It's An Oil War.
Jeff Relf
The cowboys win.
The indians lose.
The U.S./U.N. are the cowboys.
The poor in Columbia, Venezuela,
Nigeria, Libya, Malaysia etc are
the proverbial "indians."
In physics, ( See ** below )
The second law of thermodynamics tells us:
The universe will devolve into
pure randomness... Nothingness... Death.
The third law tells us:
This devolution is a function of _Heat.
The hotter it is, the faster the devolution.
Oil is that heat.
It's devolving humanity into utter randomness... Death.
Oil is slowly burning us up.
"Fantastic!" I say.
"Let's Live/Die Fast." I say.
It's Better that humanity die
in the glory of it's youth than in
the rot of old age.
God and the universe should die this way...
Discarding their heavy insecurities... Forever!
For the first 99 percent of the time that humanity has existed:
Men typically died at age 19.
Yet, Despite the laws of _Empirical thermodynamics:
Entropy and randomness are actually mysteriousness.
The universe's march toward ever greater mysteriousness is
just an artifact of accumulated empirical errors...
Due to our lack precision.
Astronomers know that everything is deterministic.
Randomness is never more than mysteriousness.
I say:
If humans could weigh the photon with "infinite" precision:
They'd be unable to distinguish between energy and mass.
I say:
If humans could become like tiny aliens by
"infinitely" shrinking their inertia to the photon's level:
The photon would no longer seem random to them.
This infinite precision/shrinkage is
what Einstein's relativity is all about, because:
Relatively more speed requires relatively less inertia.
Allowing people to imagine themselves as _Ever smaller "aliens."
Always approaching, but never reaching: Zero inertia.
Always approaching, but never reaching: The speed of light.
This is what justifies Einstein's faith in determinism.
This is why everything is dead...
Like puppets on a string... Pinocchios.
- Jeff Relf -
** Footnote: The third law of thermodynamics states:
The entropy at the absolute zero of temperature is zero,
corresponding to the most ordered possible state."
( From The Encyclopedia Britannica. )
"Entropy" is:
"The degradation of the matter and energy in the universe
to an ultimate state of inert uniformity."
( From M-W.COM )
The second law of thermodynamics states:
"The entropy of an isolated system
never decreases with time."
If fact, This is _Why time has an "arrow"...
a past/present/future.
( Perceptually that is,
The actual "course" of nature is directionless and immutable. )
Ronald Stepp
news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> It's An Oil War.
So? What's your point? Is there a better reason to attack someone than
that they control a resource vital to your interests? Do you drive a car?
Do you use gas, or buy plastic products? Would you pay thirty dollars a
gallon for gas, or have to give something to a dictator so he doesn't cut
you off from the oil?
Uncle Al
>
> It's An Oil War.
Why is this trolled to sci.physics, moron?
We're not just after petroleum. We are going to kill 100 million
dingleberried Muslims for the sheer joy of housecleaning, add five
states to the flag, and let the world know it is no more Mr. Fall Guy.
Kill them all, confiscate their financial resources, occupy their
emptied territories. Imperial Rome did not hold meetings. Imperial
Rome bordered wide avenues with crucified terrorists - six thousand
lining 132 miles of the road from Capua to Rome in a single instance -
who did not respect "civis Romanus sum."
"Civis Americus sum!" Hell hungrily awaits if your God broaches
argument in counterpoint. I laud omniscient unobstructed real time
lethality. Kill them all and make the future safe for children and
women.
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
Do something naughty to physics.
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.pdf
The short form.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
Robert Kolker
Uncle Al wrote:
> Kill them all, confiscate their financial resources, occupy their
> emptied territories. Imperial Rome did not hold meetings. Imperial
> Rome bordered wide avenues with crucified terrorists - six thousand
> lining 132 miles of the road from Capua to Rome in a single instance -
> who did not respect "civis Romanus sum."
>
> "Civis Americus sum!" Hell hungrily awaits if your God broaches
> argument in counterpoint. I laud omniscient unobstructed real time
> lethality. Kill them all and make the future safe for children and
> women.
Dammit Al, when are you going to say what you really mean instead of
pussyfooting.
Bob Kolker
Mike Dubbeld
"Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
as a leader to remove this threat. You idiot brains are totally
ignorant of what war IS. If you knew what war is you would
know what a trival matter it is for the US to respond in a
deterent fashion to the threat. You would know based on
weapons deployments and types in that area of the world
this does not qualify as 'war' material. Police action is what
it is. I don't think much of the US doing this but for all you
lame-brain whiners out there throwing rocks - none of you
offers alternatives. No, it is NOT OK that Iraq continue to
play hide and seek with weapons of mass destruction. All it
will take is ONE explosion in a major city to kill millions
of people. For millions more to develop crippling diseases
and millions more to lose their homes and jobs. At that time
whiners such as your self will yell 'Where was the US? Why
did they not act proactively. How could they allow this to
happen?' Keep your silly crap to yourself. Likely a German
whiner. What policies does your government have with
Iraq? What does your country stand to lose from an attack?
If your country does not whine about any action the US
takes, how are you going to get the US to pay you off to
be quite? Cut you some sweet deal? I say you are a low
life scumbag whiner. Inaction is action also. The US WILL
be sending terrorists a message whether your twisted
little mind likes it or not. I suggest you get yourself an
education and grow up. It will be your mother they
take hostage next time. If you don't wake up and confront
the situation, the situation will confront you. And you
HAVE NOT confronted the situation. You are merely
sitting on a fence throwing rocks with nothing constructive
in the form of a solution. A whiner.
Also - that silly stuff below - I guess you think this has
something to do with physics. Ding dong twilight
zone stuff.
Mike Dubbeld
Dirk Bruere
"Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:as91jh$8ai$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
>
> "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > It's An Oil War.
>
> No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
> these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
> supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
Pity the US only changed its mind after helping arm Saddam, sanctioning his
invasion of Iran and turning a blind eye to the use of WMDs in mass murder
and war crimes.
I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
Dirk
tj Frazir
We all got te bomb now ,,cold warr is now world arms race ......BOOM
We know better than to let it get to that ,,,we will blast first and
ask last .
We would not attack over oil ,,,the price will go down if e toulk all te
oil and the oil co dont want the price down or and end to oil age.
Your paying out the ass for oil so why would
the oil co make it cheep ?
Its a nuke war ,,,dumb fucking rag heads think they can terorise the
fuckng planet like hitler but lack the army hitler had.
Go ahead and nuke us once ,,just once ,,the midle east will be nuked
like a 8 minute egg.
No one will care who set off what on whom .
When the smoke clears there just wount be an irac packinsac or iran or
a rag to be found.
We will just turn te desert into glass and skate on it .
SO FUCK OFF AND DIE
tj Frazir
I bet your writing about liquid piston engines after you wrote the
internet power grid bull shit you got off my post.
You steel evry word you wrote after you fuck it up because your so
stupid and suc a punk ass little bumb ....wait till I get my 10 pound
fist on you !! Go ahead and piss me off Ill come strait over and bust
your head ; ))
You best just go away befor I do anyway .
You steel one more word from me and they will be placing your image on
milk cartons.
You and doninghue boath
Uncle Al
It's Thanksgiving. I'm feeling mellow - see my Web page. Early this
morning I took a 50 ml syringe and a 16.5 gauge needle and injected a
fifth of Kuyper Peach Schnapps all into a 19 lb tom turkey (free from
Ralphs supermarket). After it was stuffed and arrayed in the roasting
pan I covered the surface with peach halves in light syrup held in
place with a few strategic toothicks. Starting at 1000 hrs, 6 hrs at
325 F, basted every hour, progressively tented with aluminum foil as
the thighs and then the breast deeply browned and the peaches
carmelized. I and the little lady snorfled each other's crotches for
a couple of hours. Add candied yams, boiling onions and peas, and
Ocean Spray jellied cranberry source rippled from the can. No
mother-in-law.
How dare they try to end this beauty! Kill them all. Wipe the planet
clean of their filth, superstition and murderous arrogance, then
proceed to the stars.
James Hunter
"Ronald Stepp" <rstepp.d...@sw.rr.com> wrote in message
news:TBSF9.70901$Gc.19...@twister.austin.rr.com...
Yes, it better, since it's not an oil war. The Iragis and *their* moron
chemists
also have nuclear and biochem weapons, so it's best to put the
morons and their associated quantum randomoid illiterate shitheads out of
their
misery sooner rather than later.
>
>
>
hanson
news:as93os$pfbm2$1...@ID-120108.news.dfncis.de...
hog it all for himself. They got nervous and mad at him.....
........the rest is history = follow the dollars.......
hanson
hanson
news:3DE81B1D...@hate.spam.net...
>
> I'm feeling mellow.
> Early this morning I took a 50 ml ...... Schnapps
> Kill them all.
> Wipe the planet clean of their filth, superstition
> and murderous arrogance, then proceed to the stars.
.......AAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAA...ahahahahahah.......ahahahah
just with 50 ml ???
You are becoming a light-weight, Al,
50 ml, sheesh....and that while mother-in-law was away?
hahahahahah..hahahahah......hahahahahanson
Thanks for the laugh. Good story.
Boris Mohar
Breast up or breast down? The turkey, that is.
>How dare they try to end this beauty! Kill them all. Wipe the planet
>clean of their filth, superstition and murderous arrogance, then
>proceed to the stars.
You will find them there too. We all need an enemy.
Regards,
Boris Mohar
Ronald Stepp
news:as96i9$rmk$1...@houston.jhuapl.edu...
> Yes, it better, since it's not an oil war. The Iragis and *their* moron
> chemists
> also have nuclear and biochem weapons, so it's best to put the
> morons and their associated quantum randomoid illiterate shitheads out
of
> their
> misery sooner rather than later.
Well, yeah there is that.. I just don't think that oil is all that bad a
reason for us to do anything to other countries.
Now, if we were attacking India to assure a steady supply of seven-eleven
managers, I draw the line there.. but that's just me..
<heh>
Ronald Stepp
news:3DE807B3...@attbi.com...
> Dammit Al, when are you going to say what you really mean instead of
> pussyfooting.
I know, it's like pulling teeth with Al.
<lol>
Ronald Stepp
> morning I took a 50 ml syringe and a 16.5 gauge needle and injected a
> fifth of Kuyper Peach Schnapps all into a 19 lb tom turkey (free from
> Ralphs supermarket). After it was stuffed and arrayed in the roasting
> pan I covered the surface with peach halves in light syrup held in
> place with a few strategic toothicks. Starting at 1000 hrs, 6 hrs at
> 325 F, basted every hour, progressively tented with aluminum foil as
> the thighs and then the breast deeply browned and the peaches
> carmelized. I and the little lady snorfled each other's crotches for
> a couple of hours. Add candied yams, boiling onions and peas, and
> Ocean Spray jellied cranberry source rippled from the can. No
> mother-in-law.
>
> How dare they try to end this beauty! Kill them all. Wipe the planet
> clean of their filth, superstition and murderous arrogance, then
> proceed to the stars.
Hmmm, but Al, if we put the turkey on a rocketship with a dozen clocks
aboard, accelerated the turkey to near light speed for one year, then
brought him back for thanksgiving next year, would his clocks tell him it
was thanksgiving when the axe came down? Heheh..
Dirk Bruere
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:RyVF9.8585$ta5.9...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> "Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
> news:3DE81B1D...@hate.spam.net...
> >
> > I'm feeling mellow.
> > Early this morning I took a 50 ml ...... Schnapps
> > Kill them all.
> > Wipe the planet clean of their filth, superstition
> > and murderous arrogance, then proceed to the stars.
> > Uncle Al
>
> .......AAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAA...ahahahahahah.......ahahahah
> just with 50 ml ???
> You are becoming a light-weight, Al,
> 50 ml, sheesh....and that while mother-in-law was away?
He injected it into his jugular.
Can't get more macho than that.
Dirk
Ronald Stepp
> news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > It's An Oil War.
