Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
General TopicsAncient HistoryMedieval PeriodBritish HistoryWhat IfArchaeology
War History
War HistoryWorld War IIUS Civil War
HistoryKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

History Forum / General / British History / December 2003



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Preemptive War Against Saddam ---- Dogged, But A Good Thing

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
D. Spencer Hines - 26 Dec 2003 07:24 GMT
"The Doggedness of War"

By Charles Krauthammer

Friday, December 26, 2003
The Washington Post

"Yeah, sure.  After 18 years of American sanctions, Moammar Gaddafi
randomly picks Dec. 19, 2003, as the day for his surrender.  By amazing
coincidence, Gaddafi's first message to Britain -- principal U.S. war
ally and conduit to White House war councils -- occurs just days before
the invasion of Iraq.  And his final capitulation to U.S.-British terms
occurs just five days after Saddam Hussein is fished out of a rathole.

Capital! ---- DSH

As Jay Leno would say, what are the odds?  The nine months of
negotiations with Libya perfectly frame the war on Iraq and the fall of
Saddam Hussein.  How is it possible to ignore the most blindingly
obvious collateral benefits?

It is not possible for an intelligent, knowledgeable person to ignore
the most blindingly obvious collateral benefits ---- DSH

Imagine this kind of thinking 58 years ago: "Japan Surrenders -- Years
of War Deprivation Proved Too Much."

Dateline Tokyo, Aug. 14, 1945.  Japan capitulated yesterday to the
allies, worn down by the accumulation of hardships from the war begun
with the sudden outbreak of violence in Hawaii in December 1941.  The
housing shortage in Tokyo had become particularly acute, especially
since the nights of March 9 and 10. And there also has appeared to be an
abrupt downturn in recent economic activity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Sen. John Kerry was equally ridiculous in his explanation of the Libya
deal: "An administration that scorns multilateralism and boasts about a
rigid doctrine of military preemption has almost in spite of itself
demonstrated the enormous potential for improving our national security
through diplomacy."

Hilarious Magnus Cum Laude! ---- DSH

Unlike Howard Dean, Kerry is not a foreign policy ignoramus.  Does he
really believe that the Libyan surrender is a triumph of
multilateralism?  Does he really think that Libya's capitulation --
coinciding precisely with a preemptive war that destroyed Saddam
Hussein -- is a contradiction of the "rigid doctrine of military
preemption"?

No, he's temporizing, fabricating and fibbing ---- hoping to attract the
lunatic-left Democrats to his banner ---- seducing them away from Howard
Dean. ---- DSH

What kind of naif thinks that this is a triumph for "diplomacy," as if,
say, Bill Clinton had sent Warren Christopher to Tripoli, and he chatted
Gaddafi into surrendering his WMDs?

Kerry = A Desperate Pogue ---- Who Has Wanted To Be President All His
Life.  ---- DSH

The Democrats seem congenitally incapable of understanding that force
has not just the effect of disarming the immediate enemy but a deterrent
effect on others similarly situated. Iraq was not attacked randomly.  It
was attacked as part of a clearly enunciated policy -- now known as the
Bush Doctrine -- of targeting, by preemptive war if necessary, hostile
regimes engaged in terror and/or refusing to come clean on WMDs.

Precisely!  The BUSH DOCTRINE ---- Producing Results.... ---- DSH

Yes, the Democrats of 2003 just don't understand either the productive
use of force or coercive diplomacy ---- in a dangerous world.  This
makes them totally unsuited and disqualified for managing the National
Security Policies of the United States and defending the American People
from all enemies foreign and domestic ---- which is the PRINCIPAL duty
of ANY government ---- and is indeed called out in the Constitution of
the United States. ---- DSH

Mullah Omar did not get the message and is now hiding in a cave
somewhere.  Saddam Hussein did not get the message and ended up in a
hole.  Gaddafi got the message. ---- CK

RIGHT!!! ---- DSH

Diplomacy is fine.  But we are dealing not with Canada but with gangster
regimes.  In rogue states, the only diplomacy that ever works is
diplomacy at the point of a bayonet.  Why, even the hapless Hans Blix
went out on a limb to speculate that "I would imagine that Gaddafi could
have been scared by what he saw in Iraq."

