>>> Do you want them to leave Iraq and then go to Darfur?
>>
>> There's no oil there. Why in the world would we want to go?
>>
>> But actually, yes. I'd rather see billions spend on humanitarian
> issues than
>> on bombing a country to smithereens after we've starved them
> (sanctions) for
>> decades.
>>
>
>
> So, if I understand your "yes" above correctly, you would like the
> U.S. troops to go to Darfur and use military action there?
Possibly, but I don't like playing arm chair politician. If I were in a
position to totally immerse myself in these issues and had some influence on
polity decisions, I might form an opinion very different than one I might
shoot from the hip from my current perspective. In general though, I favor
humanitarian over military action as an instrument of foreign policy. And in
terms of the oil problem, I recommend we stop quibbling over insignificant
resources such as The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and spending hundreds
of billions on wars to secure oil we may never lay hands on, and shift the
whole paradigm to energy independence. If Bush had done that instead of
pursuing this war, he might have been remembered as one of our greatest
presidents, instead of our worst, as will probably be the case (see cover
story in this month's Rolling Stone).
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
