of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Saddam tell you the all
the answer, yes?
StanB
StanB
"Damir Ulovec" <dam...@eunet.yu> wrote in message
Now please to lick his other boot.
StanB
Matt Nemmers
>
> >It's not "asshole jingoistic thinking," pal. It's a FACT. If stating
facts
> >makes people assholes, then Sam Sloan is the nicest guy on Usenet.
> >
>
> It was also a FACT that Great Britain was a stronger country than the US
in
> 1776.
Okay....now what is your point?
> Disappointed that they didn't win that war?
No.
Regards,
Matt
drahmiel
>That analogy is so thin you can see through it.
>
>StanB
>
Yeah, yeah, I know, Im a paper asshole... whatever that means....
drahmiel
>> It was also a FACT that Great Britain was a stronger country than the US
>in
>> 1776.
>
>Okay....now what is your point?
>
My point is that living by the doctrine of "might makes right" is primitive and
barbaric.
Fifiela
and
barbaric.>>>
Agreed but it's about the max level most US citizens currently capable of.
Wickdeer3
>1. "He tried to shoot my daddy." (Maybe; Maybe not; Who knows the truth of
>anything with the regular use of torture in the Middle East?)
Dubious
>2. Oil, Oil, Oil. GWB states that blowing up your own oil wells on your own
>territory as your retreat is now a war crime. Wake up and smell the crude.
After the immense environmental damage done by the Iraqis setting oil wells on
fire
as they left Kuwait, I think it is eminently reasonable to take strong
rhetorical steps to prevent
a reoccurence. Whether its a "war crime" or not is debateable.
>3. Revenge for 09/11 against an innocent civilian population
Baloney. If we wanted this, we would be using many more bombs and not give a
damn where we shot them.
>4. And it's very good for business for CNN, Fox, MSNBC and the media
>
Oy.
I can think of three more logical explanations for the war:
a.) Bush has more precise information on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
than we have been told.
b.) The remanants of the first Bush administration want to "correct their
mistake" in not taking out Saddam in the first gulf war.
c.) The administration is being run by a bunch of overaggressive damn fools
with a Gallahad complex.
Wick Deer
Fifiela
with a Gallahad complex.>>>
OK, I'll replace my "4" with your "C".
NoMoreChess
>>in 1776.
Contrary to what is often portrayed in the movies, we had some help in that
war from the French, so this is not so simple an equation. And no, Mel Gibson
did not win that war all by himself! ;-)
>My point is that living by the doctrine of "might makes right" is primitive
>and barbaric.
Ah, Camelot. One brief shining moment and then... back to the old
rectangular tables again.
What makes "right," right? Is it not entirely subjective? Might FOR right.
Might MAKES right. Might alone suffices. What is right, but a subjective
opinion?
StanB
"Wickdeer3" <wick...@cs.comKillSpam> wrote in message
news:20030325210853...@mb-fo.news.cs.com...
> I can think of three more logical explanations for the war:
>
> a.) Bush has more precise information on Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction
> than we have been told.
>
> b.) The remanants of the first Bush administration want to "correct their
> mistake" in not taking out Saddam in the first gulf war.
>
> c.) The administration is being run by a bunch of overaggressive damn
fools
> with a Gallahad complex.
d.) It is the right thing to do.
StanB
Wickdeer3
As generalizations go, this ranks up there with "The majority of muslims are
terrorists.", which is to say that it is completely bogus.
Wick Deer
John Fernandez
>From: drah...@aol.com (drahmiel)
>Date: 3/25/2003 7:14 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <20030325191411...@mb-cd.aol.com>
Dude, you haven't gone out to a bar looking for chicks lately.
John Fernandez
drahmiel
>>My point is that living by the doctrine of "might makes right" is primitive
>>and barbaric.
>
>Dude, you haven't gone out to a bar looking for chicks lately.
>
>John Fernandez
No argument there... I long for the times when courtship was the simple "bang
'em over the head and drag 'em back to the cave.".... ahh, the good old
days.....
drahmiel
>I can think of three more logical explanations for the war:
>
I can think of one most logical explanation:
1. Osama Bin Laden doesn't have a mailing address.
John Fernandez
>Message-id: <20030326021133...@mb-fd.aol.com>
See, that was your problem. You kept trying to hit women over the head with
your Chronos. You had to use a real club, you dummy.