>
> No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
> these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
> supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
> as a leader to remove this threat. You idiot brains are totally
> ignorant of what war IS. If you knew what war is you would
Absolutely correct. It's not an oil war. But if it was about oil, that
wouldn't be bad thing either. We don't start wars, we finish them.. <grin>
Ronald Stepp
He stopped being a threat to our enemies and started being a threat to us...
Ronald Stepp
news:3689-3DE...@storefull-2152.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Anybody ask the aphid what he thought? No? I didn't think so.. I still
hear this buzzing noise though from webTV.. some insect I think..
Pathetic, little aphid
Ronald Stepp
news:3689-3DE...@storefull-2152.public.lawson.webtv.net...
man, I stillll hear that buzzing noise.. like a bug, oh wait it's tj
again...
pathetic
bzzz bzzzz buzzzz
James Hunter
> "James Hunter" <jim.h...@jhuapl.edu> wrote in message
> news:as96i9$rmk$1...@houston.jhuapl.edu...
> > Yes, it better, since it's not an oil war. The Iragis and *their*
moron
> > chemists
> > also have nuclear and biochem weapons, so it's best to put the
> > morons and their associated quantum randomoid illiterate shitheads
out
> of
> > their
> > misery sooner rather than later.
>
> Well, yeah there is that.. I just don't think that oil is all that bad a
> reason for us to do anything to other countries.
It's not, but since oil is mostly of vital interest
to economists rather than people with
above average intelligence, there is not
really universal agreement.
Maleki
<di...@neopax.com> wrote in
<as93os$pfbm2$1...@ID-120108.news.dfncis.de> that:
If you really want to see it square and honest, Saddam
is the closest ally USA has in the Middle East. Even
Israelis wouldn't go as far as he has for USA. So this
campaign (if it ever takes place) has nothing to do
with friends and foes. There is something very morbidly
economic about it. It is like a friend cutting a chunk
of meat off a friend's leg and eat it to survive. Very
ugly and morbid. Let's see what happens.
-------------------------
az kalamAte naghze irAni:
mA che bekhAhim che nakhAhim mahsur va asire
changAle joz'-joz'e a'mAle taktake afrAde mellat
hastim, va agar be dideye heghArat be AnhA
bengarim be gheymate sa'Adat va salAmatemAn tamAm
khAhad shod.
"Mehdi Bazargan"
Ronald Stepp
news:nifguu8rmqetku71m...@4ax.com...
> If you really want to see it square and honest, Saddam
> is the closest ally USA has in the Middle East. Even
> Israelis wouldn't go as far as he has for USA. So this
> campaign (if it ever takes place) has nothing to do
I hope you're fucking drunk. I really do.
If not that then I hope your just ignorant of the facts.
Dirk Bruere
Well, Saddam's problem is that what he gains in cunning he loses in
stupidity.
He only surrounds himself with yes-men - good for being a dictator, bad for
actually facing a serious opponent.
Nobody will mourn his passing.
He could have won the last war with the US intact but Bush Snr actually had
to go out of his way to let him escape. Saddam was too dumb to do it
himself.
Dirk
hanson
news:as9dj1$p0q2f$1...@ID-120108.news.dfncis.de...
after he sincerely administered another 50 ml and then
attacked his turkey with his Rambo knife, CHIRALLY....
only to realize that it was his mother-in-law who was
wearing his 1 pound diamonds, that he was really after.
hanson
PS: Unlce Al is becoming a legend in his own time.
I am envious.
strangeplace
sometimes i wish i still believed everything the media and my government
told me too...things seemed so much simpler then. i didn't have to do any
research, and i didn't have to process any information - all my thinking was
done for me. those were great times...
"we're the cops of the world, boys. we're the cops of the world."
Eric Gisse
<Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote:
....and what does iraq have to do with sci.physics? Why the FUCK do
people feel the need to drop rants about iraq *here* ?
Tom Potter
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:vjVF9.8552$ta5.9...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
It's not an oil war,
it's a political donations war.
In order to get political donations,
(And try to get more of the Jewish-American vote.)
Bush got in bed with Sharon,
(Who was hated by the Muslims for many good reasons.)
belittled the South African Racism conference,
that was held in the spring of 2001,
belittled Arafat and the Palestinian cause, and
ceased the efforts to find a peaceful Middle East solution.
This sent a signal to the Palestinians,
and the people who sympathized with their plight,
that their case was hopeless.
As can be seen, what followed was 9/11,
suicide bombings, rocket attacks on planes, etc.
If Bush had pushed the peace process,
rather than getting in bed with Sharon,
there would have been no 9/11,
no movement of America toward a police and military state,
no loss of freedoms to Americans,
no danger to American's at home and abroad,
no collapse of the economy,
no shattering of the national budget,
no impending war with the Iraqian people,
with its' attendant cost, depletion of
non-renewable resources, environmental damage, etc,
no loss of trust by most nations of the world,
no hatred of America by hundreds of millions of Muslims,
no raid on Social Security,
no airline bankruptcies, etc.
Before Sharon intruded back into the scene,
and before Bush put a chip on his shoulder,
and dared the Muslims to know it off,
the Middle East was safer than Washington, D.C.
It is interesting to see that the demise of Rome
can be traced to ONE event,
the death of the Roman Emperor Julian, in 361.
Rome was at it's heights when Julian became emperor.
He was an intelligent, brave, strong, well liked leader,
who had secured Rome's frontiers in northern Europe,
and he had visions of emulating Alexander the Great.
He led a huge Roman army into Persia,
and was killed in battle with them.
The Roman army retreated in panic,
and the Persians could have easily wiped them out,
but to avoid causalities of their own,
they made a deal to take Armenia,
and let the shambles of the Roman army
If Julian had pulled off his attempt to emulate Alexander
the Great, Rome would likely have ruled all
of Europe and Asia, and Rome would still rule the world.
To put the situation in perspective,
imagine what would happen today,
if the Americans attacked Iraq and were defeated.
As can be imagined, all the nations of the world
would lose the fear of, and respect for America,
and the America empire would come apart.
This is what happened to Rome after Julian's defeat.
I suggest that anyone who is interested in seeing what the
situation was at that time, read the biography of Julian
written by Ammianus Marcellinus,
a Greek army officer who marched with Julian,
and retreated with the Roman army.
Marcellinus himself, was almost killed a couple of times
by the Persians, and like the retreating Romans,
he nearly died of thirst and starvation.
As can be seen from Marcellinus' book,
the Persians came up with many strategies that
frustrated the Romans, such as burning the grasslands
to deny the Roman horses fodder.
Hopefully, Bush won't emulate Julian,
and bring America down for a few million bucks
in political donations.
--
Tom Potter http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp
-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----
Dirk Bruere
LSD - powerful stuff
> PS: Unlce Al is becoming a legend in his own time.
> I am envious.
Dirk
Dirk Bruere
"Eric Gisse" <kseggR...@uas.alaska.edu> wrote in message
news:fdqguukd9lomi1gc9...@4ax.com...
Well, the politics NGs are full of people who seem to know what they are
talking about, unlike here.
Dirk
hanson
> > > > > Early this morning I took a 50 ml ...... Schnapps
> > > > > Kill them all.
> > > > > Wipe the planet clean of their filth, superstition
> > > > > and murderous arrogance, then proceed to the stars.
> > > > > Uncle Al
> > > >
> > > > .......AAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAA...ahahahahahah.......ahahahah
> > > > just with 50 ml ???
> > > > You are becoming a light-weight, Al,
> > > > 50 ml, sheesh....and that while mother-in-law was away?
> > >
> > > He injected it into his jugular.
> > > Can't get more macho than that.
> > > Dirk
> > >
> > Oh yes, he could, can, did and became much more macho
> > after he sincerely administered another 50 ml and then
> > attacked his turkey with his Rambo knife, CHIRALLY....
> > only to realize that it was his mother-in-law who was
> > wearing his 1 pound diamonds, that he was really after.
> > I am envious.
> > hanson
>
> LSD - powerful stuff
WOW....!!!! you mean Uncle Al developed now
LSD = Light-Sensitive-Diamonds?
I am not envious any longer, I am outright jealous now.
hanson
Mike Dubbeld
>
> "Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> wrote in message
> news:as91jh$8ai$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> >
> > "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> > news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > > It's An Oil War.
> >
> > No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
> > these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
> > supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
>
> Pity the US only changed its mind after helping arm Saddam,
sanctioning his
> invasion of Iran and turning a blind eye to the use of WMDs in mass
murder
> and war crimes.
Says you. Saddham was armed because Iran was becoming a threat to the
region. Nobody endorsed any mass murders. Thats the consequences
of only having thug-ditators running govenments which the US does
not control and any and all attempts to do so would result in your
whiny-ass snide negative crap.
>
> I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
Try invading Kuait BOZO. Try showing his vengefulness of setting
160 oil wells on fire. Were you born an idiot or did you have to
go to school to get this dumb.
Mike Dubbeld
>
> Dirk
>
>
Mike Dubbeld
This post is proof postive of this.
Mike Dubbeld
"Tom Potter" <t...@hotsheet.com> wrote in message
news:3de8...@post.newsfeed.com...
Mike Dubbeld
Morbid. This word fits you well. So does sick. Twisted. Idiot.....
Mike Dubbeld
"Maleki" <male...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nifguu8rmqetku71m...@4ax.com...
Dirk Bruere
>
> "Dirk Bruere" <di...@neopax.com> wrote in message
> news:as93os$pfbm2$1...@ID-120108.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > "Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> wrote in message
> > news:as91jh$8ai$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > >
> > > "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> > > news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > > > It's An Oil War.
> > >
> > > No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
> > > these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
> > > supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
> >
> > Pity the US only changed its mind after helping arm Saddam,
> sanctioning his
> > invasion of Iran and turning a blind eye to the use of WMDs in mass
> murder
> > and war crimes.
>
> Says you. Saddham was armed because Iran was becoming a threat to the
> region. Nobody endorsed any mass murders. Thats the consequences
And why was that? Could it be because the Iranian people were totally pissed
off with that Western puppet the Shah and his US trained secret police
SAVAK?
And why did Iran become such a threat? Could it have something to do with
the vast amount of weapons our good 'ol pal the Shah bought from us?
> of only having thug-ditators running govenments which the US does
> not control and any and all attempts to do so would result in your
> whiny-ass snide negative crap.
Strange.
I could swear that even after Saddam used nerve gas on his own people as
well as committing war crimes the US gave him finance and weapons.
Not much call from the US for war crimes trials and 'it must not stand'
until he bit the hand that fed him eh?
Dirk
Ronald Stepp
> I could swear that even after Saddam used nerve gas on his own people as
> well as committing war crimes the US gave him finance and weapons.
>
> Not much call from the US for war crimes trials and 'it must not stand'
> until he bit the hand that fed him eh?
You better consider yourself lucky the USA is nothing like what you make it
out to be, namely intentionally doing all this bad stuff.
If we were, we'd be running the planet right now with all the people who
stodd against us, either under our military control, or glowing nuclear
holes in the ground.
Pitiful..
m4r...@xs4a11.nl
> Well, yeah there is that.. I just don't think that oil is all that bad a
> reason for us to do anything to other countries.
So once again it's: the US must get what it wants, if not voluntary,
then by force. No wonder you're the most hated country in the world.
Ronald Stepp
news:3de93993$0$11740$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
We have issues don't we? Where are you from american hater? I take it from
your little rant that no matter what we do and for what reason, you'll turn
it into anti-american rehetoric.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and try and state my position
clearly.
The United States uses oil for thousands of reasons. Plastics, chemicals,
gas, among others and as such is a vital resource for us as a nation. If
someone else tries to deprive us of those resources, then we have a
justifiable need to stop that someone. If it's a country, then we have
channels from diplomacy to aid to miltary force to state our case to them.
If it's a terrorist then we use force.
So take your ignoran ass elsewhere.. we are the best country on the face of
the planet. Even if there are inbred assholes like yourself out there who
tear other people down to make themselves feel better.
Clear?
Mortimir
> "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > It's An Oil War.
>
> that they control a resource vital to your interests? Do you drive a car?
> Do you use gas, or buy plastic products? Would you pay thirty dollars a
> gallon for gas, or have to give something to a dictator so he doesn't cut
> you off from the oil?