"The hapless Hans Blix..." indeed.  Blix is totally clueless as to the
means required to deal with GANSTER REGIMES and FAILED STATES, of which
Iraq was one. ---- DSH

Ashton Carter, co-director of the Harvard-Stanford Preventive Defense
Project, agreed that "what we did in Iraq put countries like Libya on
notice that we're really serious about countering proliferation."  To be
sure, Carter prefaced this obvious truth with the Blixian phrase "one
certainly hopes that."  But that is to be expected from an adviser to
Howard Dean.

Indeed.  But Ashton Carter is simply employing the standard timid,
arse-covering, Harvard Fig Leaf in his statement ---- oft-noted in those
environs. ---- DSH

Do the Democrats really not see the larger picture, or do they pretend
not to because it is an election year? ---- CK

Both. ---- DSH

The domino effects of the Iraq campaign are already in clear view.  It
is no accident that Iran has agreed to surprise nuclear inspections.
Mind you, I do not hold much hope for this; it will take far more to
disarm the mullahs, possibly U.S. airstrikes during a second Bush
administration.  But for now, Bush's willfulness and determination in
Iraq have persuaded Iran to grab a European plan for inspections rather
than face the wrath of the United States. ---- CK

Bingo!  Yes, Virginia, there is a DOMINO EFFECT in International
Affairs---- DSH

Elsewhere in the Middle East, Hezbollah has been quiet since the war.
Syria has made its first peace overture in years. Libya has now
confessed and capitulated on WMDs.

And that's not counting Iraq, which with Saddam Hussein captured has
finally turned a historic corner and may be on its way to establishing
the first pluralistic, representative pro-Western Arab polity in the
region.

These are not triumphs of diplomacy.  These are the aftershocks of war."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Indeed ---- And Paul Wolfowitz and his fellow NEO-CONSERVATIVES deserve
a GREAT deal of the CREDIT.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

Exitus Acta Probat
Sheila J - 26 Dec 2003 17:50 GMT
> "The Doggedness of War"
>
[quoted text clipped - 138 lines]
>
> Exitus Acta Probat

I almost wish I was American so I could have this much fun with
politics...Could use a daily good laugh...

Cheers, DSH,
Sheila J
D. Spencer Hines - 26 Dec 2003 08:13 GMT
Hmmmmmm....

Are Canadian Politics so dull, flat and unappetizing!

And what's to LAUGH about, dear?

Politics, International Affairs, Preemptive War And Coercive Diplomacy
Are VERY Serious Business ---- Not Playthings For Amateurs And Children,
As We Saw Under Clinton....

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

| > "The Doggedness of War"
| >
[quoted text clipped - 144 lines]
| Cheers, DSH,
| Sheila J
Sheila J - 26 Dec 2003 18:32 GMT
> Hmmmmmm....
>
> Are Canadian Politics so dull, flat and unappetizing!

Yes, they are....

> And what's to LAUGH about, dear?

My Dear Mr. Hines...you, yourself, use the word 'Hilarious'...
I merely wanted to share in your good humour..

> Politics, International Affairs, Preemptive War And Coercive Diplomacy
> Are VERY Serious Business ---- Not Playthings For Amateurs And Children,
> As We Saw Under Clinton....

Clinton was in Winnipeg a few weeks ago...it was the first time in his
career, he ever spoke to a house that was  so many empty seats...

so I guess we don't like him either...
:D

Cheers,
Sheila

> DSH
>
[quoted text clipped - 196 lines]
> | Cheers, DSH,
> | Sheila J
D. Spencer Hines - 26 Dec 2003 08:58 GMT
Interesting....

Why do you think there were so many empty seats for Clinton in Winnipeg?

Closely Reasoned....

Cheers, Sheila

DSH

| > Hmmmmmm....
| >
[quoted text clipped - 220 lines]
| > | Cheers, DSH,
| > | Sheila J
Sheila J - 26 Dec 2003 20:21 GMT
> Interesting....
>
[quoted text clipped - 271 lines]
> | > | Cheers, DSH,
> | > | Sheila J

I think it was probably because it was Winnipeg, and not, let's
say...Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa or Vancouver...
But that's being an Eastern Canadian speaking....

I'm not sure actually.  It was quite expensive...I think 250. $ just to
start...they ended up lowering the price right before because SO many
seats had been unsold. I was actually hoping to go but my children had
an Xmas concert that night, and hearing an off-tone rendition of Silent
Night from my angels wins every time.... That said, I would have liked
to have heard him speak...if for no other reason then I have an interest
in the 'soft power vs hard power' theory that he was supposed to be
talking about..

