Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
most snipped
http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html
In fact, the most emotionally moving testimony on
October 10 came from
a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girlSobbing, she described
what she had seen with her own eyes in
a hospital in Kuwait
JDG wrote:
O.k., o.k., how many people can't help but look at the above subject title
and say:
A God Impersonator Is With Us
;-)
JDG
Well, either you believe that God is with us or not, impersonator aside.
:)
A God Impersonator Is With Us doesn't translate as nicely to whatever
language
O.k., o.k., how many people can't help but look at the above subject title
and say:
A God Impersonator Is With Us
;-)
JDG
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Of course, I also think that comparing folk to
horses
is a form of compliment, so - take that with a
good dose of bran! ;)
Does that include being compared to only certain
*parts* of horses?
Neigh! Indeed, most
Responding to a greater-than-month-old-post (and there
are lots of others too, but I'm trying!)-
Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip most
... for every expert you can mention who was
caught flatfooted by
Iraq, I'm pretty sure I can find another in the same
field who was
On Jan 20, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Of course, I also think that comparing folk to horses
is a form of compliment, so - take that with a good
dose of bran! ;)
Does that include being compared to only certain *parts* of horses?
Cause, if so, I might have a lot more friends than I
JDG wrote:
O.k., I presume that you believed then and continue to believe now that
Baathist Iraq had the capability to mass produce chemical weapons.
I also presume that you believed then and continue to believe now that
Baathist Iraq had the capability to mass produce anthrax, and possibly
other
Nick Arnett wrote:
JDG wrote:
O.k., I presume that you believed then and continue to believe now that
Baathist Iraq had the capability to mass produce chemical weapons.
I also presume that you believed then and continue to believe now that
Baathist Iraq had the capability to mass produce anthrax,
On Dec 24, 2004, at 10:12 AM, JDG wrote:
At 12:29 PM 12/18/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
I can only see it as strategic to Iraq if their purpose was to pull
the
West into the region in order to touch off a larger conflict. If it
was
to actually try to expand their borders, they were nuts, a
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 18:44:28 -0500, maru [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You've a good point there. I think Hussein has been widely under-rated;
I've been hearing things about
how he made preparations to aid the insurgency while the US was building
up to an invasion (but obviously
its been more
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:38:37 -0800 (PST), Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can only see it as strategic to Iraq if their
purpose was to pull the
West into the region in order to touch off a larger
conflict. If it was
to actually try to
On Dec 17, 2004, at 9:34 PM, JDG wrote:
At 11:31 AM 12/17/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
I won't argue with that. I don't think that constitutes attacking the
United States, though.
So, you would disagree that firing shots with the intent of bringing
down a country's aircraft ordinarily
... telling us about how Saddam wasn't that bad
As of 17 Feb 2003, less than a month before the US invasion, the Bush
administration had not made the argumment that a new government would
help the people of Iraq free themselves from a cruel dictatorship.
It made it later.
It looks to me
I would not describe live ammunition as sabre rattling.
Hmmm ... You will gain a better understanding of history if you do.
As is, the phrase is misleading.
Many governments, especially those run by evil men, attempt to
intimidate others by killing people. The phrase is sabre rattling,
but
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:39:33 -0500 (EST), Robert J. Chassell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4. Overthrow the government of and establish a major US presence
in an Arab country so as to frighten the other Arab
dictatorships into greater efforts into policing against
enemies of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
I remember reading a long time ago that Saddam had quietly
informed the White House before the Kuwait invasion, and taken the
official silence as tacit consent. Any truth to this?
According to a partial transcript at
Ah, good ol' TOTSE. I haven't been there in a long time...
But I find interesting the segment which goes:
'We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your
dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to
emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:18:31 -0500, JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 08:02 AM 12/17/2004 -0800 Damon Agretto wrote:
I believe John was referring to both the Bush
assasination plot as well as the occasional saber
rattling with regards to the No-fly Zones.
I would not describe live ammunition
At 11:47 PM 12/17/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
So, you would disagree that firing shots with the intent of bringing down a
country's aircraft ordinarily constitutes an act of war against said
country?
