John Clark wrote:
>
> Samantha Atkins <samantha@objectent.com>
>
> > From where I sit the US is quite interested in a war.
>
> That's ridiculous, there is no reason America would want any war right
> now, much less a "major and indefinite" one. Do you think Americans just
> woke up one fine day and thought " You know what I'd really like, I'd like to
> rule the poorest country in the world, Afghanistan"? It's not complicated, no
> need to look for hidden motives, we are at war because somebody is trying
> to kill us and they've already made a very good start.
Then tell me exactly why we are talking about an indeterminate
war against an unknown number of targets in an unknown number of
countries. Such a war should be shouted down immediately. But
it isn't. Why? As bad as 911 was such a response is overboard
and overly broad.
>
> >Are you utterly sure some elements of your own country are not planting
> >just enough anthrax to create a scare and justify going after the next target?
>
> Right, and flying saucer crashed in New Mexico 50 years ago and there are
> bodies of aliens in a freezer at a Air Force base, and we learned how to make
> microprocessors from the debris of that crash, and JFK is still alive, Elvis too,
> and CIA satellites are beaming thoughts into my head, and black helicopters
> are chasing me.
>
Laugh if you want to but it is a much more complicated world
than blase assumptions that we are the good guys and those are
the "evil ones" would lead you to believe.
> >Our campaign is massively dishonest
>
> Interesting, one side crashed two civilian jetliners into the two largest civilian
> office buildings in the world, the same side sends letters laced with anthrax to
> innocent people, the same side makes it a crime to educate women,
> but that's not the side you call "massively dishonest".
>
>
We do not know there is any terrorism plot behind the anthrax
scare according to experts. Nor do we have evidence saying it
is done by any particular group that is more than extremely
flimsy. That the Taliban are nasty folks does not say they are
responsible for all ills nor that an endless campaign that goes
substantially beyond Afghanistan is in the least justified. Not
to mention the eviscerating of our own civil liberties.
>and ill-defined.
>
> I would say American foreign policy has not been better defined in my lifetime,
> it's do what you have to do in order to stay alive.
>
That is not what we are doing exactly.
> >Something is driving us beyond the horror of 911.
>
> Interesting, over six thousand have been butchered but you can't understand why that
> would be enough to make us do what we have done. I hope I'm not accused of being
> impolite by saying this because I consider it an objective fact, Madam you are a fool.
>
You hope no such thing. The response is overboard. You are
being determinedly blind. IMHO of course.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:13 MDT