Gary Smith wrote:

> Rightful owners? Shouldn't the Canal Zone been given back to Colombia
> then????

That would have been even better, but you can't unscramble an omelet.

> We came to an agreement on the Canal Zone, only AFTER
> liberating the Panamanians from Colombia.

After backing a group of separatist guerilla rebels. And you actively looked for
someone to back. Originally the canal was going to cross Nicaragua, but the
government there wanted concessions your government of the day wasn't prepared to
give.

> They agreed to give us low rent
> on the place in exchange for their own country. We were just extra
> friendly when we gave it totally back to them. Carter didn't right an
> error in history, otherwise he would have given Panama back to Colombia.
>

As I said, by that time it was too late to give Panama back to Colombia (although
Colombia still occupies islands offshore of Panama). But at least he did some
good by giving it back to the local population.

>
> Carter isn't a traitor. And right wingers don't consider him such.

Whoa -- you should read some of the comments I've seen from Pat Buchanan!

> They
> just think he's a dunderhead. And they are right. Just look at what his
> policies caused, domestically and foreign. Reagan fixed much of it.
>

By giving free rein to the loose cannon Ollie North? By obstructing freedom in
South Africa? By propping up Pinochet?

>
> As for La Reconquista, I'm aware of it. I think they are goofy if they
> think they're going to reclaim California and a few other Western States
> for Mexico. I mean, if you want to consider it, we were rather nice to
> them 150 years ago and let them keep their capitol city.  ;-)
>
> I'd hate to see the west go back to Mexico, as it would end up being the
> quintessential urban decay. Besides, US government officials are corrupt
> enough without putting the Mexican system into place.  Within a couple
> weeks, the transit systems would be working half as well as they do
> today. Postal system? Don't even think about home delivery anymore.
>

So if USAmericans think they can make the trains run on time that gives them the
right to someone else's territory? I think even a cursory high-school leavel
reading of US history shows that even "purchases" such as Gadsden were forced on
the Mexicans. The resulting resentment delayed the introduction of the Gospel
into Mexico by decades.

>
> No, I think I'd rather surrender to the Canadians first.  Maybe Marc
> could start having some of his relatives slip down here and start taking
> over the Northwest, or something....
>

I tried that once and they tried to ship me to Vietnam, so I came back home. I'll
fight for my country, but not for a war criminal's foreign intrigues.

>
> K'aya K'ama,
> Gerald/gary  Smith    gszion1 @juno.com    http://www

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

"The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark."
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authorís employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

==^^===============================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===============================================================

Reply via email to