>Date sent: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 08:53:39 -0400 (EDT)
>Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Carlos Alicea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: state terrorism
>Originally to: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Tim: Isaid that I agree with you because you were the first person
>> analyzing the US policy in light of the historical behavior of United
>> States around the globe. I come from the oldest colony in America, Puerto
>> Rico. In my political acttivism I have studied US foreing policy,
>> specially toward Latin America. A constant in the policy decison process
>> of US is their lack of selfcriticism and self analysis. Never in their
>> minds seems to evaluate in whta ways their own decisons caused resenment
>> and hatred in other countries. Invasions, supporting dictarioships in name
>> of democracy, supporting drug trafficking to tyhis country in name of
>> democracy, are some of the examples that came to mind. I do not support
>> violence againts civilians and inocent people. It is not popularity Tim,
>> but from my perspective you made a very good analysis of the US policy and
>> that is very encouraging for me.
>>
>> In solidarity, Carlos R. Alicea
>>
>> On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Joe E. Dees wrote:
>
=================================================================
>Don't overgeneralize, Carlos. Our actions are not always wrong
>simply because we're the "big, bad U. S. of A.," and they were not
>wrong here.
Sorry man, but you take the wrong way, most of the time US have had bad
external policies. If you want to ridiculousness your own people do it but
not put words in another mouth, and for instance many people around the
world recognize the precious oportunity that your country given to them in
education and transfer of new utile tecnologies in many areas of the humans
context.
And for last, what we are talking about is the US External policies, not
about the country or its citizen.
Nicla
=================================================================
>> > Date sent: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 22:03:25 -0400 (EDT)
>> > Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > From: Carlos Alicea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Subject: RE: state terrorism
>> > Originally to: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >
>> > > I agree in solidarity with Mr. Tim Hundsdorfer
>> >
>> > A goodly number seem to agree with me, too, although right and
>> > wrong should never be decided by a popularity contest. Joe Dees
>> > > Carlos R. Alicea
>> > > On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Tim Hundsdorfer wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Bullshit! We have been declared targets by this fanatical nut, and
>> > > > have every right to protect ourselves! I devoutly hope one of those
>> > > > missles cruised right up Osama Bin Laden's ass!
>> > > >
>> > > > Two things.
>> > > > > > > > First, the question which you appear to be begging is why
>>there are so many in the Islamic world who have declared us "targets."
>
>> > > >
>> > > > Second, you need to examine where this impulse came from within
>>yourself.
>> > > > > > > > No offense, Joe, but yours is not an Ecofeminist impulse,
>>in my opinion. I had the same impulse myself, but the reality is that
>>Pakistan did nothing to us (and in fact up until about two months ago
>>were s
>taunch allies) and the real story in Sudan should be thousands (tens of
>thousands?) of
>
>> > starving children.
>> > > > > > > > Hoping Bin Laden was hit with a cruise missile is not
>>worth the fact that innocent people were actually hit with them. The
>>price of 50+ cruise missiles, along with the reparations we will end up
>>paying to
> Pakistan, will truly be staggering. For a country which cut its free
>breakfast program
>
>> > for poor children, the price is too high.
>> > > > > > > > Sorry to be argumentative, but I am pretty confident my
>>comments reflect the views of a large number on this list.
>
>> >
>> > > >
>> > > > Tim Hundsdorfer
>> > > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
