---Original Message---
From: S.V. van Baardwijk-Holten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I do however think that keeping the pressure on high,
while conducting further peacefull inspections is
probably the best bet for improvement in the region.
Then again I don't see how the US will be prevented
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:39:09PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
At 05:01 PM 3/11/2003 + Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Or should decision making be based on population, so that China and
India, gain power, and smaller states, like France or the US, have
less? The `one adult, one vote' method
Dan Minette wrote:
Germany has proportional representation. If there
are two big parties, each with 47.5% of the
legislature, then a party with 5% can claim a pretty
high price to make one of the two parties the top dog.
But, OTOH, I guess Germany elects the parliamentary
- Original Message -
From: Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 6:33 AM
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Dan Minette wrote:
Germany has proportional representation. If there
are two big parties, each
On 13 Mar 2003 at 8:00, Dan Minette wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
Germany has proportional representation. If there
are two big parties, each with 47.5% of the
legislature, then a party with 5% can claim a pretty
high price to make one of the two parties the top dog.
But, OTOH,
Andrew Crystall wrote:
How partial-list works:
You have x districts. Each elects an MP. Once all MP's from the
districts are elected, you look at the percentage of votes. You chuck
out all parties with less than 5% of the vote (to keep the lunatic
fringe out). (...)
Hmmm...
On 13 Mar 2003 at 14:47, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew Crystall wrote:
How partial-list works:
You have x districts. Each elects an MP. Once all MP's from the
districts are elected, you look at the percentage of votes. You
chuck out all parties with less than 5% of the vote
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote:
At 01:00 AM 3/5/2003 -0600 Marvin Long, Jr. wrote:
Saddam is as guilty as sin but if containment can keep him as
relatively weak as he is now, then perpetuating that state of affairs is
the lesser evil
Two questions for you Marvin:
1) Do you
--- Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Behalf Of Deborah Harrell
--- Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows
humor...
Cowboys and Muslims snipped joke
This was incredibly offensive and not
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:32:17PM -0600, Marvin Long, Jr. wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote:
At 01:00 AM 3/5/2003 -0600 Marvin Long, Jr. wrote:
Saddam is as guilty as sin but if containment can keep him as
relatively weak as he is now, then perpetuating that state of
2) Did you consider the DPRK in 1994, when it was accepting US bribes and
UN inspections, and when it was only a few years away from assembling a few
nuclear bombs without us knowing or able to stop them, to be relatively
weak at that time?
Yes and no. Compared to the US, in general terms,
Jon Gabriel wrote:
I checked my archive. That was John Horn who said that, not me. You're
referring to your reply to him on 3/5?
Oops, sorry about that.
If you do want my opinion on this subject
Millions of Buddhist Indians view the swastika as a symbol of life.
On 11 Mar 2003 at 17:08, Jon Gabriel wrote:
At 22:47 10-03-03 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
Don't forget our wonderful, non democratic means for selecting a
president.
Well, there are a lot of advantages to republican government over
democratic.
What are those alleged advantages, and
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 2:02 AM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Jon Gabriel wrote:
It didn't exactly sound like a warning encouraging American
self-examination
On 12 Mar 2003 at 1:25, Jon Gabriel wrote:
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows humor...
Cowboys and Muslims
snipped joke
This was incredibly offensive and not funny for so
many reasons. :(
I'm genuinely curious: would you have posted this if
it had a German
From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:34:03 -
On 12 Mar 2003 at 1:25, Jon Gabriel wrote:
This is *awful*...but good sick
On 12 Mar 2003 at 9:51, Jon Gabriel wrote:
On 12 Mar 2003 at 1:25, Jon Gabriel wrote:
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows humor...
Cowboys and Muslims
snipped joke
This was incredibly offensive and not funny for so
many reasons. :(
I'm genuinely
From: J. van Baardwijk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I just don't think that it makes sense to have two types of
resolution. I
mean, what's the point of making a resolution if you can't
enforce it? It's
just a waste of time and money then; such a system turns the
UN into a paper tiger.