It now seems inescapable that you are saying the very thing I imagined:
We invaded Iraq.
I
- Original Message -
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL
At 12:28 AM 12/18/2004 -0600 Robert Seeberger wrote:
Lots of stuff about Nariyah
She didn't see it. It doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Dave is a good orthodox leftist and an apologist for
totalitarian dictators, Rob, but I thought better of you.
That's what I fail to understand about
JDG wrote:
I don't think that I would describe Gulf War I as an instance when we
invaded Iraq.
I think the label is appropriate any time one nation's military enters
the other's territory uninvited, destroys stuff and kills people.
Refusing this ordinary way of talking strikes me as less than
At 11:04 AM 12/18/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
I don't think that I would describe Gulf War I as an instance when we
invaded Iraq.
I think the label is appropriate any time one nation's military enters
the other's territory uninvited, destroys stuff and kills people.
Refusing this
JDG wrote:
Later in this post, you make a distinction between tactical and
strategic language.Do you agree that while US actions in Iraq in Gulf
War I could be called an invasion in the tactical sense, they would not
be described as an invasion in the strategic sense?
I think that anything
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
- Original Message -
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
At 12:28 AM 12/18/2004 -0600 Robert Seeberger wrote:
Lots of stuff about Nariyah
She didn't see it. It doesn't
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 03:24:19PM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Given, however, that I've had to defend on this list the validity
of the splended work Indict did on human rights under Iraq, but Our
Distinguished Namesake (irony very much intended) will routinely
accuse the President, and
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll add that when you said I was being
sanctimonious, I felt a bit
pissed off. You don't know what I'm feeling unless
I tell you.
I hope this all doesn't seem hopelessly pedantic. I
believe that
language is one of the most important tools for
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can only see it as strategic to Iraq if their
purpose was to pull the
West into the region in order to touch off a larger
conflict. If it was
to actually try to expand their borders, they were
nuts, a possibility
that cannot be discounted!
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why should we bat an eye when we have Gautam and JDG
to defend and
rationalize everything Bush does?
Gee, Erik, if someone came in and read this list,
whose criticisms of Bush do you think they'd take
seriously, mine or yours? Calling the occupation
You've a good point there. I think Hussein has been widely under-rated;
I've been hearing things about
how he made preparations to aid the insurgency while the US was building
up to an invasion (but obviously
its been more successful than Hitler's plans along those lines). Also,
I remember
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 03:40:18PM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Gee, Erik, if someone came in and read this list, whose criticisms of
Bush do you think they'd take seriously, mine or yours?
Gee, Gautam, whose do you think they'd see?
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
Behalf Of Gautam Mukunda
something along the lines of
(I'm not using quotation marks because I don't have
the exact words):
Don't misunderstand me, I was in Kuwait during the
Iraqi invasion and I saw the hospital where the Iraqis
stole incubators for premature babies. Saddam Hussein
Behalf Of JDG
Also, I would include Iraqi Scud missile strikes on US
barracks in Saudi
Arabia before Gulf War I as attacks on our country.
Um, John, I'm fairly certain this was *after* the air war started
against Iraq. Remember the phrase the liberation of Kuwait has
begun. I do. I
- Original Message -
From: Horn, John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 6:59 PM
Subject: RE: God Is With Us L3
Behalf Of Gautam Mukunda
something along the lines of
(I'm not using quotation marks because I don't have
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
I hope this all doesn't seem hopelessly pedantic. I
believe that
language is one of the most important tools for
peacemaking.
Geez, Nick, then stop using it as a tool to hinder
communication.
What's the antecedent of it in that sentence? Are you saying that it
appears
On Dec 18, 2004, at 4:33 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
If you don't
want to be seen as sanctimonious, stop being such a
jerk every time someone disagrees with you. You're
heading for Brin levels, for God's sake, and he may be
the most obnoxious human being I've ever communicated
with for any period
Warren Ockrassa wrote:
Jesus Howard Christ.