John Fernandez
John Fernandez
>Message-id: <20030326021302...@mb-fd.aol.com>
Nah, it's really because there's two different countries within the USA. One,
the overzealous conservative religious folks who actually believe god is on our
side, and Two, the educated people who understand the world around them and see
through Madison Avenue and Washingtonian bullshit.
Sadly, the first group is more numerous.
John Fernandez
John Fernandez
Oh yeah, then why is New York City the city in the USA with the least support
for this war? Hmmmmmmmmm. Shit, the first plane basically went over my house to
hit some building about 2 miles from here, and I'm pretty much against this
nonsense. I guess I'm not convinced enough.
John Fernandez
Tim Hanke
> >>
> >>Dude, you haven't gone out to a bar looking for chicks lately.
> >>
> >>John Fernandez
> >
> >No argument there... I long for the times when courtship was the simple
"bang
> >'em over the head and drag 'em back to the cave.".... ahh, the good old
> >days.....
>
> See, that was your problem. You kept trying to hit women over the head
with
> your Chronos. You had to use a real club, you dummy.
>
> John Fernandez
Baseball Hall-of-Famer Kirby Puckett is now standing trial for following a
woman into the bathroom and groping her. But John Fernandez has been on
record for months as saying this is his own standard M.O. Where's the
justice in this country?
Tim Hanke
--
I am a candidate for the U.S. Chess Federation Executive Board in the 2003
election. Please visit my website at http://www.timothyhanke.net.
Briarroot
> >I can think of one most logical explanation:
> >
> >1. Osama Bin Laden doesn't have a mailing address.
>
> Nah, it's really because there's two different countries within the USA. One,
> the overzealous conservative religious folks who actually believe god is on our
> side, and Two, the educated people who understand the world around them and see
> through Madison Avenue and Washingtonian bullshit.
There must be more than two groups because I don't fit
into either group you mentioned. I am conservative (if
that word actually means anything anymore), but not at all
religious. I see through Madison Avenue and Washington's
bullshit. But on this one particular issue - Iraq, I agree
with the administration's position. I'm not satisfied with
the way they're handling it; I think they waited far too long
and are now proceeding too slowly. But I agree with them in
principle: Saddam's regime must be destroyed.
StanB
> >That analogy is so thin you can see through it.
> >
> Yeah, yeah, I know, Im a paper asshole... whatever that means....
If you ever use a three ring binder and tear the hole of one of the pages,
you will wish you had a paper reinforcement (AKA paper asshole) to
strengthen the hole. You simply lick the paper asshole and place it over the
torn hole. Bon appetite.
StanB
StanB
> No argument there... I long for the times when courtship was the simple
"bang
> 'em over the head and drag 'em back to the cave.".... ahh, the good old
> days.....
That's not where you bang 'em.
StanB
joe mccarron
>snip<
> What makes "right," right? Is it not entirely subjective? Might FOR right.
> Might MAKES right. Might alone suffices. What is right, but a subjective
> opinion?
Unfortunately, I think many people think like your statements.(I'm
assuming you are being sarcastic) They don't think straight and get
confused. Maybe Hitler was right to kill Jews. Maybe Sadamm's
government is better. Its all subjective right? So why bother trying
to think things through?
joe mccarron
John, you should look at the facts of the issues and reach your
opinion based on logic. You should not be concerned with whether
some "educated" people will claim you are just one of the, albeit
unchic, "overzealous conservative religious folks."
>
> John Fernandez
NoMoreChess
>>territory as your retreat is now a war crime. Wake up and smell the crude.
>After the immense environmental damage done by the Iraqis setting oil wells
>on fire as they left Kuwait, I think it is eminently reasonable to take strong
>rhetorical steps to prevent a reoccurence.
How exactly does rhetoric, in any way, prevent a recurence? Actions could
conceivably do this, but rhetoric is just what it is.
In fact, one shot of Bagdad on TV showed what were believed to be several
trenches filled with oil and set afire, for the explicit purpose of obscuring
the view of incoming (i.e. American) bomber pilots, so they would have a
tougher time nailing their targets. The reporters quickly pointed out that
this tactic was largely innefective, due to missile guidance systems which see
through smoke.
Nevertheless, they burned a lot of oil because of... us.
In a previous post, Americans were accused of not being able to rise above a
certain level, and that charge was dismissed outright as an overgeneralization
in one reply.
However, here "we" are pointing out how burning oilwells is "environmentally
unfriendly," while at the very same moment, dropping bombs, launching missiles,
testing new bombs, etc.