>
America has large amounts of food product, money, technology, etc. that many
other countries would like to have and find convenient. By your logic I
trust that you think it would be fine for a foreign entity possessing the
necessary power -- let's say, one from some alien planet as no such powerful
entity exists on Earth -- to take any of the above mentioned things from
America by force simply out of convenience (not to mention that hunger will
strike most people as a more important need than "[driving a car, using gas,
and buying plastic products]")? Also, I suppose you think it was fine for
Germany to wage war against its neighbors in an effort to obtain things that
it wanted, as well, huh? Was it also right for an earlier America to
subject Africans and African-Americans to slave labor because America found
it convenient to have such cheap labor that was forced to do precisely as it
was told without concern for what these slaves wanted?
I think your argument has to fall into moral relativism which is but another
name for failure (and often an exhibition of philosophical weakness when a
proponent of such a 'moral' system fails to make any significant effort to
find a non-relativistic moral philosophy before resorting to relativism --
I'm not saying that this is the case with you, but it is quite often the
case with *many* relativists, if not the case with *most* relativists)...
Mortimir
Mortimir
> news:TBSF9.70901$Gc.19...@twister.austin.rr.com...
> > "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> > news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > > It's An Oil War.
> >
> > So? What's your point? Is there a better reason to attack someone than
> > that they control a resource vital to your interests? Do you drive a
car?
> > Do you use gas, or buy plastic products? Would you pay thirty dollars a
> > gallon for gas, or have to give something to a dictator so he doesn't
cut
> > you off from the oil?
>
> chemists
> also have nuclear and biochem weapons,
Show some proof that they have nuclear and biological weapons! The American
president and the CIA have not sufficiently made a case against Iraq, and
neither has any other world entity. The *only* case against Iraq is against
the corrupt regime, and any action against Iraq should be against said
regime *AND* in the interest of the Iraqi people.
The fact is that most Iraqi WMD-related material came from the UK and the
US, the two forces allied most closely now against Iraqi WMDs. Also, when
you have Israel over there arming to the teeth and threatening the use of
nuclear force (and they openly admit to having the capability) it gets
pretty hard to justify leaving them standing while attacking Iraq for
similar indescretions that are actually non-existent in terms of a threat.
There are a plethora of interests involved in the proposed war, but I have
yet to see any evidence that any of these interests and motivations are in
the least noble. Rather, they are despicable and in the interest of only
the most elite people in society. Such activity is detrimental to the vast
majority of the world's population, and it should be condemned. The thin
but sickeningly successful layer of propaganda surrounding the whole affair
should also not be tolerated.
> so it's best to put the
> morons and their associated quantum randomoid illiterate shitheads out
of
> their
> misery sooner rather than later.
>
Spoken like a true Imperialist!
It must be nice to see the world so clearly cut between you and your kind
and the "[moronic, illiterate shitheads]" (if I am to accept your view of
this 'dichotomy' and judge you by your above post, I feel I must say there
is really only one class of people and that your artificial division is
redundant). 'Unfortunately', there are still many of us who would rather
see the world as it is and not through the screen of propaganda and
ignorance.
Mortimir
Mortimir
moron
> > chemists
> > morons and their associated quantum randomoid illiterate shitheads
out
> of
> > their
> > misery sooner rather than later.
>
> reason for us to do anything to other countries.
>
> managers, I draw the line there.. but that's just me..
>
How noble of you...
Mortimir
David Lloyd-Jones
> The United States uses oil for thousands of reasons. Plastics,
> chemicals, gas, among others and as such is a vital resource for us as
> a nation. If someone else tries to deprive us of those resources,
> then we have a justifiable need to stop that someone. If it's a
> country, then we have channels from diplomacy to aid to miltary force
> to state our case to them.If it's a terrorist then we use force.
Ronald,
I have terrible news for you: Saddam *wants* to supply the world with
oil. America is the main country enforcing the embargo which limits what
he can sell.
And while we're at it, since when was the US a plastics manufacturer?
There are certainly some plastics manufacturers located in the United
States, but of course fewer and fewer of them are American with each
passing year, because Americans on the whole live beyond their means,
and only meet their bills by selling off assets.
But don't let me stop you. Please keep on practicing...
-dlj.
Mortimir
> <m4r...@xs4a11.nl> wrote in message
> news:3de93993$0$11740$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
> > In sci.physics Ronald Stepp <rstepp.d...@sw.rr.com> wrote:
> > > Well, yeah there is that.. I just don't think that oil is all that bad
a
> > > reason for us to do anything to other countries.
> >
> > So once again it's: the US must get what it wants, if not voluntary,
> > then by force. No wonder you're the most hated country in the world.
>
> We have issues don't we? Where are you from american hater? I take it
from
> your little rant that no matter what we do and for what reason, you'll
turn
> it into anti-american rehetoric.
As soon as someone uses the term 'anti-American' you can pretty safely label
them as deluded, brainwashed, mindlessly patriotic, etc. I mean if you
really consider the term it is absolutely laughable!
What does it mean to be an 'American'?
Well, America was a product of the Enlightenment, and was founded in
advocation of the use of reason, as were all products of the Enlightenment.
Therefore, it would seem that the original understanding of America would
likely show you, Mr. Stepp, to be the one how is 'anti-American' ("One of
the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days
is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in
the great struggle for Independence." -- Charles A. Beard). However, I
still do not feel that that is a fair characterization in this case. It is
really an asinine term and only likely to be compelling to someone who is
either unable to reason effectively for whatever reason or has already
abandoned the use of reason!
>
> I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and try and state my position
> clearly.
>
How kind of you to be so patient with someone who has so contemptuously
strayed from the herd!
> The United States uses oil for thousands of reasons. Plastics, chemicals,
> gas, among others and as such is a vital resource for us as a nation. If
> someone else tries to deprive us of those resources, then we have a
> justifiable need to stop that someone. If it's a country, then we have
> channels from diplomacy to aid to miltary force to state our case to them.
> If it's a terrorist then we use force.
>
Have you really even bothered to think about the implications of your
claims? You sound like the result of one who unthinkingly accepts whatever
propaganda is sent your way. It is really startlingly ignorant and really
quite frightening! I do not mean to be insulting by what I say, but I
seriously think that you need to re-evaluate your position, at least for
coherence. Do you mean to expound an absolutely relativistic moral
philosophy? Have you really exhausted all other options?
> So take your ignoran ass elsewhere.. we are the best country on the face
of
> the planet.
Define "best". The US is certainly the "best" at bullying the rest of the
world and pacifying its own citizenry -- the majority of which is also
negatively impacted by US policy and actions!
> Even if there are inbred assholes like yourself out there who
> tear other people down to make themselves feel better.
>
Why am I not surprised that you are also inclined to resort to ad hominem
fallacies? I wonder: Is anyone else surprised?
> Clear?
>
Clearly one of the most shameful, ignorant things I've seen in quite some
time! I sincerely hope that you give more thought to your opinions on world
matters and foreign policy. This is a very important topic; its importance
can really not be overstated. Going wrong here can be to cut your own
throat, practically, and I hardly hesitate to posit that you haven't given
nearly the appropriate amount of attention that these issues should be
given.
Think for yourself; question authority; question the legitimacy of
institutions of power. If anything, *that* is what America is all about...
It certainly isn't about (or *shouldn't* be about) rallying around the flag,
beating the drums of war, and screwing over everything and anything that
gets in the way of US interests.
Finally, I recommend that you sincerely and objectively study information
pertaining to these issues from multiple sources (*especially* non-American
sources; that is: foreign sources). Also, I think you should study a
variety of moral philosophy (*especially* critiques of relativism,
emotivism, etc.). After doing these two things for a sufficient amount of
time, if you still value the opinions you have put forth in the above-quoted
text, I will be very surprised, but I will be much more inclined to respect
your point of view, as it will surely be better supported.
Until then...
Mortimir
Mortimir
> Jeff Relf wrote:
> >
> > It's An Oil War.
>
> Why is this trolled to sci.physics, moron?
>
> We're not just after petroleum. We are going to kill 100 million
> dingleberried Muslims for the sheer joy of housecleaning, add five
> states to the flag, and let the world know it is no more Mr. Fall Guy.
>
> Kill them all, confiscate their financial resources, occupy their
> emptied territories. Imperial Rome did not hold meetings. Imperial
> Rome bordered wide avenues with crucified terrorists - six thousand
> lining 132 miles of the road from Capua to Rome in a single instance -
> who did not respect "civis Romanus sum."
>
> "Civis Americus sum!" Hell hungrily awaits if your God broaches
> argument in counterpoint. I laud omniscient unobstructed real time
> lethality. Kill them all and make the future safe for children and
> women.
You are offensively ignorant and a shame to yourself and your country.
Mortimir
>
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
> Do something naughty to physics.
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.pdf
> The short form.
>
> --
> Uncle Al
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
> "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
Mortimir
> news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
>
> these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
> supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
If the US has such an obligation, it certainly is not living up to it. All
the US ever seems to do is get what it wants by any means necessary. The
proposed war on Iraq *is* about oil, but that is not all it is about. There
is a plethora of reasons why the US is moving to attack Iraq, and none of
them seem very likely to be genuinely moral, benevolent, or in the interest
of the vast majority of the population of the US and the world. US
atrocities are done in the interest of a tiny portion of the population, the
wealthiest portion, at that!
If the US does truely want to keep "thug-dictators [from] amass[ing] weapons
of mass destruction", then why isn't it planning a war against Israel?
Israel admits to having WMDs and has threated to use them on numerous
occasions. Israel also stands opposed to pretty much the entirety of the
Arab world. Do you not think that Israel encourages countries like Iraq to
obtain WMDs? It seems quite obvious that if Mother Theresa were the leader
of Iraq that she would be a poor one if she didn't seek to develop an
arsenal significant enough to rival Israel's! And consider the only country
in the world who has the most nuclear weapons and has *ACTUALLY USED THEM
AGAINST CIVILIAN POPULATIONS*: the United States of America. Should the US
then be invaded in the interest of keeping the peace? Who has *that* moral
obligation?
> You idiot brains are totally
> ignorant of what war IS.
I think everyone knows what war *is*. I'm not sure how the phrase "idiot
brains" is relevant to your argument, though. Perhaps you'd like to clarify
that?
> If you knew what war is you would
> know what a trival matter it is for the US to respond in a
> deterent fashion to the threat.
Are you here only talking about how easy it would be for the US to attack
and conquer other world powers? I have no doubt that the US is capable of
committing successful acts of war against the strongest of the world's
powers. I especially think Iraq would fall quite easily under a US attack,
certainly much more easily than it did during the Gulf War, I would imagine.
> You would know based on
> weapons deployments and types in that area of the world
> this does not qualify as 'war' material. Police action is what
> it is. I don't think much of the US doing this but for all you
> lame-brain whiners out there throwing rocks - none of you
> offers alternatives.
There are many, many alternatives offered! The best one's are by these
so-called "lame-brain whiners". I call them best in the sense that they are
genuinely moral, benevolent, and/or in the interest of the vast majority of
the population of the US and the world.
You see, all of the things you seem to think the US does (and that the US
does indeed *claim* to do) it does not actually do, and it even seems very
likely that it does not indeed ever intend to do them. I know US propaganda
is extremely successful in camouflaging this, but you don't have to scratch
the surface too hard to find the truth, or at least a clearer version of it.
Take the time to study serious opposing viewpoints from as many sources as
you can muster. I think you'll find that much of what you have been led to
believe is a lie.
> No, it is NOT OK that Iraq continue to
> play hide and seek with weapons of mass destruction.
The above-quoted text is an example of the US propaganda that is so easily
accepted by so many well-intentioned people. Think about the
logical/philosophical implications of suggesting that someone indeed does
have something but you just can't prove it because they keep hiding it from
you somehow. How about if the police accused you of stockpiling cocaine and
guns, searched your house and everything, found no cocaine and guns, but
then incarcerated you anyway, because they concluded that you somehow
managed to hide them every time they looked for them? Would that make much
sense? Of course not! But for some reason when we hear it from Pres.