I think it's spectacularly poor form to insult the person whose list a
given group nominally is. If you really feel that Nick is
sanctimonious and arrogant or behaves like a jerk with those who
disagree with him (pot/kettle if ever I saw it) and
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We keep our own house clean, do we not?
xponent
At 09:44 AM 12/14/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
Bill Clinton got a blow job.
Funny how commiting perjury rather than give testimony that is compelled by
a law that you signed with your hand managed to slip your mind.
George Bush lied to congress and the citizens of the United States to
go to war
JDG wrote:
Never attacked us?Tell that George Bush Senior.Tell that to the
families of the hundreds of Americans who died in Iraq and Saudi Arabia
over the previous 12 years.
I'm confused -- surely you're not saying that we invaded them in
response to the attacks they made on our troops
Nick Arnett wrote:
I'm in one of those families.
And to be a little clearer, I'll speak for our family -- please don't
presume. I don't think our loss gives us special rights to justify or
criticize this war, so I sure don't think it gives anyone else any.
Nick
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
At 09:44 AM 12/14/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
Bill Clinton got a blow job.
Funny how commiting perjury rather than give
Never attacked us?Tell that George Bush
Senior.Tell that to the
families of the hundreds of Americans who died in
Iraq and Saudi Arabia
over the previous 12 years.
edit
This doesn't mean automatically that the second Gulf
war wasn't
justified...just that it wasn't a war on a
- Original Message -
From: Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
Never attacked us?Tell that George Bush
Senior.Tell that to the
families of the hundreds
On Dec 17, 2004, at 8:02 AM, Damon Agretto wrote:
Never attacked us? Tell that George Bush Senior. Tell that to the
families of the hundreds of Americans who died in Iraq and Saudi
Arabia over the previous 12 years.
I believe John was referring to both the Bush assasination plot as well
as the
On Dec 17, 2004, at 11:10 AM, Dave Land wrote:
Does every message to this thread have to end with a disclaimer that
says, in effect, Yeah, Iraq didn't attack the US , but I still support
the war?
No. The war was unjustified, is unjust, and is a result of criminal
irresponsibility on the part of
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
Honestly, I am not sure what John was referring to, originally, but I
must accept that he sincerely believes
Not that I think the occasional bombing campaigns were less than what
were needed, but technically Iraq has been in breach of the cease-fire
agreement several times in the last 12 years.
Does every message to this thread have to end with a disclaimer that
says, in effect, Yeah, Iraq didn't attack
--- Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Next we'll be hearing me about Iraqis taking babies
out of incubators in
hospitals in Kuwait -- part of a long Bush family
tradition of telling
lies to justify war in Iraq.
You know, I spoke to someone on the US embassy staff
in Kuwait at the time who
On Dec 17, 2004, at 2:49 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Next we'll be hearing me about Iraqis taking babies out of incubators
in
hospitals in Kuwait -- part of a long Bush family tradition of telling
lies to justify war in Iraq.
You know, I spoke to someone on
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
Considering the success of the Hill Knowlton PR effort behind
Nayirah's testimony, I'm not surprised that your
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
On Dec 17, 2004, at 4:07 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Considering the success of the Hill Knowlton PR effort behind
Nayirah's testimony, I'm not surprised that your embassy staffer
believes that s/he saw what s/he believes was evidence of what has
been quite thoroughly
- Original Message -
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
xponent
Too many Hits To Bother With Maru
I now recall that with a bit more detail. But, having someone
At 03:14 PM 12/17/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
Next we'll see
Dave telling us about how Saddam wasn't that bad - part of a long
leftist tradition of excusing any totalitarian barbarity as long as
it's
committed by an enemy of the United States.
Ridiculous prediction, Gautam, but not
On Dec 17, 2004, at 8:36 PM, JDG wrote:
At 03:14 PM 12/17/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
Next we'll see
Dave telling us about how Saddam wasn't that bad - part of a long
leftist tradition of excusing any totalitarian barbarity as long as
it's
committed by an enemy of the United States.
Ridiculous
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
- Original Message -
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED
At 07:10 AM 12/17/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
JDG wrote:
Never attacked us?Tell that George Bush Senior.Tell that to the
families of the hundreds of Americans who died in Iraq and Saudi Arabia
over the previous 12 years.
