From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Sat Sep 24 2005 - 19:00:55 BST
>> [Case]
>> Beyond the rich fantasy life of the Bush administration there is nothing
>> to
>> suggest that Iraq was a threat to us.
>[Platt]
> Every Western country said Saddam had WMD. Hardly a fantasy of the Bush
> administration.
[Case]
I long ago realized that incompetance was responsible for more evil in the
world than malicious intent. The Bush administration has certainly given me
no reason to change that view.
[Case]
>> The terrorism going on now in Iraq is
>> the result of our actions, so in that sense you would have to say that
>> instead of reducing the threat of terrorism we have actually increased
>> it.
>[Platt]
> I know. Like your hero Chomsky, you blame terrorism on the U.S. We deserve
> to get killed.
[Case]
Once again you fail to address the issue of our having increased not
decreased the incidence of terrorism. But if you look honestly at the
history of our country you will find much to be ashamed of. Trying to wash
away our sins with statements about how wonderful it is not to be living in
a tent and having cheap gas really don't cut it for some of us. I actually
can't recall anyone saying that anyone deserves to be terrorized by us our
anyone else for that matter.
>> [Case]
>> Are you really saying we should kill everyone we suspect of threatening
>> us?
>
> Would you not want to prevent someone from killing you?
[Case]
So you DO support killing everyone who MIGHT be threatening?
>> [Case]
>> That was never stated as a reason for our invasion until it was clearly
>> shown that the reason we had been given were wrong.
>
> So are you against liberating them from a brutal dictatorship?
[Case]
I support having a govenment honest enough to give me the real reason we are
doing things. But what part of the answer offered below to the same question
did you have trouble with?
>> If we want to make
>> liberating people from dictatorships a cornerstone of our foreign policy,
>> it might get some support but we are going to have a lot more countries
>> to
>> invade than just this one. I notice that we really only care about
>> freedom
>> unless there is oil involved. Once again the reduction of all value to
>> economic value.
>
> Of course our interests are partially economic, or would you rather live
> in a tent huddling around a campfire to keep warm?
[Case]
So you are also in favor of killing others as long as it furthers our
economic interest ? As for the need to huddle around a campfire, the only
reason we are in this situation is that for at least 30 years we have
ignored the fact that we were dependant on a resource that isn't our. We
have done nothing to reduce our dependence. It is this willful neglect that
that puts us in dire straits today. Who do you think is responsible for
this?
I also notice you contine to to dodge the issue of value. I find this odd.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 24 2005 - 19:30:26 BST