Deborah Harrell wrote:
Nope, I have no idea how you feel about living
under the BJP government.
My initial response had the 'no' highlit, but I
decided that was a bit too much. G
chuckle
Sometimes I feel as if I carry a neon sign over my head, proclaiming my
opinion of BJP et al.
--- Kevin Tarr wrote:
[I wrote]
serious mode
...the scare tactics being employed by the current
administration to erode civil liberties (re: the
Patriot Act), change health policy, and weaken
environmental protections concern me. The
deliberately arrogant and aggressive stance toward
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Nope, I have no idea how you feel about living under
the BJP government.
g
Well, my emotions and reactions vary. The first reaction, of course, was
disbelief that people were idiotic enough to vote them in. That lingered
for quite a while, and cosily snuggled up to
--- Ritu Ko wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Nope, I have no idea how you feel about living
under the BJP government.
My initial response had the 'no' highlit, but I
decided that was a bit too much. G
g
Well, my emotions and reactions vary. The first
reaction, of course, was
serious mode Probably not nearly as worried as you
must be, but - as has been noted on-list previously -
the scare tactics being employed by the current
administration to erode civil liberties (re: the
Patriot Act), change health policy, and weaken
environmental protections concern me. The
Deborah Harrell wrote:
serious mode Probably not nearly as worried as you
must be, but - as has been noted on-list previously -
the scare tactics being employed by the current
administration to erode civil liberties (re: the
Patriot Act),
On that note:
Ritu Ko wrote about Saddam's other career as a romance novelist:
I have always thought it was near-unpardonably short
sighted of Saddam not to explore this avenue of addressing
his financial problems. :)
*He* doesn't have financial problems, nor do his cronies.
It's the people of Iraq that
Russell Chapman wrote:
A Dutch company may just buy the place and run it as a corporation
like they have a few small African nations.
Do you really think Bush will sell it to them?
8^)
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:43:01PM +1000, Russell Chapman wrote:
A Dutch company may just buy the place and run it as a corporation like
they have a few small African nations.
Not sure if that was a joke. Buy it from whom?
By the way, in an earlier message you mentioned some countries that
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:43:01PM +1000, Russell Chapman wrote:
A Dutch company may just buy the place and run it as a corporation like
they have a few small African nations.
Not sure if that was a joke. Buy it from whom?
Mostly joking - in the past they have just
--- Russell Chapman wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
By the way, in an earlier message you mentioned
some countries that
were in Afghanistan to build or re-build. I have a
very hard time
finding news stories on who is in Afghanistan and
exactly what they are
doing. Can you recommend any articles
Erik Reuter wrote:
So is your point that we shouldn't spend resources
on Iraq; rather we should attack Saudi Arabia?
Yes - instead of dropping threatening leaflets that will
make iraqis laugh, you should be dropping porn leaflets
over Saudi Arabia.
Alberto Monteiro
Dan Minette wrote:
The reason I'm not sure is that the first time
I read his name I knew that he is of an Indian descent.
Well, that just shows how much more astute you are
than I am. I guessed he was Irish. :-)
I thought that Mukunda was african. And that Ritu was
polinesian
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:55:30PM -0500, Julia Thompson wrote:
Actually, if you're a woman, there are *much* suckier rulers to
live under. (Or die under.) Saudi Arabia, for a biggie. Iraqi
women enjoy greater freedoms than women in almost all other Mideast
Ritu Ko wrote:
Dan M. wrote:
Well, that just shows how much more astute you are than I am.
I guessed he
was Irish. :-)
chuckle
With a name like Gautam Mukunda?
Nope. But I am not really that astute. Most Indians can take a look at
that name and tell you about the caste of
Whoops, in my reply, I'd snipped a bunch of stuff that Erik had said,
and to be fair, I think I ought to respond to all that he said in his
post. Here it is:
Erik Reuter wrote:
That does not seem a good plan. For one thing, the grounds for attacking
SA are less. They haven't violated a
Julia Thompson wrote:
Actually, I think it would be the caste of Gautam's *grandfather*. :)
The way it was explained to me how surnames go in India (and you can
correct me if I'm wrong) is that your surname is your father's given
name.
The naming convention are different in different
Ritu Ko wrote:
I also find it amazing that 9/11 doesn't seem to
have made the American strategists aware of the
emotions that are aroused when one's country is
attacked or threatened. :)
It did, but unfortunately that only seemed to
have lasted for about two weeks. Frankly I'm
amazed that
At 09:58 07-10-2002 -0500, Julia Thompson wrote:
The way it was explained to me how surnames go in India (and you can
correct me if I'm wrong) is that your surname is your father's given
name.
In the US, your surname is your father's surname.
Until recently, in The Netherlands a child would
J. van Baardwijk wrote:
At 09:58 07-10-2002 -0500, Julia Thompson wrote:
The way it was explained to me how surnames go in India (and you can
correct me if I'm wrong) is that your surname is your father's given
name.
In the US, your surname is your father's surname.