I'm confused -- surely you're not saying that we invaded them
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It might be worthwhile to see exactly what an
eyewitness saw soon after
Kuwait was liberated instead of stating with
certainty that what she
thought she saw was debunked. Looking at the
condition the hospital was
left in after the Iraq troops had
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Lots of stuff about Nariyah
She didn't see it. It doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Dave is a good orthodox leftist and an apologist for
totalitarian dictators, Rob, but I thought better of you.
=
Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freedom is not
--- Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave
PS: I still think Saddam is a bad guy, Gautam.
Sure, just not as bad as George Bush, right? It's
exactly like leftists with Stalin in the 1930s, 1940s,
and 1950s. He was bad, of course - getting them to
admit that was like pulling teeth, but most
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I don't doubt that Iraqi soldiers trashed many
buildings and did
bodily harm to many people. I don't doubt that
American soldiers have
done similar things in Iraq.
But not every story repeated will have the same
component of truth.
xponent
At 10:10 AM 12/17/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
Honestly, I am not sure what John was referring to, originally, but I
must accept that he sincerely believes that Iraq's unwillingness to be
kept under the boot of the United States (my language) was sufficient
cause for this latest war.
I've posted
At 08:02 AM 12/17/2004 -0800 Damon Agretto wrote:
I believe John was referring to both the Bush
assasination plot as well as the occasional saber
rattling with regards to the No-fly Zones.
I would not describe live ammunition as sabre rattling.
Also, I would include Iraqi Scud missile
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Lots of stuff about Nariyah
She didn't see it. It doesn't
At 11:31 AM 12/17/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
I won't argue with that. I don't think that constitutes attacking the
United States, though.
So, you would disagree that firing shots with the intent of bringing down a
country's aircraft ordinarily constitutes an act of war against said country?
At 11:39 PM 12/17/2004 -0600 Robert Seeberger wrote:
Lots of stuff about Nariyah
She didn't see it. It doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Dave is a good orthodox leftist and an apologist for
totalitarian dictators, Rob, but I thought better of you.
That's what I fail to understand about your
At 09:35 AM 12/17/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
JDG - You're not lying when you really believe something to be true,
Maru.
Unless, of course, you are lying to yourself. They selectively accepted and
rejected reports, based on whether they were consistant with what they knew
a priori. In
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 11:18 PM
Subject: Iraqi Attacks and Violations Re: God Is With Us L3
At 08:02 AM 12/17/2004 -0800 Damon Agretto wrote:
I believe John was referring to both
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I don't doubt that Iraqi soldiers trashed many
buildings
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
At 11:39 PM 12/17/2004 -0600 Robert Seeberger wrote:
Lots of stuff about Nariyah
She didn't see it. It doesn't mean
JDG wrote:
So, you would disagree that firing shots with the intent of bringing down a
country's aircraft ordinarily constitutes an act of war against said country?
It now seems inescapable that you are saying the very thing I imagined:
We invaded Iraq.
They shot at our airplanes that were flying
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do you think about FDR's lies? Were they immoral, or was secretly
protecting British ships justified...given the likelihood that we would
eventually have had to face the winner of the German/Soviet war? Did he
well represent (or did he actually
Warren wrote (?)
Boldly proclaiming certainty? Oh really? I thought all I did was
suggest that the current admin had to be fairly dim not to have learned
from history.
Dan wrote (?)
To the earlier exchange, I think the question's pretty clear: How is
it that so many people seem not to have
--- Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please bear in mind that in World War II Germany
declared war on the
US first, not vice-versa.
Weinberg's a great historian, but there's been lots of
work on the topic since then. Marc Trachtenberg has a
book forthcoming on it, for example.
On Dec 13, 2004, at 10:18 PM, JDG wrote:
At 09:26 PM 12/10/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
The one following that is When will Congress impeach Bush?
Never until the people in this country wake up to the fact that
they're
getting reamed.