Bush's lips on TV it seems to be more plausible...but it's not... It is the
fallacy of the complex question, like: Have you stopped beating your wife?
The US is asking Iraq: Have you stopped hiding your WMDs from our
inspectors?
You might be surprised to know that, I believe it was the head, of the
inspection team that was going into Iraq after the Gulf War, Scott Ritter,
is very much opposed to any military action against Iraq. He is not a
pacifist, he admits outright, but he thinks that US aggression will only
hurt the Iraqi people, and, if anything, make things worse for the world in
general. Look him up; he does a lot of writing on the subject and has
first-person insight that is very helpful.
> All it
> will take is ONE explosion in a major city to kill millions
> of people. For millions more to develop crippling diseases
> and millions more to lose their homes and jobs.
Have you considered that US foreign policy has been and continues to be an
*HUGE* part, if not the whole part, of the motivation for terrorists to
commit such an act as you describe?
> At that time
> whiners such as your self will yell 'Where was the US? Why
> did they not act proactively. How could they allow this to
> happen?'
We "whiners" have already hoped for the US to adopt more responsible, moral,
benevolent policies that are neutral to, or in the interest of, the majority
of the world's population (the majority of the US population would be a nice
start, though). Sure, humanity nearly unanimously agrees that murder is
wrong, terrorism is wrong, but why is it always ignored mostly and referred
to as "defense" when the US is doing it? The US, I'm sad to say, is the
single largest terrorist nation in the world by its own definition!
> Keep your silly crap to yourself.
You'd rather only hear what you want to hear, even if it is flawed,
propaganda, and/or intentionally manipulative? I hope not.
> Likely a German
> whiner.
I fail to see the relevance of said dissenter's nationality. In fact, it
strikes me as a bit racist/nationalistic to bring it up, unless you have
some specific point of which it is a necessary premise, which I doubt is the
case.
> What policies does your government have with
> Iraq? What does your country stand to lose from an attack?
> If your country does not whine about any action the US
> takes, how are you going to get the US to pay you off to
> be quite? Cut you some sweet deal? I say you are a low
> life scumbag whiner.
Not nearly so sweet as the oil deal(s) Bush and his cronies will likely get
from a war against Iraq. Not to mention the many, many other benefits they
will exact and have already exacted from the tragedy of 9-11.
> Inaction is action also. The US WILL
> be sending terrorists a message whether your twisted
> little mind likes it or not. I suggest you get yourself an
> education and grow up. It will be your mother they
> take hostage next time. If you don't wake up and confront
> the situation, the situation will confront you. And you
> HAVE NOT confronted the situation. You are merely
> sitting on a fence throwing rocks with nothing constructive
> in the form of a solution. A whiner.
The above-quoted text is simply not true, as I stated above. There are
numerous alternatives that seem much more sound in their reasoning. I
suppose you just haven't looked hard enough for them. US propaganda is
ridiculously successful. It will take a bit of effort, but just try to find
some serious work that criticizes the official American understanding.
Also, familiarize yourself with the raw facts of previous actions of the US,
and think about them objectively; question everything you've ever thought to
be true about them no matter how seemingly obvious. I think you'll be
surprised.
I hope you'll take my advice and take a more critical view of the US, even
if just in an effort to prove me wrong. Critical reasoning is always a good
thing, especially in matters of such significance as these we are
discussing. If nothing else, the absurdities that are regularly coming from
the mouths of those who agree wholeheartedly with the US should make one
take pause to consider what exactly is going on. I mean we have people
saying that all people of the Islamic faith should be killed, that even
Islamic children should be killed, that Middle Eastern people in general
should be killed, that it is justifiable to commit acts of war just to
satisfy American greed, etc. I've read enough of your posts, Mr. Dubbeld,
to know that these are not things you're quick to embrace. Consider the
implications of their association with your current view of the US/Iraq and
US/World issue(s).
Also, having read your posts, I must warn you that I'm short on time and
might not be able to read anything overly lengthy, though I feel a bit
hypocritical saying that just now!...=P
Take care,
Mortimir
>
> Also - that silly stuff below - I guess you think this has
> something to do with physics. Ding dong twilight
> zone stuff.
>
> Mike Dubbeld
>
>
> > The cowboys win.
> > The indians lose.
> >
> > The U.S./U.N. are the cowboys.
> > The poor in Columbia, Venezuela,
> > Nigeria, Libya, Malaysia etc are
> > the proverbial "indians."
> >
> > In physics, ( See ** below )
> > The second law of thermodynamics tells us:
> > The universe will devolve into
> > pure randomness... Nothingness... Death.
> >
> > The third law tells us:
> > This devolution is a function of _Heat.
> > The hotter it is, the faster the devolution.
> >
> > Oil is that heat.
> > It's devolving humanity into utter randomness... Death.
> > Oil is slowly burning us up.
> >
> > "Fantastic!" I say.
> > "Let's Live/Die Fast." I say.
> > It's Better that humanity die
> > in the glory of it's youth than in
> > the rot of old age.
> > God and the universe should die this way...
> > Discarding their heavy insecurities... Forever!
> >
> > For the first 99 percent of the time that humanity has existed:
> > Men typically died at age 19.
> >
> > Yet, Despite the laws of _Empirical thermodynamics:
> > Entropy and randomness are actually mysteriousness.
> > The universe's march toward ever greater mysteriousness is
> > just an artifact of accumulated empirical errors...
> > Due to our lack precision.
> >
> > Astronomers know that everything is deterministic.
> > Randomness is never more than mysteriousness.
> >
> > I say:
> > If humans could weigh the photon with "infinite" precision:
> > They'd be unable to distinguish between energy and mass.
> >
> > I say:
> > If humans could become like tiny aliens by
> > "infinitely" shrinking their inertia to the photon's level:
> > The photon would no longer seem random to them.
> >
> > This infinite precision/shrinkage is
> > what Einstein's relativity is all about, because:
> > Relatively more speed requires relatively less inertia.
> > Allowing people to imagine themselves as _Ever smaller "aliens."
> > Always approaching, but never reaching: Zero inertia.
> > Always approaching, but never reaching: The speed of light.
> >
> > This is what justifies Einstein's faith in determinism.
> >
> > This is why everything is dead...
> > Like puppets on a string... Pinocchios.
> >
> > - Jeff Relf -
> >
> > ** Footnote: The third law of thermodynamics states:
> > The entropy at the absolute zero of temperature is zero,
> > corresponding to the most ordered possible state."
> > ( From The Encyclopedia Britannica. )
> >
> > "Entropy" is:
> > "The degradation of the matter and energy in the universe
> > to an ultimate state of inert uniformity."
> > ( From M-W.COM )
> >
> > The second law of thermodynamics states:
> > "The entropy of an isolated system
> > never decreases with time."
> >
> > If fact, This is _Why time has an "arrow"...
> > a past/present/future.
> > ( Perceptually that is,
> > The actual "course" of nature is directionless and immutable. )
> >
> >
>
>
Maleki
<unk...@unknown.com> wrote in
<yFdG9.364$E_....@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
that:
>
>"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
>news:3DE7FD5A...@hate.spam.net...
>> Jeff Relf wrote:
>> >
>> > It's An Oil War.
>> [snip]
>>
>> Why is this trolled to sci.physics, moron?
>>
>> We're not just after petroleum. We are going to kill 100 million
>> dingleberried Muslims for the sheer joy of housecleaning, add five
>> states to the flag, and let the world know it is no more Mr. Fall Guy.
>>
>> Kill them all, confiscate their financial resources, occupy their
>> emptied territories. Imperial Rome did not hold meetings. Imperial
>> Rome bordered wide avenues with crucified terrorists - six thousand
>> lining 132 miles of the road from Capua to Rome in a single instance -
>> who did not respect "civis Romanus sum."
>>
>> "Civis Americus sum!" Hell hungrily awaits if your God broaches
>> argument in counterpoint. I laud omniscient unobstructed real time
>> lethality. Kill them all and make the future safe for children and
>> women.
>
>
>
>You are offensively ignorant and a shame to yourself and your country.
>
>Mortimir
>
>
More likely it is the ecstasy of seeing USA being
reduced to his beloved Israel. You know, the feeling
whores have when their prudent friends express desire
to join the business. An experience of strong relief,
almost liberation.
-------------------------
az kalamAte naghze irAni:
harke shod mahrame del dar harame yAr bemAnd
vAnke in kAr nadAnest dar enkAr bemAnd
az sedAye sokhane eshgh nadidam khoshtar
yAdgAri ke darin gonbade davvAr bemand
"Hafez"
Steve Harris
> > > Pity the US only changed its mind after helping arm Saddam,
> > sanctioning his
> > > invasion of Iran and turning a blind eye to the use of WMDs in mass
> > murder
> > > and war crimes.
> >
> > Says you. Saddham was armed because Iran was becoming a threat to the
> > region. Nobody endorsed any mass murders. Thats the consequences
>
> And why was that? Could it be because the Iranian people were totally
pissed
> off with that Western puppet the Shah and his US trained secret police
> SAVAK?
If they were, they were being stupid, since they got much worse than SAVAK
with the Ayatollah's regime. That's what Western ideas were protecting them
from. It's much like what happened in Afghanistan with the Taliban-- if you
think Western puppet governments are bad, try Muslim fundamentalist ones.
> And why did Iran become such a threat? Could it have something to do with
> the vast amount of weapons our good 'ol pal the Shah bought from us?
That one's easy: no. Weapons themselves don't make a country fearsome. It
the people and government that do. Nobody is really afraid that (say) France
will use weapons of mass destruction, aka nukes, in an aggressive way.
> Strange.
> I could swear that even after Saddam used nerve gas on his own people as
> well as committing war crimes the US gave him finance and weapons.
Yes, there's a big memory hole there, all right. Saddam gassed the Kurds,
who he accused of helping the enemy (perhaps with justification), at the end
of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988. The senate voted to embargo arms to him then,
the Reagan admin fought that (sticking up for the private dealers and arms
industries they were so fond of), and the bill died in committee. I don't
know if the US gov actually sold Sadam arms after that, but they sure didn't
prevent US industries from doing so privately.
> Not much call from the US for war crimes trials and 'it must not stand'
> until he bit the hand that fed him eh?
Yes, it's true that the US gov couldn't quite muster up a formal arms
embargo against Saddam in the Reagan administration, during which the entire
time (80-88) Iraq was fighting Iran, which the Reaganauts hated (as did
everybody else, right?). Saddam generally got carte blanch to use gas
against Iran (84), which was fighting a rather agressive war which
threatened to topple Iraqi government, and also gas against insurrection
within Iraq during that war (same applies-- the UN and US generally are less
hard on defensive war and suppression of internal dissention in countries
than they are on external aggression). It was only when Iraq came out in a
clear war of aggression against another country which hadn't provoked it
(against Kuwait in 90) that the world decided Iraq was a danger to WORLD
peace. And Saddam then got his toys taken away, and he's still not going to
get them back.
That said, I wish Bush et al. was a little clearer about this whole thing.
It's not the possession of nerve gas we don't like so much as the possession
of nerve gas by an aggressive country. And for nukes, that goes double.
Pakistan can have nukes because they haven't invaded a Kuwait. Saddam is
being kicked around by the UN because he's a different story.
SBH
--
I welcome Email from strangers with the minimal cleverness to fix my address
(it's an open-book test). I strongly recommend recipients of unsolicited
bulk Email ad spam use "http://combat.uxn.com" to get the true corporate
name of the last ISP address on the viewsource header, then forward message
& headers to "abuse@[offendingISP]."
Ronald Stepp
news:3DE961A8...@rogers.com...
> And while we're at it, since when was the US a plastics manufacturer?
Since this has got to be a joke, I won't even answer the rest of it....
Maleki
<sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in
<asbu94$nba$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net> that:
>> And why was that? Could it be because the Iranian people were totally
>pissed
>> off with that Western puppet the Shah and his US trained secret police
>> SAVAK?
>
>If they were, they were being stupid, since they got much worse than SAVAK
>with the Ayatollah's regime.
That's what your "Iran Analysts" tell you :-) And boy
you deserve it.