I
Jon Gabriel wrote:
IMO, that doesn't make the joke acceptable. I do understand where
you're coming from, but I still disagree. There isn't a stated goal
of male Americans raping and murdering women either but you won't see me
joking about that (hopefully extremely) rare occurrence for any
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:58:41 -0600
Jon Gabriel wrote:
IMO, that doesn't make the joke acceptable. I do understand
Jon Gabriel wrote:
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:58:41 -0600
According to _The Gift of Fear_ by Gavin de Becker, 75
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:09:44 -0600
Jon Gabriel wrote:
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Yeah, but the system America uses is horribly over-complex. I'm in
favour of a partial-list (much like Germany
- Original Message -
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Jon Gabriel wrote:
IMO, that doesn't make the joke acceptable. I do understand where
you're
At 05:01 PM 3/11/2003 + Robert J. Chassell wrote:
So, to return to the question, who should employ the `sheriff'?
* Should the rest of the world depend on the US?
Yes.I simply don't trust anyone else at this point.Ultimately, I
see the US as being ultimately responsible to itself,
At 12:15 PM 3/10/2003 -0800 Deborah Harrell wrote:
What do you choose?
As I have pointed out before, I haven't seen enough
info to agree that Iraq is a direct threat to the US
which would justify our 'going alone' (with a few
others);
In 1998, the UN said that Hussein had vast quantities of
At 05:01 PM 3/11/2003 + Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Anyhow, this makes the rest of your propositions irrelevant. but
here are my answers just for yucks.
What should be the criteria of membership? Should a new government
include everyone as the UN now does?
No.
It should be limited
At 01:00 AM 3/5/2003 -0600 Marvin Long, Jr. wrote:
Saddam is as guilty as sin but if containment can keep him as
relatively weak as he is now, then perpetuating that state of affairs is
the lesser evil
Two questions for you Marvin:
1) Do you consider the ability to use massive amounts of
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
On 12 Mar 2003 at 15:34, Dan Minette wrote:
Yeah, but the system America uses is horribly over-complex
--- Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then show why it's in their interest *in the
long-term.* Offhand, I'd say that the Muslim
extremists will eventually target France because
they
are, after all, part of the hated West - women
aren't
veiled, they vote and drive, and religion is
My question is not `who should be sheriff?' but `who should be the
government that employs the sheriff, and what should be its form?'
Should the United States emply the sheriff? Or should the United
Nations as currently constituted? Or should the UN be revised, or
should it be a different
--- Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* on the other side, those who ask, `is Iraq now
a
part of a larger
war, much as Morocco, the first country the US
invaded in World
War II, was a small part of a larger war?'
Someone else is reading USS Clueless :-)
Gautam
On 11 Mar 2003 at 7:00, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Now, there is one way to convince France that it is in
their long term interest to support us. And that is
to make it clear that there will be consequences to
opposing us. Attack the European Union structure, for
example, and you weaken
--- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually no. You attack the EU, and you force the
EU
to respond. You
reinforce the us and them mentality, and you
bolster support for a
Federal Europe.
Andy
That depends on how you do it. Note that I'm not
(necessarily) advocating this
On 11 Mar 2003 at 10:04, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually no. You attack the EU, and you force the
EU
to respond. You
reinforce the us and them mentality, and you
bolster support for a
Federal Europe.
Andy
That depends on how you do
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows humor...
(maybe someone's already posted this, but I have ~ 480
posts to clear, so I'm passing it on)
Cowboys and Muslims
Three men are sittin' on a bench...One's a Texan
wearing a Stetson, One's
a muslim wearing a Turban, and the last an Apache
Indian
Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Should international legislation be based on the current UN two-fold
system in which, on the one hand, individual states, no matter how
small, have one vote when they become temporary members of the UN
Security Council; but which other states are permanent members
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:11:43 -0800 (PST)
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows humor...
(maybe someone's already posted
At 03:04 PM 3/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:11:43 -0800 (PST)
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows
At 22:47 10-03-03 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
Don't forget our wonderful, non democratic means for selecting a
president.
Well, there are a lot of advantages to republican government over democratic.
What are those alleged advantages, and *why* are they advantages?
Jeroen Political Inquiries van
At 15:04 11-03-03 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:
Cowboys and Muslims
Three men are sittin' on a bench...One's a Texan wearing a Stetson,
One's a muslim wearing a Turban, and the last an Apache Indian with an
Eagle feather woven in his hair.
