No, that was me. No need to reduce caffeine intake :) I was drawing a line between Bush's preemptive strike policy and the Roman's being the attackers.
-- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 12:29:13 PM, you wrote: AO> I was following that, but I thought someone brought in Iraq. AO> My bad. Time to cut back on the caffeine ;-) AO> Andy AO> -----Original Message----- AO> From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] AO> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 2:07 PM AO> To: CF-Community AO> Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy AO> Andy I was talking about something very different, the similarities between AO> the US and Rome, no comparisons with Iraq. AO> larry AO> At 10:08 AM 3/5/2003 -0600, you wrote: >>The difference is in who starts the conflict. >> >>And we in USA are not pristine clean. I'd suggest that our treatment of >>Native Americans is the classic example. >> >>However, we are NOT talking about any of those subjects. We are talking >>about a leadership that has: >>1. Invaded another country and is ignoring the rules that it was forced to >>comply to after they were kicked out of that country >>2. Has used its WMD against its own people and others >> >>While all war is by definition aggression, the Iraqi conflict is not a war >>of aggression as is commonly used. It is a defensive/policing action. I >>agree with the argument that if the UN is going to start to enforce its >>sanctions it should do so in a uniform and appropriate manner. However, >>past failure to do so is not a valid reason for inaction now. >> >>Andy >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 12:47 PM >>To: CF-Community >>Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy >> >> >>At 09:07 AM 3/5/2003 -0600, you wrote: >> >Larry: >> > >> >Kinda of selective in your facts, aren't ya. Rome attacked, we defended. >> >Rome pillaged, we rebuilt. Rome enslaved, we've freed. >> >>What about the impending war in Iraq? Is that not a war of aggression? Or >>the Spanish-American War, or the Mexican War (1840), or the War of 1812, or >>to some extent the Civil War. Moreover in some ways the Civil War is very >>similar to the Social Wars of Rome. There were a very similar set of causes >>- the allied cities of Italy rebelled because the republican government of >>Rome began trampling on their rights - the whole series of arguments were >>very similar to what the South used in the US Civil War. >> >>Also talking about pillaging/destruction - as a counter argument look at >>the mass destruction that the US military has done to the cities of its >>opponents in past conflicts. Where's the difference? >> >>larry >> >> >> >> >Besides that, great comparison. >> > >> >You wrote: >> > >Of course the US doesn't go around taking over other countries and >> > >holding them militarily for an extended period of time. >> > >> >Like Germany, Japan, Korea, and what now looks like Bosnia and Kosovo. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> AO> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