-------------------------
az kalamAte naghze irAni:
mA che bekhAhim che nakhAhim mahsur va asire
Mortimir
> > I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
>
us...
>
>
He couldn't defeat Iran with the help of the US, UK, big oil, and a few
others (basically the largest powers in the world), yet he is a threat to
the US? Yeah right; give us a break!
Besides, what did the Iraqi *people* do to America? They're the ones who
usually suffer the most from US intervention in anything having to do with
their lives. For example, they're the ones dying every day, senselessly, as
a direct result of US sanctions.
Mortimir
Mortimir
Aye, when Saddam committed his worst atrocities he was a US puppet, and the
US showed no concern.
Mortimir
Mortimir
> "Dirk Bruere" <di...@neopax.com> wrote in message
> news:asb4hb$p25cc$1...@ID-120108.news.dfncis.de...
>
> > I could swear that even after Saddam used nerve gas on his own people as
> > well as committing war crimes the US gave him finance and weapons.
> >
> > Not much call from the US for war crimes trials and 'it must not stand'
> > until he bit the hand that fed him eh?
>
> You better consider yourself lucky the USA is nothing like what you make
it
> out to be, namely intentionally doing all this bad stuff.
>
Look at the facts, Mr. Stepp. It is quite clear that the US acts in the
interests of power, namely massive corporate power. It makes perfect sense
if you think about it and is only surprising because you've likely been
indoctrinated with the official dogma, and thus the truth comes as quite a
shock. But seriously, I challenge you to take a critical look. That's what
America is all about, anyway, right?
> If we were, we'd be running the planet right now with all the people who
> stodd against us, either under our military control, or glowing nuclear
> holes in the ground.
>
It's not quite so easy. The US government has to worry about pacifying its
people. They didn't do a good enough job of that in the Vietnam War, for
instance, and near the end they were allocating troops to stay at home in
case a revolution broke out. The US government has to walk a fine line,
pacifying the people while basically acting as a 'gopher' for corporate
power. If the government started obviously immoral wars, the people would
likely become highly critical, and the empire would fall. Certainly a
massive nuclear campaign would not sit will with many citizens, thankfully!
Again, I implore you to think more seriously about these issues rather than
being irrationally defensive. It is for your own good in large part, after
all...
Mortimir
Mortimir
"strangeplace" <vze4...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:gTYF9.2912$ic6....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> "Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> wrote in message
> news:as91jh$8ai$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> >
> > "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> > news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> > > It's An Oil War.
> >
> > No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
> > these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
> > supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
> > ignorant of what war IS. If you knew what war is you would
> > know what a trival matter it is for the US to respond in a
> > weapons deployments and types in that area of the world
> > this does not qualify as 'war' material. Police action is what
> > it is. I don't think much of the US doing this but for all you
> > lame-brain whiners out there throwing rocks - none of you
> > play hide and seek with weapons of mass destruction. All it
> > will take is ONE explosion in a major city to kill millions
> > of people. For millions more to develop crippling diseases
> > whiners such as your self will yell 'Where was the US? Why
> > did they not act proactively. How could they allow this to
> > whiner. What policies does your government have with
> > Iraq? What does your country stand to lose from an attack?
> > If your country does not whine about any action the US
> > takes, how are you going to get the US to pay you off to
> > be quite? Cut you some sweet deal? I say you are a low
> > be sending terrorists a message whether your twisted
> > little mind likes it or not. I suggest you get yourself an
> > education and grow up. It will be your mother they
> > take hostage next time. If you don't wake up and confront
> > the situation, the situation will confront you. And you
> > HAVE NOT confronted the situation. You are merely
> > sitting on a fence throwing rocks with nothing constructive
> > in the form of a solution. A whiner.
> >
> > something to do with physics. Ding dong twilight
> > zone stuff.
> >
> > Mike Dubbeld
>
>
> told me too...things seemed so much simpler then. i didn't have to do any
> research, and i didn't have to process any information - all my thinking
was
> done for me. those were great times...
> "we're the cops of the world, boys. we're the cops of the world."
>
>
Like they say: "Ignorance is bliss!" I suppose it is often so with
misinformation (a nice way of saying 'manipulative lies') as well. It is a
shame that there aren't more independent news agencies. I mean there are
quite a few, but it would be nice if they were more accessible, more
mainstream. People need opposing viewpoints in this time more than any
other perhaps.
Mortimir
-----------------------------------
"People can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. Tell them they
are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism." -Herman Goering
keith stein
Mitchell Jones
<Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
> Robert Kolker wrote:
> >
> > Uncle Al wrote:
> > > Kill them all, confiscate their financial resources, occupy their
> > > emptied territories. Imperial Rome did not hold meetings. Imperial
> > > Rome bordered wide avenues with crucified terrorists - six thousand
> > > lining 132 miles of the road from Capua to Rome in a single instance -
> > > who did not respect "civis Romanus sum."
> > >
> > > "Civis Americus sum!" Hell hungrily awaits if your God broaches
> > > argument in counterpoint. I laud omniscient unobstructed real time
> > > lethality. Kill them all and make the future safe for children and
> > > women.
> >
> > Dammit Al, when are you going to say what you really mean instead of
> > pussyfooting.
>
> It's Thanksgiving. I'm feeling mellow - see my Web page. Early this
> morning I took a 50 ml syringe and a 16.5 gauge needle and injected a
> fifth of Kuyper Peach Schnapps all into a 19 lb tom turkey (free from
> Ralphs supermarket). After it was stuffed and arrayed in the roasting
> pan I covered the surface with peach halves in light syrup held in
> place with a few strategic toothicks. Starting at 1000 hrs, 6 hrs at
> 325 F, basted every hour, progressively tented with aluminum foil as
> the thighs and then the breast deeply browned and the peaches
> carmelized. I and the little lady snorfled each other's crotches for
> a couple of hours. Add candied yams, boiling onions and peas, and
> Ocean Spray jellied cranberry source rippled from the can. No
> mother-in-law.
>
> How dare they try to end this beauty! Kill them all. Wipe the planet
> clean of their filth, superstition and murderous arrogance, then
> proceed to the stars.
***{Unfortunately, it is democratically elected politicians who view
public office as theater, not as deadly serious business, who will decide
the fate of this civilization. And what they will do is play games in the
spotlight, aiming to impress an audience of mental defectives ("the
public"), while our Muslim enemies attempt to smuggle a weapon of mass
destruction into a location from which they can take this global
civilization down. Time is all the enemy needs, and our duly elected
imbeciles are giving them that time. Thus an unfavorable outcome is pretty
much a foregone conclusion. --MJ}***
===============================================
Killfile inmates: Charles Cagle, Stephen Speicher, Mati Meron, Franz
Heymann, Mike Varney, Dirk Van de moortel.
Tom Potter
"Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:asb3cp$j2v$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
It is interesting to see that Mike Dubbeld makes his point that anyone
who "can read and write is eligible to spew garbage",
as he surely does so, when he makes a childish, ill-formed effort, .
to attack the messenger, rather than address the message.
I, for one, would like to see Mike Dubbeld
address the message in an intelligent, rational, mature, moral way.
The question of the day is:
can Mike Dubbeld make a mature, intelligent post,
or is all he can do is "spew garbage"?
You've posted your garbage Mike Dubbeld.
Let's see some content.
Robert Kolker
Mortimir wrote:
>
> You are offensively ignorant and a shame to yourself and your country.
No he isn't. Al is an iconoclast who does not truckle with political
correctness nor succomb to the blandishments of Diversity. Some people
are smarter than others, and if the less smart want to benefit from the
natural inequality of man, they had best let the smart do their thing.
We will live rather nicely from the the crumbs of the table that the
smart and energetic layout for themselves.
If more American were like Al and myself we would not be living in fear
of the Wog's next attack. Why? Because there would be no Wogs. If we
cannot tame the children of a Lesser God we will have to kill them.
Bob Kolker
Robert Kolker
Maleki wrote:
> More likely it is the ecstasy of seeing USA being
> reduced to his beloved Israel. You know, the feeling
> whores have when their prudent friends express desire
> to join the business. An experience of strong relief,
> almost liberation.
Keep in mind, you Islamic cunt, that if the U.S.A. goes down, so does
the rest of world. Apres nous, la deluge.
Most likely we will bleed, but your kind will die, and good riddance to
all of you.
Bob Kolker
Mike Varney
Maleki
<bobk...@attbi.com> wrote in
<3DEA2699...@attbi.com> that:
Hehe :) I said it didn't I.
You don't care about USA. We know that. You ought to be
concerned as far as your mind can stretch, and that's
within borders of Israel. You _know_ of Iran and USA
and Israel which one would go up the stratosphere
first, don't you. So don't fool us beyond your
significance, you "whore" :)
We survived the Mongols. No trace of their foolishness
around, look. We'll survive your stupidity as well. I'm
talking about superiority here, Kolker, your pet word.
-------------------------
az kalamAte naghze irAni:
khodAyA:
marA hamvAreh AgAh va hushyAr dAr tA pish az
shenAkhtane "dorost" va "kAmele" kasi, yA fekri
mosbat yA manfi, ghezAvat nakonam.
"Ali Shari'ati"
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>"Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
>news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
>> It's An Oil War.
>So? What's your point? Is there a better reason to attack
>someone than that they control a resource vital to your interests?
Yes: Because they worship the wrong gods.
--
George W. Bush threatens to kill us all -- for oil
http://www.gwbush.com/ http://www.bushwatch.net/
Soon to come: http://www.notserver.com/
Maleki
(Mitchell Jones) wrote in
<mjones-0112...@66-105-229-3-aus-02.cvx.algx.net>
that:
How naive. The nukes you're worrying about have been
around and installed inside USA by all probabilities
since the 1960s :-( Why the heck do you think Cuba is
still standing in there looking up your bare asses???
You don't have "time" because others have stopped
helping you. You'll either grow up or will collapse and
become a little brother to Mexico, and you have about
20 or so years left for it. Moslems aren't doing
anything to you, they've just stopped helping you.
You've lost their respect. Go fuck with your own demons
before it's too late, bozo.
-------------------------
az kalamAte naghze irAni:
agar rAhe eslAhe keshvar rA mijuyim be hich vajh
nabAyad nazar be yek noghteh va be yek markaz
mesle "majles", "dowlat", "farhang", "artesh",
"bAnk", "behdAsht", "bAzAr", ... biyafkanim, va
donbAle rAhehalhAye fowri gashteh, az yek fard
mesle "nakhostvazir", "vakil", "mollA", "mo'allem"
va gheyreh entezAre eslAh dAshteh bAshim. nazar
bAyad be tamAme afrAde mellat bAshad. _AfrAd_
bAyad eslAh shavand, va in eslAh bAyad davAm va
baghA dAshteh bAshad tA natijeye matlub va mofidi
hAsel gardad.
"Mehdi Bazargan"
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>"James Hunter" <jim.h...@jhuapl.edu> wrote in message
>news:as96i9$rmk$1...@houston.jhuapl.edu...
>> "Ronald Stepp" <rstepp.d...@sw.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:TBSF9.70901$Gc.19...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>> > "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
>> > news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
>> > > It's An Oil War.
>> > So? What's your point? Is there a better reason to attack someone than
>> > that they control a resource vital to your interests? Do you drive a car?
>> > Do you use gas, or buy plastic products? Would you pay thirty dollars a
>> > gallon for gas, or have to give something to a dictator so he doesn't cut
>> > you off from the oil?
>> Yes, it better, since it's not an oil war. The Iragis and *their* moron
>> chemists
>> also have nuclear and biochem weapons,
>Show some proof that they have nuclear and biological weapons! The American
>president and the CIA have not sufficiently made a case against Iraq, and
>neither has any other world entity.
He's not our President.
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>Jeff Relf wrote:
>>
>> It's An Oil War.
>[snip]
>Why is this trolled to sci.physics, moron?
>We're not just after petroleum. We are going to kill 100 million
>dingleberried Muslims for the sheer joy of housecleaning, add five
>states to the flag, and let the world know it is no more Mr. Fall Guy.
