I'm mostly responding WRT I wrote, not quoted.
> Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> > "Feeling safe" is in itself an interesting
> concept; if
> > Americans _feel_ safer, yet are not _actually_
> safer,
> > will that be enough of a 'victory?' This ties
into
> > the defining of terrorists, domestic vs. foreign,
> > which was not determined (at least here on the
> List):
> > if gang members are prosecuted as terrorists, but
> >gang activity does not lessen, then many inner city
> > residents will feel (and be) no safer than before
> >the Iraq campaign. Would it change our outlook to
> >call gangs 'domestic terrorists' and realize that
> >they take thousands of lives annually?**
> War on terrorism is expanded enough already. How do
> we declare
> victory, over who? Have been articles that the
> Patriot Act is now
> being used more for non-terrorist activities than to
> prosecute terrorists.
<nods> I agree, but think that those who want to call
gang members, frex, 'terrorists' have an interesting
point. But one that, if used to prosecute, will open
the door to further abuses of civil rights (IMO).
[Bob C:]
> > > For Americans, and for the rest of the world,
key
> > > questions still remain:
> > >Do you think United States policy will lead to
> > > victory for the US?
> > >Will United States strategy lead to Americans
> > > feeling safer a generation and two from now?
> > Unless things are changed from the current course,
> so
> > that Iraqis feel safe and Americans feel they are
> > doing good in being there, no.
> We will win the war against terrorism when we win
> the battle of the
> sexes and the war on drugs and for much the same
> reasons.
> Too much fraternization with the enemy.
<grim laugh>
> Don't give patriotic speeches, tell me what actions
> you will take to
> make people safer and how we or others will have to
> pay for it.
> I see Shrub didn't follow that advise.
Whoops, I posted before reading this:
> The Bush speech oultine Five Steps to Peace In Iraq:
> 1 Handing over authority to a sovereign Iraqi
> government.
> 2 Establishing security.
> 3 Continuing to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure.
> 4 Encouraging more international support.
> 5 Moving toward a national election in Iraq that
> "will bring forward
> new leaders empowered by the Iraqi people."
>
> Except for 3, the support for Halliburton, isn't
> this Kerry's plan?
I thought it was just 'more of the same' [current
direction]; that the security part still needs to be
established, after a year, seems sluggish to me; that
Bush is now asking for international help after so
thoroughly disdaining it a year ago, both ironic and
sadly infuriating.
Debbi
I Will Read All Posts Before Posting Myself
I Will Read All Posts Before Posting Myself
I Will Read All Posts Before Posting Myself...Maru
(yeah, suuuure...!) :)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