Interesting gossip aside....They did charge, (I believe) 2500 to have
supper with him at the Dubrovnic ( a very nice restaurant here) and then
another 500 to have coffee and dessert with him.  That didn't even sell
out....And then, insult to the city organizers who did stoke his
proverbial fire, he was about 2 hours late....
So......I'm not sure if he will be invited back...

:D

Cheers,
Sheila
D. Spencer Hines - 26 Dec 2003 11:37 GMT
Yes, that all makes good sense.

My opinion of those Canadians who did NOT go to hear Clinton speak or to
rub shoulders with him has risen appreciably.

Those hefty charges are doubtless in large part to pay for his speaking
fee.

One can hear him speak quite frequently on CSPAN for free.

Why anyone would PAY to do so is a mystery to me.

What do folks in Canada think of Chretien's record in office these days?

Cheers,

DSH

| > Interesting....
| >
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
| >
| > DSH

| I think it was probably because it was Winnipeg, and not, let's
| say...Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa or Vancouver...
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
| Cheers,
| Sheila
Sheila J - 26 Dec 2003 21:46 GMT
> Yes, that all makes good sense.
>
[quoted text clipped - 54 lines]
> | Cheers,
> | Sheila

I'm a die-heart Liberal, so I liked Chretien....if nothing else, he
brought a bit of humour to Sussex drive..
He was probably the only PM we had who tried to strangle a protester....

But, like most things, I think people view him now as they view all
those who have just retired....

'What a swell guy'.....

I'm sure in another year it will be different.

That said, I'm not a big Paul Martin fan, but we have an interesting
opportunity coming up as our son Jens has just won this competition
where they are flying our whole family to Ottawa to meet the new PM.  He
wrote a postcard about what 'peace means to me' and he won.  So, we get
to go have din-din with Paul Martin so Jens can present his 'essay'.

I'll let you know what I think of him after I view his table manners...

Cheers,
Sheila
D. Spencer Hines - 26 Dec 2003 12:22 GMT
Fair Enough...

Cheers,

Spencer

| > Yes, that all makes good sense.
| >
[quoted text clipped - 76 lines]
| Cheers,
| Sheila
Paul J Gans - 27 Dec 2003 02:15 GMT
In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:

[snip]

>I'm a die-heart Liberal, so I liked Chretien....if nothing else, he
>brought a bit of humour to Sussex drive..
>He was probably the only PM we had who tried to strangle a protester....

>But, like most things, I think people view him now as they view all
>those who have just retired....

>'What a swell guy'.....

>I'm sure in another year it will be different.

>That said, I'm not a big Paul Martin fan, but we have an interesting
>opportunity coming up as our son Jens has just won this competition
>where they are flying our whole family to Ottawa to meet the new PM.  He
>wrote a postcard about what 'peace means to me' and he won.  So, we get
>to go have din-din with Paul Martin so Jens can present his 'essay'.

>I'll let you know what I think of him after I view his table manners...

I wonder if he knows that he's getting a military family.

:-)

   ---- Paul J. Gans
Sheila J - 27 Dec 2003 02:26 GMT
> In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>
>     ---- Paul J. Gans

My husband  has already been warned not to do any  'chest poking' by his
superiors.....

But, of course, his comment to Jens' win was

'What are we doing wrong that he would win an essay on peace....'

He was joking....( I hope)

Actually Jens wrote about what it was  like to have both Mommy and Daddy
going off to peace missions...
I'm sure it was nothing more than a PR move on behalf of our govt....but
it's a free trip, so I won't complain...

Cheers,
Sheila

Signature

ÐÏࡱá

Paul J Gans - 27 Dec 2003 04:16 GMT
In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:

>> In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>>
>>     ---- Paul J. Gans

>My husband  has already been warned not to do any  'chest poking' by his
>superiors.....

>But, of course, his comment to Jens' win was

>'What are we doing wrong that he would win an essay on peace....'

>He was joking....( I hope)

>Actually Jens wrote about what it was  like to have both Mommy and Daddy
>going off to peace missions...
>I'm sure it was nothing more than a PR move on behalf of our govt....but
>it's a free trip, so I won't complain...

>Cheers,
>Sheila

Yes, but PR or not, Jens wrote sincerely and it is very
likely that it is the sincerity that is being rewarded.
The rest is wonderful for PR, but not all PR is bad.
Some of it is just natural.

