Amen, John.
--- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "tschibasch"
<tschibasch_at_y...> wrote:
> The people of Iraq are no doubt better off now that Saddam Hussein
is
> out of power. Even as a member of Amnesty International, I was still
> surprised at what went on there, with all the political murders and
> toture... In one of Uday's palaces (he is the oldest son of Saddam),
> among all the guns, booze and porn, US Forces found a large cache of
> UNICEF supply boxes intended for Iraqi children. Why weren't the
Iraqi
> children getting these things, which they were certainly entitled
to?
>
> I am, however, still against this war. The fact that Hussein has
WMDs
> (e.g. "big bad weapons") and may use them is no excuse to invade.
> Doing so sets a dangerous precedent: As we mull over the pros and
cons
> of now attacking Syria for the same reasons, reports are coming in
> that India is considering attacking Pakistan, for the very same
> reasons: India claims that Pakistan has WMDs and is harboring
> terrorists. Why would India's "war against terror" be any less valid
> than the American one?
>
> The United States does not have the unilateral right to "correct" a
> regime that it sees as unfit.
>
> Just my two rupees.
>
> John
>
>
> --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "Georgie Hinklemyer"
> <samoolives_at_y...> wrote:
> > I agree. I've heard about true acts of nobility performed by our
> > troops - the same ones who were sent out to do serious damage to
> > another country's leadership. A general telling his soldiers to
kneel
> > down and point their weapons at the ground to show the
townspeople
> > they mean no harm to the local mosque. A 16-year veteran
> > acknowledging that people are happy to see Saddam's reign end but
> > disgusted with the bodies and bloodshed in the streets, and
sorrowing
> > over the condition of a freed prisoner of the regime. Soldiers
> > talking to Iraqis and trying to get them to organize themselves
into
> > some sort of police force for their own protection. Talking
> > one-on-one to the Iraqi people. Once the weaponry was put aside,
we
> > got some pretty damn honorable people trying to do some pretty
damn
> > honorable things. Yes, I can support the Coalition forces (now)
> > without condoning the purported reasons for going in, the
flaunting of
> > our science and power in the many faces of the world. Here at
home,
> > it seems no one listens to anyone with a differing viewpoint.
> > (Present company excepted, of course!)
> >
> >
> > G.H.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "tschibasch"
> > <tschibasch_at_y...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I could not agree more with David. It is entirely possible to be
> >
> >
> > > AGAINST the war but SUPPORT the military. And it is our right to
> >
> >
> > > demonstrate, if we so choose.
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > > And another thing: We are only too aware that Iraqis could never
> >
> >
> > > demostrate against their own government. The fact that they
cannot
> > and
> >
> >
> > > we can does not mean that we shouldn't.
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > > John
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > > --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "dne44"
<dne_at_d...>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > Lenny-
> >
> >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > It's as simple as this: I respect and admire the courage,
> > dedication
> >
> >
> > > > and professionalism of our troops. However, I do not believe
in
> > the
> >
> >
> > > > cause and timing of this war as outlined by our government,
and
> >
> >
> > > > therefore do not support the war. This does not strike me as
a
> > self-
> >
> >
> > > > contradicting view in the least.
> >
> >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > When we see actions such as those taken by the president of
the
> >
> >
> > > > baseball hall of fame refusing to honor the movie Bull Durham
> > because
> >
> >
> > > > of the political views of Tim Ribbins and Susan Sarandon, it
> > strikes
> >
> >
> > > > me that more than ever people are losing the ability to be
> > rational
> >
> >
> > > > about what free speech is supposed to mean (and this is true
of
> > both
> >
> >
> > > > sides; however, it is particularly worrisome on the right
since
> > the
> >
> >
> > > > government is taking an actively anti-free speech stand, at
least
> >
> >
> > > > rhetorically).
> >
> >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > - David
> >
> >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "7visions"
> >
> >
> > > > <7visions_at_p...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > > As for the " I Support the Troops" line being bandied
about, it
> > has
> >
> >
> > > > always
> >
> >
> > > > > been a bit of a cliche. This men and women have trained for
a
> > long
> >
> >
> > > > time to
> >
> >
> > > > > be where they are. If you say, "I Support the Troops, but I
am
> >
> >
> > > > against what
> >
> >
> > > > > they are doing", just what are you actually saying? ..." I
think
> >
> >
> > > > you are
> >
> >
> > > > > nice people, but I don't like soldiers". ?
> >
> >
> > > > >
Received on 2003-04-15 17:11:50
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: 2020-02-04 07:16:16 UTC