The Indian is rather glum and says, Once my people were
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:13:36 +0100
At 22:47 10-03-03 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
Don't forget our wonderful, non democratic means
From: Jean-Louis Couturier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:16:03 -0500
At 17:08 2003-03-11 -0500, Jon wrote:
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply
- Original Message -
From: Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
Like: How do you fit forty four people in a Volkswagon?
Uh Oh!!!
We be thinking alike Kevin!
xponent
I wrote:
much snippage
Well, what Powell et al. are doing right now -
intense lobbying - is worth trying...
rest snipped
I'll add that Bush is getting in on the lobbying
personally (phone calls), from what I heard on the
news; this is laudable.
Debbi
who's comenting out-of-turn, but hopes to
--- Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is *awful*...but good sick gallows humor...
Cowboys and Muslims
snipped joke
This was incredibly offensive and not funny for so
many reasons. :(
I'm genuinely curious: would you have posted this if
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of Robert Seeberger
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:17 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
- Original Message -
From: Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of Deborah Harrell
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:48 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: [Humor] RE: Who is the sheriff?
--- Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is *awful
Jon Gabriel wrote:
It didn't exactly sound like a warning encouraging American
self-examination to me.
Hmm, I can sympathize with your reaction, but the above is how I
interpreted the joke.
While we're on the subject, I asked the other day why it is that the use
of Nazi symbols is inherently
(4) Mel Brooks would laugh at it.
In To Be Or Not To Be, he did play a 'wipe out the Jews'
game and out finessed the Nazis.
It's all how you look at it, and some people shouldn't look when warned.
William Taylor
-
Debbi or naughty Debbi? I aint a quisling.
On 10 Mar 2003 at 0:07, Dan Minette wrote:
mm...maybe in the War of Independence, Israel needed it, but since
then we'd have managed fine, thanks.
That contradicts everything I've heard about why Israel was able to
finally win the Yom Kipper war. Without the asymmetry in the resupply
of
JDG wrote:
Ok, why not Venezuela? Even if you consider Chavez a
dictatorial type, he is still the elected power in
Venezuela, and, if nothing weird happens,
he will pass the power to the next elected power
in a few months.
[BTW: neither Argentina nor Paraguay are currently
being
On 10 Mar 2003 at 8:36, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
serious
This opposition criterium will exclude the USA - for
all non-USAns, the Democratic and Republican Parties
are clones, so there's no opposition in the USA for
the past 150 years :-P
/serious
In many ways, our Labour party have
I said:
Rich, who will update his weblog article with this information as soon
as he gets time.
I've now done this, complete with lots of hyperlinks to more
information:
http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/31.html#update
Rich
___
--- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mm...maybe in the War of Independence, Israel needed
it, but since
then we'd have managed fine, thanks. The Six Day war
alone should
incicate to you the kind of men the IDF had and has
on it's planning
staff.
Andy
No, this is definitely
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
One other note - I have been quietly told that the
extent of US aid to Israel in 1973 vastly exceeds what
has been publicly reported. I don't want to say any
more than that. Has anyone else heard anything about
this?
Nukes?
Alberto Monteiro
--- Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
One other note - I have been quietly told that the
extent of US aid to Israel in 1973 vastly exceeds
what
has been publicly reported. I don't want to say
any
more than that. Has anyone else heard anything
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
serious
This opposition criterium will exclude the USA - for
all non-USAns, the Democratic and Republican Parties
are clones, so there's no opposition in the USA for
the past 150 years :-P
/serious
Don't forget our wonderful, non democratic means for selecting a
At 20:03 2003-03-09 -0500, John wrote:
Russia can't really
be called a democracy until it truly has an opposition, and the opposition
succeeds in getting elected. (This will probably eliminate a few other
candidates I included originally - but that was more of an outline,
really, than anything.)
At 19:35 2003-03-09 -0500, John wrote:
Let's say that the US proposes a League of Democracies, with membership
invitations extended to all members of NATO, all members of the EU
(including newly invited members), most of Latin America (except Cuba,
Venezuela, and a few others), Japan, Republic of
This is a continuation of my reply, rudely interrupted
by the library's closing Saturday grumble, grumble.