   ---- Paul J. Gans
Sheila J - 27 Dec 2003 05:31 GMT
> In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
>
>     ---- Paul J. Gans

Well  (blush) we are pretty proud of him....

Especially since he is autistic so this is pretty significant for him....

:D
Sheila
Andrew Chaplin - 30 Dec 2003 13:17 GMT
> In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> :-)

Almost certainly. Mr. Martin's posse have a reputation for
thoroughness.

Beyond that, he set the tone for his relationship with the profession
of arms and the wider defence establish (camp followers) by making his
first public appearance as PM in any ministry in National Defence
Headquarters. Admittedly it was to congratulate the staff on a
successful annual charity drive, but the following day when he froze
major capital acquisitions he exempted the navy's Sea King replacement
project.

This will be interesting. He may be the most considerate[1] PM the
forces have seen since Louis St-Laurent at the outset of the Cold War.

[1] He might not give the CF what they ask for, but at least the
request might have been given due consideration.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
Sheila J - 30 Dec 2003 16:37 GMT
>>In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
> (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Andrew:
The only thing that rubbed me the wrong way was at a meeting a few years
ago in Ottawa, when Paul was the Finance minister.  He sat down with a
bunch of military families to explain the amazing coincidence between
pay raises and PMQ hikes...etc...etc...I'm sure you remember those debates..

Want to know Martin's response?  I'm a military brat...I feel your pain.
His father, the great Big Martin, had served with a reserve unit for a
few months at some point.

I thought that was the most insulting thing he could have said.

Just my thoughts...

Signature

Also say to them, that they suffre hym this day to wynne his spurres,
for if God be pleased, I woll this journey be his, and the honoure thereof.
 Edward III, at some point...

Andrew Chaplin - 30 Dec 2003 16:53 GMT
> The only thing that rubbed me the wrong way was at a meeting a few years
> ago in Ottawa, when Paul was the Finance minister.  He sat down with a
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Just my thoughts...

Ouch! I will defend him no farther than to point out that his dad was a
reservist when it was more difficult and they had even less to work with, or
they were at war (I believe he was talking about the late 30s or during the
Second War). But I can see why you're no fan.

As a proceduralist in the employ of the House of Commons, I'm not allowed to
be a fan; as a sceptic, I'm not likely likely to be -- but then I'm also
likely to be a fan of no one, save those I love.
--
ABC
On someone else's computer
Peter Skelton - 30 Dec 2003 17:48 GMT
>> The only thing that rubbed me the wrong way was at a meeting a few years
>> ago in Ottawa, when Paul was the Finance minister.  He sat down with a
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>they were at war (I believe he was talking about the late 30s or during the
>Second War). But I can see why you're no fan.

Paul Martin Sr. was elected in 1935 and in the government from
then on. ISTR he was too young for WWI. I doubt it was wartime or
late 30's, but haven't anything to hand that tells me.

>As a proceduralist in the employ of the House of Commons, I'm not allowed to
>be a fan; as a sceptic, I'm not likely likely to be -- but then I'm also
>likely to be a fan of no one, save those I love.

Peter Skelton
Andrew Chaplin - 30 Dec 2003 18:31 GMT
> Paul Martin Sr. was elected in 1935 and in the government from
> then on. ISTR he was too young for WWI. I doubt it was wartime or
> late 30's, but haven't anything to hand that tells me.

That may well be the case (I thought it was later) but I am not sure
M.P.s felt obliged to resign their commissions or retire on being
elected the way they would now.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
Paul J Gans - 31 Dec 2003 01:59 GMT
In soc.history.medieval Andrew Chaplin <abchaplin@yourfinger.rogers.com> wrote:

>> In soc.history.medieval Sheila J <wolseley@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>>
>> :-)

>Almost certainly. Mr. Martin's posse have a reputation for
>thoroughness.

>Beyond that, he set the tone for his relationship with the profession
>of arms and the wider defence establish (camp followers) by making his
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>major capital acquisitions he exempted the navy's Sea King replacement
>project.

>This will be interesting. He may be the most considerate[1] PM the
>forces have seen since Louis St-Laurent at the outset of the Cold War.