Until recently,
--- Erik Reuter wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
Actually, if you're a woman, there are *much*
suckier rulers to
live under. (Or die under.) Saudi Arabia, for a
biggie. Iraqi
women enjoy greater freedoms than women in almost
all other Mideast countries.
So is your point that we
--- Ritu Ko wrote:
See, as an Indian, I do not relish living under the
BJP government.
However, any attempt by any other country to bring
about a change in
*my* country's regime [unless they have been
specifically invited to do
so] would evoke only one reaction,
Back off! It's none
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 10:03:02AM -0500, Julia Thompson wrote:
IF we can build Iraq into a democracy, it'll do a lot of good for a
lot of people in that part of the world in the long run. I'm just
not entirely sure of Bush-43's ability to get a democracy built. I'm
hoping he'll pleasantly
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:20:05PM +1000, Russell Chapman wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
I'm hoping other UN countries would pleasantly surprise us on
this. There are a number of countries that should be able to do a
good job of it. Whether they will or not is another matter.
Aren't there a
Erik Reuter wrote:
In Iraq?
Ahh - too much snippage (for a change)...
I thought we had been discussing Afghanistan as evidence of what the US
could or couldn't achieve post-invasion.
To get with the thread (instead of trailing a day or so behind it...) -
I think Iraq will be different
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 02:52:15AM -, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
The U.S. military has dropped leaflets (...)
Are USA strategists aware that the more arrogance the
USA exhibits, the stronger will be the Iraqi people's
support for Saddam?
Are you saying that dropping leaflets saying
Erik Reuter wrote:
Are USA strategists aware that the more arrogance the
USA exhibits, the stronger will be the Iraqi people's
support for Saddam?
Are you saying that dropping leaflets saying that if they fire on US
planes, they will be fired upon, is arrongant?
Well, if I were an
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:27:58PM +0530, Ritu Ko wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
Are USA strategists aware that the more arrogance the
USA exhibits, the stronger will be the Iraqi people's
support for Saddam?
Are you saying that dropping leaflets saying that if they fire on US
Erik Reuter wrote:
Well, if I were an Iraqi and came across leaflets saying
that..'arrogance' would be one of the nicer words to cross my mind.
Really? Would you care to explain?
Certainly. :)
Consider the present conditions, the USA's drive to remove Saddam.
Irrespective of whether
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 09:41:51PM +0530, Ritu Ko wrote:
Well, I'd suggest that the US govt. calms down a bit.
It seems fairly calm to me. I'd like to see a little more charisma and
charm from Bush in working with other nations, but I have to say that
the response from other nations is quite
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You think Saddam and BJP are comparable??? Have you any conception of
how Saddam has ruled Iraq?
Both have used chemical weapon on their 'native' populations. I will get
to it. Sometime.
___
At 13:33 06-10-2002 -0400, Erik Reuter wrote:
Surely you can see the difference between a fascist dictator and a
and a democractically elected government? Why should the former be
protected? Especially when the former has repeatedly disobeyed
instructions of the United Nations?
Well, other
The Fool wrote:
Both have used chemical weapon on their 'native' populations.
I will get
to it. Sometime.
Oh, this I've not heard about and am interested. Could you refer some
sites or sources please?
Ritu
___
Dan Minette wrote:
Indeed, for Americans, Europe's and its failure to respond to
Hitler has
been a paradigm example of what not to do for over 50 years of foreign
policy. I cannot imagine you picking a worse example to use.
It doesn't
falsify your arguement, but it is not a good case
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 01:31:02AM +0530, Ritu Ko wrote:
I am not claiming that the former should be protected. But just that
there are proper channels to take these actions. And that when these
channels are ignored, things worsen. They don't get better. At least
not for the non-Americans.
Erik Reuter wrote:
Are you saying that dropping leaflets saying that if they fire on US
planes, they will be fired upon, is arrongant?
No
Alberto Monteiro
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 10:24:18PM -, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
Are you saying that dropping leaflets saying that if they fire on US
planes, they will be fired upon, is arrongant?
No
How about arrogant?
--
Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dan Minette wrote:
I'm not arguing that the war reparations were not a bad
idea...but that
they were essentially dropped and were thus meaningless. In a
sense, the
difference between WWI and WWII was that the winners ran the
losing country
for the benefit of the losers for a number of
- Original Message -
From: Ritu Ko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 10:33 PM
Subject: RE: U.S. drops leaflets warning Iraq of counterattack
I mean, look at what happened in 1947/8 and '71 - India won both the
wars decisively and convincingly
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: U.S. drops leaflets warning Iraq of counterattack
- Original Message -
From: Ritu Ko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday
Dan Minette wrote:
Well, I won't argue against your examples, but I am thinking
of a much more
decisive win than that. All of Germany and Japan were under
the control of
the winners of WWII. Pakistan wasn't after those two wars.
No, Pakistan was not completely under Indian control but
Dan M. wrote:
If that outside help is coming from Uncle Sam, I'd say that
my concerns
are reasonably valid.
You know, I'd just love to see Ritu and Gautam get into a
debate on this.
chuckle
I have to say I agree.
But like you siad, he is busy. :)
(I think I told you, Ritu, that
42 matches
Mail list logo
