With all due respect to our fine moderator, I am really tired of receiving this BS from JT.
I am not interested in your pre-20th century utopian crap- and I really really resent you joining every single goddamned list out there. I've watched this Jt loser get booted off of many lists and respectfully ask for the immediate removal of this inconsiderate spammer: There is never anything in the slightest resembling communication from this individual. One can say anything to "him" and nothing will come back. I had to expell him about 5 times in the same day to get rid of him from two lists I run. NO MORE WSM/ NO MORE J.T.! Hands off radical email lists by spammers!!! Macdonald ----- Original Message ----- From: "j t" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 4:36 PM Subject: ALTERNATIVE TO WAR IS NOT PEACE, BUT... > The refrain of war supporters, in every war, is "Well, what would you do > instead?", whenever they are confronted by opponents. The typical > responses to this challenge fall into three general camps: > > 1.Woolly liberals who favour 'talking' and negotiation as a universal > panacea; > > 2. Principled Pacifism, which has the benefits, at least, of intellectual > consistency; or > > 3. Emotivism, arguing "It's wrong!" and simply leaving it at that. > > I would argue that their opposition to the horrors of war, the casual > sophistries and the easy brutalities it brings forth from our masters, is > perfectly justifiable. > > Currently, we live in a world of permanent warfare, not a decade of the > last century passed without British soldiers being at war somewhere in the > world, and not a year passes in which some section of our world community > is not being ravaged by a war. In a society in which groups of > capitalists must try and hold onto their property to the exclusion of > rival groups, it > becomes essential to have military forces in order to achieve this. Of > course, if people have military forces, they are going to be prepared to > use them. > > Wars in the past century have been uniformly fought over access to trade > routes, natural resources, and geo-strategic influence. It would seem to > be so in this century, with Osama Bin Laden bent on throwing the U.S. out > of oil-rich Saudi Arabia, and America, obviously, wants to stay, and wants > to continue exerting control over the regions natural resources > (including the elusive Caspian Oilfields). > > War will continue so long as these conditions of competition continue to > exist, and so the only practical alternative to war is not just peace, but > the common and democratic ownership of the worlds resources by the entire > human race, administered in our own interest. > > The murderous anarchy of capitalism cries out to be replaced by a sane > society. That is the answer to the warmongers' question. > > JT > > www.worldsocialism.org > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.yahoo.com