>[1] He might not give the CF what they ask for, but at least the
>request might have been given due consideration.
>--
>Andrew Chaplin
>SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
>(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Andrew:  As a matter of minor interest, I read this post of
yours in alt.politics.british several days ago.  Yet it is
only now showing up on my server in soc.history.medieval.

I mention this only to remind those who delete all context
that newsgroups do not preserve the order of postings...

  ---- Paul J. Gans
Ken [NY) - 27 Dec 2003 17:00 GMT
>I almost wish I was American so I could have this much fun with
>politics...Could use a daily good laugh...

    It's especially fun because the Democrats are told every day
what they could do to improve their lot, yet they cannot bring
themselves to take the advice. And they will admit they are heading
for disaster at the polls.
    The fun part? It's on the order of watching a car full of
clowns driving off a cliff in slow motion cinema, without the horror
of resulting deaths. Sort of like watching one of our American
adventure films.
    Pass the popcorn.

    Cheers,
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

"How can anyone take this country seriously
when we take the time to celebrate the birthday
of an imaginary rodent?
 - George Carlin, on Mickey Mouse's birthday

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.

spammers can send mail to uce@ftc.gov
Julian Richards - 27 Dec 2003 00:21 GMT
>These are not triumphs of diplomacy.  These are the aftershocks of war."
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Indeed ---- And Paul Wolfowitz and his fellow NEO-CONSERVATIVES deserve
>a GREAT deal of the CREDIT.

They are in great part the result of British Socialists and their
diplomacy. Whilst Iraq was run by a madman who could not be reasoned
with, Libya has a more pragmatic leader and there are political forces
in Iran who are open to diplomacy. Military action against those two
has never been an option and they know it. The hard line Palestinian
groups would love the USA to go after them as they are spoiling for a
fight. The fact that they are willing to go to Iraq to kill Americans
is testament to this.

--

Julian Richards
julian-richards "at" ntlworld.com

"My son has asked for a pair of Nike trainers.
He's ten years old, he should make his own"

"I bought a CD of whale music. Imagine my
disappointment when I got home to discover
that it was actual a cover version by a tribute
band of dolphins"
D. Spencer Hines - 26 Dec 2003 14:42 GMT
Hilarious!

Libya could be turned into a parking lot from the Mediterranean, if the
United States and its allies so chose.

Colonel Gaddafi well understood that.

You seem pleased to see Americans killed in Iraq ---- and Brits as well?

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

| >These are not triumphs of diplomacy.  These are the aftershocks of war."
| >-------------------------------------------------------------
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
| Julian Richards
| julian-richards "at" ntlworld.com
Julian Richards - 28 Dec 2003 01:26 GMT
>Hilarious!
>
>Libya could be turned into a parking lot from the Mediterranean, if the
>United States and its allies so chose.

But its allies would never choose, not one. The USA certainly could
defeat the Libyans (even Chad inflicted the greatest single defeat of
armour upon them) but that is not what foreign policy is about. If it
were then the USA would continually look to invade other countries,
putting them in a very disreputable group of regimes.

With regard to most foreign governments, the carrot will give far
greater results than the stick (which still has its uses). GWB
realises this having become by circumstance one of the most
internationalist of US presidents.

>Colonel Gaddafi well understood that.

Why did Libya and Iran want nuclear weapons? To hit Israel? They have
more nuclear weapons than the UK. Principally they wanted them because
they feared the USA. Why shouldn't they when they hear what Americans
say  about them. If they feel that the that there is no threat of
invasion by the USA then they don't need them. They never wanted a
"muslim bomb" because Pakistan is the "muslim bomb", they wanted it
for their own national use and would certainly not want the trouble
that giving one to someone like Bin Laden could cause.

The USA could have furthered its own interests greatly by being the
first and biggest donor of aid to the earthquake in Iran.

>You seem pleased to see Americans killed in Iraq ---- and Brits as well?

You know that is not true. Everyday the TV news says one or two US
servicemen are killed and my heart sinks. although for different
reasons, we both supported war in Iraq, and although both of our
opinions had no say in the matter as to whether the war happened or
not, I feel some responsibility. I still believe that it was the right
choice but the cost has been high.

Have you read the "Time" article about soldiers in Iraq? It certainly
isn't easy out there.