This just in: bombs, too, are proven "unfriendly" to the environment,
according to a study just completed at Nagasaki, Hiroshima, and Bikini Atol.
Wake up and smell the radiation and/or napalm.
This is commonly referred to as hypocrisy, except of course, when it applies
-- as it clearly does here -- to "us," to Americans.
>I can think of three more logical explanations for the war:
>a.) Bush has more precise information on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
>than we have been told.
Hey, dumb as he may look, Bush has access to far more info than any of us
about all matters of national security.
>b.) The remanants of the first Bush administration want to "correct their
>mistake" in not taking out Saddam in the first gulf war.
Not bad, *in comparison* with what Clinton's motive for trying to launch a
random war was.
This just in: Monica will soon have her own TV show. We all know where her
greatest talent lies, but who on Earth will they get to work with her?
>c.) The administration is being run by a bunch of overaggressive damn fools
>with a Gallahad complex.
Bashing the opposition, by itself, will never get you elected. Try something
along these lines: "Ask not, what your country can do for you, ask how you can
get two chickens in every garage and a car in every pot."
NoMoreChess
>>
>> a.) Bush has more precise information on Iraqi weapons of mass
>destruction
>> than we have been told.
>>
>> b.) The remanants of the first Bush administration want to "correct their
>> mistake" in not taking out Saddam in the first gulf war.
>>
>> c.) The administration is being run by a bunch of overaggressive damn
>fools
>> with a Gallahad complex.
>
>d.) It is the right thing to do.
>
>StanB
Have you ever considered a career in politics?
WinWinscenario
>
>a.) Bush has more precise information on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
>than we have been told.
The reason I find this difficult to believe is because the administration keeps
chaning its story. It has said over and over it has the evidence, both for the
existance of weapons of mass destruction, and for the connection with Al Qaeda,
but they have refused to provide it.
For instance, they talk about the WMD in various ways that have been publicly
refuted. They say Hussein Kamel proved their existance when he defected to
Jordan. but Hussein Kamel, in the part of his interview that they "neglect" to
reveal, also said that all of these weapons were destroyed. They say the
Iraqis are working on a nuclear program. But every time they present a real
fact, it is refuted. They said the aluminum tubes were used in atomic weapons
production. Al Baradei of UNMOVIC stated that was not true. They said Iraq
bought weapons material from an African country. Now it turns out those
documents were forged "by a foreign power" (Israel?).
If they had evidence, real evidence and not neocon fantasies, they could have
supplied it to the weapons inspectors and provided the smoking gun. Hans Blix
would have had to provide a negative report, the whole world would have been
convinced, and the UN would have signed on. Instead, the US regime seems to be
the only ones who believe there is hard evidence of WMD. Even the gassing of
the Kurds, Bush's favorite demonization, has been challenged. It turns out the
nerve agents used were typical of Iranian weapons, not Iraqi weapons, and were
used in an area of Iraq that was contested between the two countries during a
time when both were suing chemical weapons.
As a lawyer, Wick, you can see that Bush doesn't have hard evidence, and is
just blowing smoke. For that reason, he has lost a debate in the court of
world opinion with Saddam Hussein, one of the world's most detested men.
Regards,
Tom Dorsch
StanB
"NoMoreChess" <nomor...@wmconnect.comkillspam> wrote in message
news:20030326121256...@mb-fw.wmconnect.com...
> >d.) It is the right thing to do.
> >
> >StanB
>
> Have you ever considered a career in politics?
Yes. I was elected to and served five years on a school board. We discovered
I had a gene deficit which was quickly cured. I no longer care to serve on
any publicly elected board that has the power to tax.
StanB
RSHaas
for US 7th Cav.. which is said to be somewhat low on ammunition and fuel.
Tiime to call 1-800-AIR-POWR. (RSHaas)
StanB
"RSHaas" <rsh...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030326145704...@mb-mp.aol.com...
Time to lock and load and circle the wagons.
StanB
drahmiel
>Nah, it's really because there's two different countries within the USA. One,
>the overzealous conservative religious folks who actually believe god is on
>our
>side,
I actually heard a conservative radio talk show host out there (and are these
guys multiplying like rabbits or what?) say, "people keep quoting this New
Testament passage that says "love thine enemy", but these ignorant people don't
understand that interpreted in the proper context, this passage implies that
the government can use deadly force against evil."
Wow.