>Kill them all, confiscate their financial resources, occupy their
>emptied territories. Imperial Rome did not hold meetings. Imperial
>Rome bordered wide avenues with crucified terrorists - six thousand
>lining 132 miles of the road from Capua to Rome in a single instance -
>who did not respect "civis Romanus sum."
>"Civis Americus sum!" Hell hungrily awaits if your God broaches
>argument in counterpoint. I laud omniscient unobstructed real time
>lethality. Kill them all and make the future safe for children and
>women.
>http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
>Do something naughty to physics.
>http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.pdf
>The short form.
Amen, Brother! And besides, Bush found out these people's skin wasn't
white so that's good enough for him. The fact that they wrship the
wrong gods was just gravy.
>--
>Uncle Al
>http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
>"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
--
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>Mortimir wrote:
And of course that's exactly what the Islamic crazies are saying about
the Christian crazies. Funny that they're both right. It's a shame
that the religious just can't exterminate each other and leave their
intellectual and moral superiors out of their religious wars.
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>"Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
>news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
>> It's An Oil War.
>No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
>these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
>supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
>as a leader to remove this threat.
Ah, good, you're in favor of exterminating madmen with access to
weapons of mass destruction. Add Dubya to the top of the list, pal.
Maleki
<var...@collorado.edu> wrote in
<asdd4h$gaj$1...@peabody.colorado.edu> that:
Hahhah :) There are funny mistakes in it but it's a
good one.
-------------------------
az kalamAte naghze irAni:
_gorize_ be hoseyn va AshurAye hoseyn sonnati sakht
amigh va besyAr porma'ni va shAyesteye ta'ammol
ast. har lahzeh rA bAyad be dAstAne 'u peyvand
dAd. har ruz rA bAyad be AshurA peyvast, hameye
mAh-hA rA be moharram, hameye noghtehAye zamin rA
be An gusheye sorkh. az harche matrah ast, towhid,
maz-hab, ghor'An, mohammad, ali, hajj, ebAdat,
falsafeh, erfAn, eshgh, imAn, shAdi, gham, ..., az
har aghide'i har sonnati, har mas'ale'i har rasmi,
az har bo'di az ab'Ade zendegi, ejtemA', tArikh,
akhlAgh, ruh, va az harke va harche, bAyad be
hoseyn va AshurAye hoseyn "goriz" zad.
bAyad be dAstAne 'u peyvand khord. vagarnah
mojarrad va motlaghim. vagarnah mobham va
bisamarim. mehvare harche ke hast amale 'ust.
"Ali Shari'ati"
Ronald Stepp
news:mjones-0112...@66-105-229-3-aus-02.cvx.algx.net...
> public"), while our Muslim enemies attempt to smuggle a weapon of mass
> destruction into a location from which they can take this global
> civilization down. Time is all the enemy needs, and our duly elected
They're going to need far more than one weapon to do it... as Russia and the
USA discovered during the cold war..
But if they ever set *one* weapon off, the consequences for the terrorists
won't be favorable at all.. their days will be numbered as all other nations
of the world get serious about finishing them off... too bad this is the
kind of incentive we will likely need to get them off their rumps.
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>"Mike Dubbeld" <mi...@erols.com> wrote in message
>news:as91jh$8ai$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
>> "Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
>> news:as8qfl$390$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
>> > It's An Oil War.
>> No it is not an oil war. The US has an interest in not allowing
>> these thug-dictators amass weapons of mass destruction and
>> supporting terrorists but it also has a moral obligation to act
>Pity the US only changed its mind after helping arm Saddam, sanctioning his
>invasion of Iran and turning a blind eye to the use of WMDs in mass murder
>and war crimes.
>I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
The Taliban was Bush Sr.'s corporate partner, working out the lease for
the land the pipeline was to be laid along -- until the Taliban changed
their mind. What a coincidence that Bush Jr. started bombing along the
proposed pileline route first.
It wouldn't surprise me if Dubya knew a terrorist attack was going to
be staged and ordered a stand down of domestic assets to allow these
Islamic kooks free access. Nazi Germany created "crisis" in order to
justify their fascism.
m4r...@xs4a11.nl
>> > Well, yeah there is that.. I just don't think that oil is all that bad a
>> > reason for us to do anything to other countries.
>>
>> So once again it's: the US must get what it wants, if not voluntary,
>> then by force. No wonder you're the most hated country in the world.
>
> We have issues don't we? Where are you from american hater? I take it from
> your little rant that no matter what we do and for what reason, you'll turn
> it into anti-american rehetoric.
And let me add to my previous comment: anybody who disagrees with the
US or any part of US foreign policy, is by definition anti-American, an
American-hater, and quite possibly a terrorist.
> I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and try and state my position
> clearly.
>
> The United States uses oil for thousands of reasons. Plastics, chemicals,
> gas, among others and as such is a vital resource for us as a nation. If
> someone else tries to deprive us of those resources, then we have a
> justifiable need to stop that someone. If it's a country, then we have
> channels from diplomacy to aid to miltary force to state our case to them.
So I was right: if the US can't get what they want, they'll use force.
Consider this: there are other places you can get oil besides Iraq.
There are other countries that have oil, and Alaska has quite a bit
too. Thing is: you want it as cheap as you can get it (those SUVs guzzle
quite a bit, don't they?), and at some point, taking it by force (even at
the expense of many lives) becomes cheaper than getting it elsewhere.
Already gas in the US is much cheaper than in the rest of the world.
Do you think George W. would get reelected if because of his (in)action
American citizens would have to pay as much for gas as the rest of the
world? I don't think so. His accountants have probably factored all this
in already. It's just a matter of time now. When will Dubya need another
war to distract US citizens from the state of the economy? When's the
next election? Going to war with Iraq has little to do with Saddam
Hussein (except perhaps that George W. wants to make his daddy proud
and finish what he started), nor with any weapons of mass destruction
that Iraq might have. It's about money and politics.
> If it's a terrorist then we use force.
>
> So take your ignoran ass elsewhere.. we are the best country on the face of
> the planet. Even if there are inbred assholes like yourself out there who
> tear other people down to make themselves feel better.
>
> Clear?
Yes, you've made it abundantly clear that you're a redneck American with
little knowledge of the world outside of his SUV, unwilling to even
consider the remote possibility that it's morally wrong for a single
country to impose its will on the rest of the world. For better or
worse (and mostly for worse, these days), that's what the US are doing,
and the world is a less pleasant place because of it. Fortunately most
Americans I've spoken to realize this, which gives me some hope at least.
Capt. Fredric L. Rice
>"Dirk Bruere" <di...@neopax.com> wrote in message
>> I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
>Try invading Kuait BOZO.
Wrong war, you stupid fuck.
Mortimir
If "all other nations of the world get serious about finishing [terrorists]
off", then the US is going to *have* to change significantly, along with
quite a few other countries. They will all have to stop giving reasons that
make it so easy for terrorists to recruit!
Terrorism is a horrible thing, but that is also true when it is US terrorism
against other countries in the world. When you look at the US' role in the
world, things like 9-11 just do not seem all that surprising. That is not
to say they're justified; it is still a terrible, terrible thing -- I cannot
stress that enough. It is analogous to a bully who picks on people in his
school and one day gets beaten horribly by a group, knifed, or shot. The
analogy does fall apart, though, when you consider that the majority of the
victims of terrorism are not ill-intentioned people (like the bully in the
example is) and are therefore in some very significant sense innocent.
Mortimir
P.S. - Have you asked yourself *why* terrorists hate America and its
'allies'? You seem to just assume that they have no valid reason; yet
thousands of them exists, and many more are sympathetic with them.
Mortimir
I repeat -- now for your benefit: You are offensively ignorant and a shame
to yourself and your country.
Beyond that, what is this of a "Lesser God"? I hope you're not referring to
the God of Islam, because that is the same God as the God of the varieties
of Christian religious belief and Jewish religious belief: God, Elohim,
Yahweh, Allah, etc. They are all the same 'person', the same God. I'm no
religious scholar, mind you, but I think you'll find that to be accurate,
unless memory fails.
Mortimir
hanson
news:SEhG9.3$zH...@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net...[Mortimir]
> Look at the facts, Mr. Stepp. It is quite clear that the US acts in the
> interests of power, namely massive corporate power.
> likely become highly critical, and the empire would fall. Certainly a
> massive nuclear campaign would not sit will with many citizens,
thankfully!
>
[hanson]
I can understand your bashing of the US, left and right.
It's of course your reaction, your fear, to the hammer that is going
to come down. ------ Can't blame you.
However, after all the praise from you bashers about the moral
superiority of your own countries, cultures and religions, you must
first prove to me by showing me how many of our American citizens
do emigrate to your paradise of moral superiority.
Seem to me that so many good citizens FROM YOUR homelands come
TO OUR shores, in such vast numbers, that we do consider sealing
our borders.
Ever thought about why there is this one-way migration into the US?
hanson
Jeff Relf
are also inclined to resort to ad hominem
fallacies? I wonder: Is anyone else surprised? >>
-- Mortimir
I've already has the Dis-pleasure of meeting Mr. Stepp.
He only knows how to _Ridicule.
I guess it makes him feel better about himself.
<< Think for yourself; question authority; question the legitimacy of
institutions of power. If anything, *that* is what America is all about...
It certainly isn't about (or *shouldn't* be about) rallying around the flag,
beating the drums of war, and screwing over everything and anything that
gets in the way of US interests. >>
Hurrah! Great post.
You're like water in a desert, Keep up the good work.
----
Q. Why must the U.S. attack the friendly, Western educated,
nuclear-free Saddam Hussein, While the U.S. is afraid to even talk bad of
the hostile, Eastern educated, nuclear armed Kim Il Sung?
Would the U.S. ask the Israeli President Moshe Katsav to disarm?
A. We want the Iraqi oil, but
North Korea is under the Chinese umbrella.
- Jeff Relf -
P.S. Everyone cares about oil,
No one cares if they are a Pinocchio or not.
Jeff Relf
subject Africans and African-Americans to slave labor because America found
it convenient to have such cheap labor that was forced to do precisely as it
was told without concern for what these slaves wanted?>>
-- Mortimir
Your mind is like a laser guided missile, Mortimir.
I love the analogy.
The U.S.:
"[ Slave ] Masters of the World."
Perfect.
- Jeff Relf -
Mortimir
"Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
<snip>
>
> << Think for yourself; question authority; question the legitimacy of
> institutions of power. If anything, *that* is what America is all
about...
> It certainly isn't about (or *shouldn't* be about) rallying around the
flag,
> beating the drums of war, and screwing over everything and anything that
> gets in the way of US interests. >>
>
> Hurrah! Great post.
> You're like water in a desert, Keep up the good work.
>
Thanks for the kind, reassuring words!...=)
Mortimir
Jeff Relf
they've just stopped helping you.
You've lost their respect. >>
Maleki,
Is there any difference between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia?
Haven't the Saudi's desecrated Mecca?
- Jeff Relf -
Mortimir
> "Mortimir" <unk...@unknown.com> wrote in message
> news:SEhG9.3$zH...@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > "Ronald Stepp" <rstepp.d...@sw.rr.com> wrote in message
> >
> [Mortimir]
> > Look at the facts, Mr. Stepp. It is quite clear that the US acts in the
> > interests of power, namely massive corporate power.
> > The US government has to worry about pacifying its people.
> > If the government started obviously immoral wars, the people would
> > likely become highly critical, and the empire would fall. Certainly a
> > massive nuclear campaign would not sit will with many citizens,
> thankfully!
> > Mortimir
> >
> [hanson]
> I can understand your bashing of the US, left and right.
> It's of course your reaction, your fear, to the hammer that is going
> to come down. ------ Can't blame you.
Apparently you do not understand it at all. There is ample criticism of the
US coming directly from the US itself! What fear should US citizens have of
the "hammer that is going to come down"?
There is also the fact that positing a motive for criticism of the US
provides you with a rather convenient escape from addressing the actual
criticisms themselves, evaluating them for accuracy, etc. So what if I'm
writing what I write as a scared foreign individual or if I'm writing it as
a prominent US CEO or public official? Does that really alter the
significance of my criticisms and arguments?