(It closes at varying times - 5:30, 7 or 9 PM - but
all that is posted is Closed Sunday and Wednesday.)
--- John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
large snip
Moreover, we cannot afford
On 10 Mar 2003 at 11:02, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
One other note - I have been quietly told that the
extent of US aid to Israel in 1973 vastly exceeds what
has been publicly reported. I don't want to say any
more than that. Has anyone else heard anything
On 10 Mar 2003 at 5:59, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mm...maybe in the War of Independence, Israel needed
it, but since
then we'd have managed fine, thanks. The Six Day war
alone should
incicate to you the kind of men the IDF had and has
on
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Debbi
who wonders if anyone else thinks that there must be a
joke in the deadline of St. Paddy's Day
Yeah, well, too bad the soldiers will be going into a *desert* environment,
with their camouflage the wrong color for St. Pat
Julia
who misses being able
At 12:15 PM 3/10/03 -0800, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Debbi
who wonders if anyone else thinks that there must be a
joke in the deadline of St. Paddy's Day
We may be interrupting Muslims while they're drinking their green beer?
We're driving the snakes out of Iraq?
-- Ronn! :)
Almighty Ruler
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Nukes?
Nope. They were developed alongside South Africa. And with
some help from France.
Is there _any_ nuclear program that didn't have the help
from France? :-)
Alberto Monteiro
___
- Original Message -
From: Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Nukes?
Nope. They were developed alongside South Africa. And with
some
--- Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My understanding of the 17th was that there was an
implied clearance for military action if Iraq
failed to cooperate...? Is that incorrect?
No, that is correct. That's exactly what 1441 said.
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
big snip
A secret document about ideas that a working group
has about laws they
would like to pass is not a very good place to
reference the actions of the
government. I remember all the references of the
Birchers to such documents. :-)
But it is
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Gautam Mukunda
...
The French acted the way they did
because that was in consonance with their perception
of French interests. The Germans the same. The
goodwill meant jack shit to them, because
At 06:32 AM 3/10/2003 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
Don't forget our wonderful, non democratic means for selecting a president.
Well, there are a lot of advantages to republican government over democratic.
I agree - and it's this ambiguity that suggests
erring in the side of _inclusion_ and not
At 10:43 PM 3/10/03 +, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Nukes?
Nope. They were developed alongside South Africa. And with
some help from France.
Is there _any_ nuclear program that didn't have the help
from France? :-)
The Manhattan Project?
-- Ronn! :)
Almighty
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Debbi
who managed to get in another mention of horses :)
OK, that does it, Debbi! You have to start reading some Elizabeth Moon.
Start with _Hunting Party_. :)
Julia
___
At 16:21 8-3-2003 -0800, Debbi Harrell wrote:
Moreover, we cannot afford to bring our troops home for a few months
and send them back in the Fall.
No, they certainly can't stay there 'indefinitely.'
Unfortunately, that means that there WILL be a war against Iraq. If the US
withdraws it troops
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 12:23:57 +0100
At 16:21 8-3-2003 -0800, Debbi Harrell wrote:
Moreover, we cannot afford to bring our troops
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 10:40:47 +0100
At 18:16 7-3-2003 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:
As for the security of the people of Israel, I
On 9 Mar 2003 at 11:59, Jon Gabriel wrote:
As for the security of the people of Israel, I think the IDF is
quite capable of defending Israel -- as is proven by the fact that,
despite several wars, the state of Israel still exists today.
Jeroen, have you ever been to Israel?
No -- and I
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 02:45:50PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
Unfortunately, the US would be very foolish to create a new such
organization, in which it could be outvoted
That is called democracy, and it is not foolish. The organization should
have proportional representation, with each
At 11:59 09-03-03 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:
Jeroen, have you ever been to Israel?
No -- and I am not planning on going there in the forseeable future either.
I asked for the following reason: I have it on good authority from people
who have been (including my wife) that the original,
J. van Baardwijk wrote:
At 22:34 7-3-2003 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
And if you can't understand the difference between the two types of
resolution when it's spelled out for you for the third time,
Until a few days ago I didn't even know there were two types of resolution.