Which bears a remarkable similarity to right-wingers who
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
On Dec 13, 2004, at 10:18 PM, JDG wrote:
At 09:26 PM 12/10/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
The one following
- Original Message -
From: kerri miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do you think about FDR's lies? Were they immoral
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 12, 2004, at 8:44 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Yes
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 08:27:45AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
From 1969 to 1970, he served as Director of the Office of Economic
Opportunity and Assistant to the President. From 1971 to 1972, he was
Counsellor to the President and Director of the Economic Stabilization
Program. In 1973, he left
- Original Message -
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
That wasn't the question.
It wasn't?
Nope. If you want, I can quote the exchange, but it was the when you
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:58:03 -0600, Dan Minette
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
That wasn't the question
- Original Message -
From: Gary Denton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:58:03 -0600, Dan Minette
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:16:29 -0600, Gary Denton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Those whose idealogy prevents them from learning the lessons of
Vietnam are repeating the mistakes and making even larger ones in
Iraq. Thanks to the internet we can get a citizen's eye view of the
Iraq lessons as
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
In a sense, one could say that Rumsfeld mis-applied a lesson from Viet
Nam by overrunning the basic
philosophy
We could, after all, have just pounded Japan
after Pearl Harbor and left Germany alone.
I'm not sure how. Germany and Japan were at least loosely allied.
Pounding Japan would have left us with the undealt-with problem of
the Nazis.
Please bear in mind that in World War II
--- Gary Denton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The lessons of Vietnam are far more universally
accepted than Gautam
believes. There is a small dispute fueled by those
with an agenda
that the Vietnam War does not reflect well on.
Nonsense. In my Sources of American Foreign Policy
course, for
On Dec 12, 2004, at 11:41 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Nothing about them specifically is a lesson from
Nam, but I listed more
than their names as lessons. I brought *them* up to
point out that
once-failed leadership was in charge of this second
debacle, and that
should have been a point of concern
On Dec 13, 2004, at 11:58 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
When a foreign policy graduate student at MIT,
who received a degree in government from Harvard states that your
point
differs from historians and political scientists who are studying the
period, then it is highly likely that you hold such an
Warren Ockrassa wrote:
Well, they're usually about conquest _by one side_.
The side that's trying to prevent itself from being
conquered is not usually described as fighting for
conquest.
I'm not sure what spin doctors would put it that way; whether one is
on the offensive or defensive is
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Warren asked (Yahoo truncated it) what they are
teaching me in Poli. Sci. courses. The obvious answer
is history and english, among other things. You would
profit from taking them, Warren. For starters, you
are doomed to lose if you don't fight a
You, sir, are free to autocopulate at a time and place of your
choosing. I will not bandy words further with you.
On Dec 13, 2004, at 9:37 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Warren asked (Yahoo truncated it) what they are
teaching me in Poli. Sci. courses.
At 09:26 PM 12/10/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
The one following that is When will Congress impeach Bush?
Never until the people in this country wake up to the fact that they're
getting reamed.
Which bears a remarkable similarity to right-wingers who similarly waited
for the American
South Vietnam wasn't an independent country?
No, under American law, it was not. Nor was North Vietnam. The US
considered South Vietnam a `protocol state' meaning that its president
would be given honors as if he were president of an independent
country. However, the US could and did turn
In both cases the US was the occupying force, in both cases the
US met much heavier resistance than anticipated, and in both
cases the US was caught off guard.
Well, among other things, because your first statement is false
and your third statement is questionable.
On Dec 12, 2004, at 9:32 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I honestly don't know why the lessons of history manage to go
unlearned, Dan. I only know that they do.
That wasn't the question.
It wasn't?
When a foreign policy graduate student at MIT,
who received a degree
- Original Message -
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: God Is With Us L3
On Dec 11, 2004, at 10:33 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Let's see
On Dec 12, 2004, at 8:44 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I honestly don't know why the lessons of history
manage to go
unlearned, Dan. I only know that they do.
Well, you think that _your_ lessons of history go
unlearned. Other people (people who, among other
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 12, 2004, at 8:44 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Yes, interpretation of historical events is at least
partly objective.
Given that I can see how some things that might be
clear to me may not
be to others.
Or, alternately, why things you think
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