--

Julian Richards
julian-richards "at" ntlworld.com

"My son has asked for a pair of Nike trainers.
He's ten years old, he should make his own"

"I bought a CD of whale music. Imagine my
disappointment when I got home to discover
that it was actual a cover version by a tribute
band of dolphins"
tiglath - 28 Dec 2003 01:29 GMT
> >You seem pleased to see Americans killed in Iraq ---- and Brits as well?
>
> You know that is not true.

Don't fall for that "guilt trip" red herring.   It is an extension of the
ridiculous "if you apposed the Iraq war you are pro-Saddam" fallacy that the
hawks have been forced to used repeatedly after their lies were exposed and
the WMD debacle damage cried for repairs.

The hawks want to confuse things so that all opposition to their warmonging
can be described as "not supporting our troops" "being pleased at coalition
casualties" and other red herrings to distract from the repugnance decent
people feel for the way this war has been justified, and prosecuted.
Leadfoot - 27 Dec 2003 20:45 GMT
Nice try but don't you thnk we are a little busy to invade Libya in the
foreseeable future? Keeping in mind North Korea is till an unresolved
problem.
D. Spencer Hines - 28 Dec 2003 10:38 GMT
Gans has been hiding his posts of this sort of errant gibberish over in
AHB and not posting them to SHM.  Vide infra.

Why Does He Do That?

Because he wants to maintain TWO quite SEPARATE PERSONAE in the two
newsgroups---- and he doesn't want the folks in SHM to see the persona
he assumes in AHB ---- or vice versa.

He does the same thing in TALK.ORIGINS, where he assumes a THIRD
persona.

Gans thinks all this folderol is "cute" and clever.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

"Please stop accusing people of being *for* Saddam simply because they
say something you don't like.   Invading Iraq was a stupid, useless,
expensive exercise that has caused and will cause the US great pain
further down the road.   We accomplished NOTHING by it."

[Gans, my pet goose, sounds more and more like Howard Dean every
day. ---- DSH]

"The world is filled with not-nice folks like Saddam.  Some were our
friends (like Saddam) and others were our enemies and are now our
friends (like Qadaffi).  Stop looking for moral values in a place
(politics) where there aren't any."

[...]

> Was Prime Minister Chamberlain unpatriotic with his appeasement of
Hitler?
> No, but he let his passionate hatred of war make him act like a fool
and
> lead the world into a very bad war, a war that he might have been
avoided if
> he had acted sooner.  Most liberals and Democrats who want to treat
our
> enemies with a light hand are like Chamberlain, meaning they are more
> foolish than unpatriotic.  (Although a few of them do seem to cross
the line
> and ARE on the wrong side of this thing.) ---- Rod Keys

"I think that's despicable.  Perhaps you might give some thought to the
idea that the war was unneeded, accomplished very little, had nothing to
do with 9/11 or Osama bin Laden and that perhaps the people who are
saying so are right."

"How would you react if someone said that the war was fomented for
personal profit by those in the current administration and constituted a

using of US power to that end."

"Would you be a bit annoyed at that?"

[Hilarious!  Prominent, farblondjet Democrats have said precisely
that ---- including Al Gore.  Gans hasn't been paying attention. ----
DSH]

[snip]

  ----- Paul J. Gans

PS:  I do NOT think that the war was fomented for personal
profit.  But the very fact that I have to put this disclaimer
in place shows, I think, how low the current level of
political discourse in the US has sunk.

P. Jonathan Gans ---- NYU Chemist Masquerading As Grand Strategist And
Moral Philosopher
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hilarious Magnus Cum Laude!

Gans, my pet goose, sounds more and more like Howard Dean every day....

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

Exitus Acta Probat

Fortem Posce Animum
D. Spencer Hines - 28 Dec 2003 13:09 GMT
"Don't forget, my solution was to see him shot while resisting arrest."

"He'd have still been removed from the possibility of power and not been
around to make trouble during a trial.  Of course the Arabs would see
his death as cynical revenge on our part (which it would have been) but
at least they'd have understood it."

P. Jonathan Gans ---- NYU Chemist ---- Self-Appointed Grand, Global,
Political Strategist And Moral Arbiter
----------------------------------------------

Hilarious Magnus Cum Laude!

Democrats who doggedly and sedulously opposed the War In Iraq don't want
a public trial of Saddam because they know the facts that emerge will
make them look even MORE like the craven, weak, timid appeasers they so
clearly are.

Next Summer Seems Like A Good Time For Saddam's Trial....

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

Exitus Acta Probat

Fortem Posce Animum
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.