I can
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 02:45:50PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
Unfortunately, the US would be very foolish to create a new such
organization, in which it could be outvoted
That is called democracy, and it is not foolish. The organization should
have proportional representation, with each
From: Jean-Louis Couturier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 18:57:05 -0500
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 02:45:50PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
Unfortunately, the US would be very foolish to create a new such
organization, in which it could be outvoted
Erik Reuter wrote:
Unfortunately, the US would be very foolish to create a new such
organization, in which it could be outvoted
That is called democracy, and it is not foolish. The organization should
have proportional representation, with each country member having votes
proportional to its
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 07:35:02PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
I can't believe that a libertarian or at least a neo-libertarian is
writing that.
Does it make you feel more secure in your self-righteous understanding
of someone once you assign them a label, John? If so, you'll have to try
JDG wrote:
Let's say that the US proposes a League of Democracies, with membership
invitations extended to all members of NATO, all members of the EU
(including newly invited members), most of Latin America (except Cuba,
Venezuela, and a few others),
Ok, why not Venezuela? Even if you consider
This may well be so, but bear in mind that the British Army has already
started receiving its Apache Longbows and the French and German armies
will start getting their Tigers in December (I must admit to knowing
little about helicopters, but it seems to me that the Tigers will be not
much less
At 12:44 AM 3/10/2003 - Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Ok, why not Venezuela? Even if you consider Chavez a dictatorial type,
he is still the elected power in Venezuela, and, if nothing weird happens,
he will pass the power to the next elected power in a few months.
[BTW: neither Argentina nor
- Original Message -
From: J. van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
Then why doesn't Israel go to the UN, plead their case there, and ask
that
their borders will be changed
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
mm...maybe in the War of Independence, Israel needed it, but since
then we'd have managed fine, thanks
At 07:17 7-3-2003 -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
I'm sure the French were quite grateful for being liberated by (among
other countries) the US. However, you seem to believe that because the
US took part in the liberation of France over fifty years ago, the
French should forever accept and
At 22:44 7-3-2003 +0100, I wrote:
And I have absolutely no intention whatsoever of starting a flame war.
Other people on this list have also made comments about the erosion of
civil rights/liberties in the US, and have mentioned that the US is on
its way to becoming a police state. Do you believe
At 18:16 7-3-2003 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:
As for the security of the people of Israel, I think the IDF is quite
capable of defending Israel -- as is proven by the fact that, despite
several wars, the state of Israel still exists today.
Jeroen, have you ever been to Israel?
No -- and I am not
Jeroen said:
If we acted in such a way, Jeroen, then you, right now, would be
living in part of the American empire.
To an extent, I already am.
In no sense are you.
In random order:
1. American fast-food restaurants are all over the place here.
This is because random citizens of the
At 23:18 7-3-2003 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
As for the security of the people of Israel, I think the IDF is quite
capable of defending Israel -- as is proven by the fact that, despite
several wars, the state of Israel still exists today.
Tell that to the kids on the bus.
John, horrible as it may
At 22:34 7-3-2003 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
And if you can't understand the difference between the two types of
resolution when it's spelled out for you for the third time,
Until a few days ago I didn't even know there were two types of resolution.
I can assure you that I do understand the
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 09:51:14AM +, Richard Baker wrote:
http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/31.html
In ten to fifteen years, though, things will be very different, and
then I expect the other European states to suddenly decide to play
a much more active and positive
Erik said:
You made an excellent case for the UK developing capabilities to
project power, but you didn't give any evidence that the rest of
Europe was doing so, which makes this last statement look like a big
leap to me. Since you said it takes a long time to develop such
capabilities, then
Gautam said:
1. I think you're underestimating the qualitative superiority of
American forces. Partly this is because of systemic effects.
This is, of course, much harder to judge, especially when comparing
systems that are mature against ones that are just entering service or
will do soon.
--- John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
But there is a subset of the war option:
essentially
unilateral US war, or UN-sanctioned military
action/war
(with the US of course being the major player)...
I snipped a teeny bit here Reasons include physical
support by
101 - 200 of 379 matches
Mail list logo