>
> However, after all the praise from you bashers about the moral
> superiority of your own countries, cultures and religions, you must
> first prove to me by showing me how many of our American citizens
> do emigrate to your paradise of moral superiority.
>
I think that few people argue that their countries have some sort of
"paradise of moral superiority". The problem people have is with the way
America aggravates things, supports corruption, and generally makes life
much worse than it has to be for much of the world's population. Add in the
fact that America attempts to hide all of those facts behind a hypocritical
advocation of democracy, humanitarianism, individual rights, etc., and you
truly end up with a clearer understanding about the real motivation behind
these "bashers".
Consider this fact: US foreign aid is ***DIRECTLY*** proportional to human
rights violations around the world.
> Seem to me that so many good citizens FROM YOUR homelands come
> TO OUR shores, in such vast numbers, that we do consider sealing
> our borders.
>
> Ever thought about why there is this one-way migration into the US?
I guess many consider it better to be pacified, brainwashed, and manipulated
yet still have a better than average quality of life (in comparison to the
world average) than to accept the alternative of remaining within easy reach
of US power.
But in truth, that is an overstatement. Other countries are not perfect;
they serve power just as the US does. The difference is that the US is the
king of all of these corrupt countries that cause so much unnecessary
suffering for the vast majority of the world's populations.
Mortimir
P.S. - You may be surprised to know that I am an American. I was born and
raised in America. I venture that the major difference between us with
regard to this current conversation is that I choose to take an objective,
critical look at world affairs and you seem content to accept what you see
on CNN, MSNBC, ABCNews, etc. I encourage you to seriously study these
issues from multiple perspectives. Look at the facts, look at moral
philosophy, and just think for yourself. After you do that, tell me what
you think about world affairs... Until then, bear in mind that if I should
be living in fear of the "hammer that is going to come down", then you
should also fear that same hammer...
Jeff Relf
a shame to [ himself and his ] country. >>
-- Mortimir
I know squirrels that smarter than Uncle Al.
His posts are the text equivalent of farts.
- Jeff Relf -
hanson
news:pskkuugsifmoohs32...@4ax.com...> > you Islamic cunt
>
> you "whore"
>
Look at the love fest between these two seventy year
old, highly educated gentlemen here. Wonderful.
So touching to see how they finally hug each other.
hahahahahah.....hahahaah....hahahanson
Michael L. Coburn
> "Mortimir" <unk...@unknown.com> wrote in message
> news:SEhG9.3$zH...@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> "Ronald Stepp" <rstepp.d...@sw.rr.com> wrote in message
>>
> [Mortimir]
>> Look at the facts, Mr. Stepp. It is quite clear that the US acts in the
>> interests of power, namely massive corporate power.
>> The US government has to worry about pacifying its people.
>> If the government started obviously immoral wars, the people would
>> likely become highly critical, and the empire would fall. Certainly a
>> massive nuclear campaign would not sit will with many citizens,
> thankfully!
>> Mortimir
>>
> [hanson]
> I can understand your bashing of the US, left and right.
> It's of course your reaction, your fear, to the hammer that is going
> to come down. ------ Can't blame you.
>
> However, after all the praise from you bashers about the moral
> superiority of your own countries, cultures and religions, you must
> first prove to me by showing me how many of our American citizens
> do emigrate to your paradise of moral superiority.
Among all the sick perversioins of the lunantic right this is probably
the most sickening and putrid. The usable natural reources per capita
in the United States of America is what has made this nation a very
favorable place to live. The constnt prancing of right wing lunatics
claiming some kind of moral or political superiority as the _cause_
of Ameican success is probably the biggest lie ever foisted on the
people of any nation. I sometimes wonder how much better off the
American people would be today if it were not for the Ray Gun
disinformation takeover of the United States in the 1980's.
http://GreaterVoice.org/econ/Money_For_Nothing.php
> Seem to me that so many good citizens FROM YOUR homelands come
> TO OUR shores, in such vast numbers, that we do consider sealing
> our borders.
>
> Ever thought about why there is this one-way migration into the US?
> hanson
This contry _STILL_ has a better resource to population ratio and they
will _try_ to come until that is not the case. Your prancing and
posturing are noted and hereby rejected as lying crap.
--
Mike Coburn
"It's the tax system, stupid. No, it's the ludicrous
banking system. Well, actually, its both. With proper
consideration we find these injustices are made
possible by the lack of representation of The People
in their government". -- http://GreaterVoice.org
kenneth couesbouc
> Mortimir wrote:
> >
> > You are offensively ignorant and a shame to yourself and your country.
>
> No he isn't. Al is an iconoclast who does not truckle with political
> correctness nor succomb to the blandishments of Diversity. Some people
> are smarter than others, and if the less smart want to benefit from the
> natural inequality of man, they had best let the smart do their thing.
> We will live rather nicely from the the crumbs of the table that the
> smart and energetic layout for themselves.
>
> cannot tame the children of a Lesser God we will have to kill them.
>
> Bob Kolker
How reasuring it must be to feel one is smarter. But I'm surprised
that intelligent thought leads to murder in the name of a Superior
God. I have long imagined that reason tried to get to the causes and
mass extermination seems a rather primitive way of trying to resolve
the present crisis. Any way limited oil reserves and recession can't
be blamed on western oriental gentlemen. And only the future will
tell if or not they bring about the end of the New Empire. Empires
mostly bring about their own end. Kenneth
Steve Harris
> Aye, when Saddam committed his worst atrocities he was a US puppet, and
the
> US showed no concern.
>
> Mortimir
COMMENT:
The US showed plenty of concern. They failed to DO anything in 1988, due to
internal political discent, with the senate and administration disagreeing.
As I said, I take issue with what were Saddam's worst attrocities. His worst
attrocity, and the thing that really proved he was a danger to world peace,
was attacking a smaller, helpless country that hadn't done anything to
provoke the attack. That's what finally proved he was dangerous to the
world. And that's when the world acted against him.
It wasn't about oil, since plenty of oil rich countries like Canada and
Saudi Arabia joined the United Nations in Desert Storm. Basically, this was
a world police action against a clear agressor. What had the Iraqi people
done to the US, you ask? Supported a dictator who is taking over smaller
countries. If you have a neighbor who burglarizes his neighbors, you have to
do something about it, even if your house has so far been left alone. If the
bad guy baracades himself in with his family, you can't just quit and go
home-- alas you still have to so something about the sitution, and the guy.
In this case, civilains can get hurt. But in hostage situations, which is
what you always have with dictators, there's no help for it.
Or perhaps you can call UN actions like Desert Storm a medical action
against a world cancer. WW II taught the world a lot of things, and one of
them is that the Body of the World can't just ignore a country which has
turned malignant, and is spreading across the borders of its neighbors
(think of Imperial Japan here, so I don't have to invoke Godwin's Law).
Treatment is called for, and that's usually surgical (what we did to
Saddam). That does some harm, but there's no help for it. In the worst cases
treatment for a malignant country can be chemotherapy (what we threatened
Saddam with), or it can even be radiation therapy (see Japan). What the
world cannot do with a clearly malignant country, is leave it alone.
SBH
--
I welcome Email from strangers with the minimal cleverness to fix my address
(it's an open-book test). I strongly recommend recipients of unsolicited
bulk Email ad spam use "http://combat.uxn.com" to get the true corporate
name of the last ISP address on the viewsource header, then forward message
& headers to "abuse@[offendingISP]."
Steve Harris
> Like they say: "Ignorance is bliss!" I suppose it is often so with
> misinformation (a nice way of saying 'manipulative lies') as well. It is
a
> shame that there aren't more independent news agencies. I mean there are
> quite a few, but it would be nice if they were more accessible, more
> mainstream. People need opposing viewpoints in this time more than any
> other perhaps.
>
> Mortimir
The UN security council voted sanctions against Saddam, 15 to zero.
One supposes from your remarks that they don't have any independent news
organizations in any of those 15 counties?
Steve Harris
news:mjones-0112...@66-105-229-3-aus-02.cvx.algx.net...
> Killfile inmates: Charles Cagle, Stephen Speicher, Mati Meron, Franz
> Heymann, Mike Varney, Dirk Van de moortel.
Congrats, Michael. I don't know your writing, but I do know the writing of
the people above. And you're the first person ever to make my own killfile
on nothing but the basis of the contents of YOUR killfile.
Steve Harris
> > > I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
> >
> us...
> >
> >
>
> He couldn't defeat Iran with the help of the US, UK, big oil, and a few
> others (basically the largest powers in the world), yet he is a threat to
> the US? Yeah right; give us a break!
He did basically beat Iran, from 1984 on, and using chemical weapons and US
aid to go it. He just didn't INVADE Iran.
He did invade Kuwait. That made him a threat to everyone.
> Besides, what did the Iraqi *people* do to America? They're the ones who
> usually suffer the most from US intervention in anything having to do with
> their lives. For example, they're the ones dying every day, senselessly,
as
> a direct result of US sanctions.
U.N. sanctions. Sanctions voted for lots of countries who don't need oil,
and who don't love the US. Thus your argument has big flaws.
Steve Harris
news:3de93993$0$11740$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
> So once again it's: the US must get what it wants, if not voluntary,
> then by force. No wonder you're the most hated country in the world.
I don't let this worry me, since hatred of the most powerful country will be
automatic, no matter what they do. Sure, the US throws its weight around
some (not nearly as much as it could). But if we didn't at all, we'd still
be hated almost as much.
SBH
Robert Kolker
kenneth couesbouc wrote:
> be blamed on western oriental gentlemen. And only the future will
> tell if or not they bring about the end of the New Empire. Empires
> mostly bring about their own end. Kenneth
There is no American Empire. If there were, we would not be having the
problems that we do. On the other hand we would not need an empire if
we were more willing to mow down and eliminate impediments to our
happiness and prosperity.
If we had any courage in our leadership, Meccah and Medina would be
nuclear slag heaps and the Qaba a memory. We could say to the Moslems
where was your God when we nuked His holy place? But alas, America has
been on the Good Guy track in which we actually show kindness and
patience with our adversarsies.
If the Jihadists unleash an attack on American soil with a weapon of
mass destruction or if they shoot down an airplane full of civilians you
will see an amazing transformation take place. America, finally and at
long last will be -royally pissed off-. That last time that happened was
when the Japs blindsided us at Pearl Harbor. Which lead directly
(although it took 4 years) to the nuking of two of their major cities
off the face of the earth. It happened to the Japs and it will happen to
the Moslems as well. Let the ragheads and camel jockeys of the world
beware. America, in a rage and a royal snit, is not to be trifled with.
Bob Kolker
Robert Kolker
Capt. Fredric L. Rice wrote:
> And of course that's exactly what the Islamic crazies are saying about
> the Christian crazies. Funny that they're both right. It's a shame
> that the religious just can't exterminate each other and leave their
> intellectual and moral superiors out of their religious wars.
Very good. Now let us prove they are right in nuclear spades. The
bastards want to go to Wog heaven and collect their 72 dark eyed houris.
By all means, let us grant their fondest wish.
Bob Kolker
Robert Kolker
Capt. Fredric L. Rice wrote:
> It wouldn't surprise me if Dubya knew a terrorist attack was going to
> be staged and ordered a stand down of domestic assets to allow these
> Islamic kooks free access. Nazi Germany created "crisis" in order to
> justify their fascism.
You are strongly implying the WTC-Pentagon disaster was our Reichstag
fire? If so, we have not capitalized on it. What suprises you has little
or nothing to do with reality.
>
> --
> George W. Bush threatens to kill us all -- for oil
That is o.k. If necessary we can vote him and his friends out of office.
That is one of the fellicities of democracy.
Bob Kolker
Mortimir
"Jeff Relf" <Jeff...@HowAmazing.COM> wrote in message
> << Was it also right for an earlier America to
> subject Africans and African-Americans to slave labor because America
found
> it convenient to have such cheap labor that was forced to do precisely as
it
> was told without concern for what these slaves wanted?>>
> -- Mortimir
>
> Your mind is like a laser guided missile, Mortimir.
> I love the analogy.
Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed it...=)
Mortimir
Mortimir
And here, we have an especially obvious example of the fallacy of reasoning
known as "appeal to force". Notice that beyond said fallacy there is little
to no content whatsoever...
Mr. Kolker, you are unfortunately very ignorant of the motivations people in
the world have to hate America. Becoming sensitive to those is the only way
to stop their hatred. What you propose will only lead to the extermination
of mankind or our being bombed back to the Stone Age, because there will
always be resistance to the sort of fascism you advocate, externally and
internally. This is especially true in our times as we are all
indoctrinated to believe that we have individual rights, that democracy is
the best form of government, etc. (I say 'indoctrinated' not to suggest that
they are untrue beliefs but that they usually exist in the citizens' minds
unargued). This is precisely why America's recent fascism (and I don't mean
just since Bush took office -- either one of them) has to be concealed,
because, waved about as openly as you suggest, it would likely bring about a
great deal of discontent and ultimately cause major problems for the fascist
desires of the powers that lead and control the US.
Mortimir
Mortimir
"Steve Harris" <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message
news:ase80m$26o$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
> "Mortimir" <unk...@unknown.com> wrote in message news:1vhG9.1
> > > > I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
> > >
> > > He stopped being a threat to our enemies and started being a threat to
> > us...
> > >
> > >
> >
> > He couldn't defeat Iran with the help of the US, UK, big oil, and a few
> > others (basically the largest powers in the world), yet he is a threat
to
> > the US? Yeah right; give us a break!
>
> He did basically beat Iran, from 1984 on, and using chemical weapons and
US
> aid to go it. He just didn't INVADE Iran.
>
Here, I'm afraid, history doesn't agree with you, at least not as you seem
to construe your argument.
> He did invade Kuwait. That made him a threat to everyone.
>
Or so we're told, right? There is some evidence, as I understand it, that
suggests that his invasion of Kuwait may have been the result of mistaken
orders from the US.
But, anyway, Saddam is not a threat to much of anyone outside of his area of
influence, which is thankfully VERY small. Israel is much more of a threat
to world peace, with its nuclear weapons and generally aggressive attitude,
not to mention it fairly obvious racism. Then there was the recent issue
with North Korea who openly admits to having a nuclear weapons program.
Where was the aggressive US response then?!
Your understanding of the world just doesn't hold water. Please take the
time to study some serious, formal dissent on these issues, preferable from
as many sources as you can muster.
>
> > Besides, what did the Iraqi *people* do to America? They're the ones
who
> > usually suffer the most from US intervention in anything having to do
with
> > their lives. For example, they're the ones dying every day,
senselessly,
> as
> > a direct result of US sanctions.
>
>
> U.N. sanctions. Sanctions voted for lots of countries who don't need oil,
> and who don't love the US. Thus your argument has big flaws.
>
The UN isn't quite the savior it is made out to be. The US has successfully
bullied them since the UN's inception, as a matter of fact. The sanctions
are essentially of the US with strong UK backing. That is just a simple,
obvious fact.
I don't really understand the above sentence of yours that says: "Sanctions
voted for lots of countries who don't need oil, and who don't love the US".
Perhaps you can clarify it so that I can respond.
Finally, I don't claim to have a *perfect* understanding about how the world
works. That is why I encourage people to study multiple sources, etc. But
I do think I have a very accurate grasp on the general theme, and I think
with very little effort in study, most people will see the same general
framework that has become quite obvious to me. If you'll take the time to
evaluate all available sources as objectively as possible, I think you'll
likely realize that your traditional understanding is nothing more than
convenient subterfuge, wishful thinking, and propaganda issued forth by
corrupt, elite organizations of power that represent roughly 1% of the
world's population at best.
I apologize for not having the time to compose a more thorough response.
Mortimir
me...@cars3.uchicago.edu
>
>"Steve Harris" <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message
>news:ase80m$26o$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
>> "Mortimir" <unk...@unknown.com> wrote in message news:1vhG9.1
>> > > > I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
>> > >
>
>> He did invade Kuwait. That made him a threat to everyone.
>>
>Or so we're told, right?
So we're told? You think he didn't invade Kuwait.
> There is some evidence, as I understand it, that
>suggests that his invasion of Kuwait may have been the result of mistaken
>orders from the US.
>
The deranged conspiracy theorist is always capable of construing
"evidence" out of thin air. This has nothing to do with real evidence
and his thought processess have nothing to do with "understanding".
You fail even at being entertaining. Go infest some other newsgroup.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
me...@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
James Hunter
"Mitchell Jones" <mjo...@jump.net> wrote in message
news:mjones-0112...@66-105-229-3-aus-02.cvx.algx.net...
> <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
>
> >>
> ***{Unfortunately, it is democratically elected politicians who view
> public office as theater, not as deadly serious business, who will decide
> the fate of this civilization. And what they will do is play games in the
> spotlight, aiming to impress an audience of mental defectives ("the
> public"), while our Muslim enemies attempt to smuggle a weapon of mass
> destruction into a location from which they can take this global
> civilization down. Time is all the enemy needs, and our duly elected
> much a foregone conclusion. --MJ}***
If public office wasn't theater they would actually pay,
rather than tax, the National Academy of Sciences
for their idiot theories of energy.
>
> ===============================================
Michael L. Coburn
> <m4r...@xs4a11.nl> wrote in message
> news:3de93993$0$11740$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
>
>> So once again it's: the US must get what it wants, if not voluntary,
>> then by force. No wonder you're the most hated country in the world.
>
>
> I don't let this worry me, since hatred of the most powerful country will
> be automatic, no matter what they do. Sure, the US throws its weight
> around some (not nearly as much as it could). But if we didn't at all,
> we'd still be hated almost as much.
>
The "envy pony" on steroids!
Good Grief.....
Steve Harris
> > He did basically beat Iran, from 1984 on, and using chemical weapons and
> US
> > aid to go it. He just didn't INVADE Iran.
>
>
> Here, I'm afraid, history doesn't agree with you, at least not as you seem
> to construe your argument.
I'm afraid you need to see some histories of the Iran-Iraq war (google "iran
iraq war history") to see whether it agrees with me. Iran ended that war on
unfavorable terms after Iraq had made deep incursions into Iran, which was
running with no airforce due to lack of US spare parts, had captured 3/4 of
Iran's armor, and half its artillery and APCs. And was threatening to shell
Teheran with chemical weapons, causing a third of that city to flee for the
hills. That sounds to me like Iraq was winning. You get some details and get
back to me if you're going to disagree.
> > He did invade Kuwait. That made him a threat to everyone.
>
> Or so we're told, right? There is some evidence, as I understand it, that
> suggests that his invasion of Kuwait may have been the result of mistaken
> orders from the US.
You're out of your mind. This is too silly even to reply to.
> But, anyway, Saddam is not a threat to much of anyone outside of his area
of
> influence, which is thankfully VERY small.
It includes the entire Arabian peninsula, and that's too big. Sorry.
> Israel is much more of a threat
> to world peace, with its nuclear weapons and generally aggressive
attitude,
> not to mention it fairly obvious racism.
It isn't Israel which is blowing up people with anti-civilian bombing
attacks in Kenya, Southeast Asia, Washington DC and New York City. That's
other guys.
> Then there was the recent issue
> with North Korea who openly admits to having a nuclear weapons program.
> Where was the aggressive US response then?!
Nowhere, since North Korea wasn't taking over surrouding countries. Once
upon a time when it did do this (during the Korean war) there was a US
response. Indeed, a UN response.
> Your understanding of the world just doesn't hold water. Please take the
> time to study some serious, formal dissent on these issues, preferable
from
> as many sources as you can muster.
Thanks, but that's my line. By constrast, you seem to have read only
Chomsky. Anybody who seriously thinks that Iraq invaded Kuwait because it
thought the US told it to, really needs his mental screws adjusted.
> The UN isn't quite the savior it is made out to be. The US has
successfully
> bullied them since the UN's inception, as a matter of fact. The sanctions
> are essentially of the US with strong UK backing. That is just a simple,
> obvious fact.
Nothing obvious about it. It's true that France and Russia have wanted to
lift the sanctions, but it's just as true that both voted with the US in the
recent security council resolution to disarm Iraq of WMD. As also did China,
Bulgaria, Camaroon, Guniea, Mexico, Syria(!), Colombia, Ireland, Mauriturus,
Norway and Singapore. In particular, China, France, Russia, Bulgaria,
Syria, and Norway don't exactly strike me as a list of countries which do
anything the US wants.
> I don't really understand the above sentence of yours that says:
"Sanctions
> voted for lots of countries who don't need oil, and who don't love the
US".
> Perhaps you can clarify it so that I can respond.
See above. Syria. Canada fought in the gulf war along with the US, and they
don't need mid-east oil.
> Finally, I don't claim to have a *perfect* understanding about how the
world
> works. That is why I encourage people to study multiple sources, etc.
But
> I do think I have a very accurate grasp on the general theme, and I think
> with very little effort in study, most people will see the same general
> framework that has become quite obvious to me. If you'll take the time to
> evaluate all available sources as objectively as possible, I think you'll
> likely realize that your traditional understanding is nothing more than
> convenient subterfuge, wishful thinking, and propaganda issued forth by
> corrupt, elite organizations of power that represent roughly 1% of the
> world's population at best.
Again, that's just Chomsky-ism. You go on about Iraq was attacking the Iran
and the world with US weapons in the 80's. Not exactly true. They had some
U.S. weapons-platforms like helicopters, and also a lot of previously US
stuff provided by arms dealers (cluster bombs made in South America with US
machines). But everybody was in on that act. For example, Iraq's weapons in
the gulf tanker war in the mid 80's, which nailed many Iraq tankers and even
one US ship, were Exocet anti-ship missles fired by Super-Etendard jets.
IOW, a very high tech French weapon fired by a very high tech French
aircraft. And yet (here's the Chomsky) we don't see you going on here about
how the *French* are source of all the world's evil. Had it been a US jet
and missile it would be different, eh?
SBH
Mortimir
<me...@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:6uyG9.10$Q4....@news.uchicago.edu...
> In article <tgyG9.939$zH1...@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Mortimir" <unk...@unknown.com> writes:
> >
> >"Steve Harris" <sbha...@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message
> >news:ase80m$26o$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
> >> "Mortimir" <unk...@unknown.com> wrote in message news:1vhG9.1
> >> > > > I wonder what Saddam did wrong to make the US change its mind?
> >> > >
> ...
> >
> >> He did invade Kuwait. That made him a threat to everyone.
> >>
> >Or so we're told, right?
>
> So we're told? You think he didn't invade Kuwait.
No. He isn't a threat to the US.
...
But Elvis *is* still alive! I'm kidding of course...=P
>
> > There is some evidence, as I understand it, that
> >suggests that his invasion of Kuwait may have been the result of mistaken
> >orders from the US.
> >
> The deranged conspiracy theorist is always capable of construing
> "evidence" out of thin air. This has nothing to do with real evidence
> and his thought processess have nothing to do with "understanding".
No, actually, the evidence does support an inductive argument with a
conclusion to the effect that I expressed above. The problem is that the
induction in this particular case isn't terribly solid. I don't put *that*
much stock in the theory, myself, but it would not surprise me at all. My
point was that there is a whole lot more to the story than "he invaded
Kuwait and we thought it was going to be Hitler all over again!" 'We'
didn't think that (meaning the US powers-that-be), and 'we' still do not
think that. It is nothing more than a useful bit of propaganda.
More than worrying about Saddam's aggression, the US was/is clearly much
more interested in maintaining the desired structure with the world's oil
and all that that entails.
>
> You fail even at being entertaining. Go infest some other newsgroup.
>
And you fail at contributing in a worthwhile manner to the discussion, but
I'll try to continue reading your posts with an open mind.
Also, if you do not wish to read my posts, there is a 'killfile' feature
built into your newsreader, I'm sure. You can filter my posts out if you
like. I would encourage you not to do that, even if you disagree with me,
because I feel that my contributions to the groups to which I post are
worthwhile. However, if you feel otherwise, use the 'killfile'...
Mortimir