>>> "Mark Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/11 3:50 PM >>>
nothing separates your thinking from that of the Vlassovites
who
wanted a Russia free from Stalin's oppression and therefore
thought it
logical to fight for Hitler. You are Fifth Columnists,
nothing more.
Mark, you may know something about these people that I
don't, in which case maybe you should come out with it, but
the logic you use here is simplistic in the extreme and
leaves me cold. There is nothing 'logical' in fighting for
Hitler because one is opposed to the oppression of Stalin.
One could just as easily argue (and with logic just as
simplistic) that in fighting for Stalin one was ultimately
fighting for the capitalism of US and Britain and therefore
even for the eventual establishment of NATO. Or that if one
condemned the Chinese government actions in Tiannemen Square
that one was pro-Western imperialism. Or that if one said
that Saddam was an oppressor of his own people that one then
justified the starving of Iraqi children or something. If I
had spoken against Idi Amin around the time of Entebe, would
I have been a Zionist?
I have found myself arguing quite passionately while in
Europe recently against the role of NATO and anti-Slav
racism, which is so much a part of European history, but it
would never have even occurred to me that I was arguing FOR
Milosevic. I would think that the Serbian people would be
better judges of him. I would like to know what they do
think, but the answer to this question cannot be given
simply by reference to imperialism.
Tahir
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
