From: matus (matus@snet.net)
Date: Mon Mar 17 2003 - 12:56:44 MST
Humania said
"Allright. I give up. No more communication possible. A complete waste of
time and energy. The falcons on this list live in a giant bubble and don`t
even realize that they are isolated in the world. You are lost, my
un-friends! I am too exhausted to answer the false arguments on this list
anymore. It is pure disgrace. So let there be war. Let there be celebrations
of killing children. Let us sit in front of the TV and watch the apparently
surgical precision of the bombs. What a great laugh! Praise the Lord and
pass the ammunition!"
Suffice to say, and not surprisingly, you answered absolutely none of the
questions. Can you not even justify your own opinions beyond 'war = bad'
You call for the ousting of murderous tyrants as war criminals *only* if its
Bush, and you expect others on this list to think that sounds like a
reasonable and we thought out opinion? You support the unconditional
removal of Bush for something he *might* do but care not about Saddam who
*has* done those things! Please try to help us understand, cause, speaking
for myself, I am quite confused about your line of reasoning.
You said "but I do support their stance against the Iraq war which is a
disarmament founded on peaceful methods and more patience."
I say again, what if Saddam is not interested in disarmement founded on
peaceful methods, what would you propose be done then?
Alas, given the news breaking today it sounds as if all your efforts have
been wasted anyhow.
Michael Dickey
> >
> > Apparently, Mr. Mania, you have no sense of irony. The respondent was
> > using acts that Saddam has committed, and which you and your country
> > seem blithely unwilling to bring him to task on. The fact that you are
> > so willing to remove Mr. Bush for acts which Mr. Saddam has committed,
> > and not willing to remove Mr. Saddam, exposes your hypocrisy and hidden
> agenda....
>
> "Yes, you are right, I failed to see the irony here. But anyway, your fine
> President will be responsible for the deaths of American soldiers and for
> invading a country. So, the reasons for accusation remain just the same,
> no matter if I failed to detect ironic statements or not."
>
> So you now recognize the irony, but do nothing to answer the question? Why
> would you support a move, unilitarerally or multilaterally, to depose Bush
> as a war criminal but CALL Bush a war criminal for trying to do exactly
that with Saddam, who IS in fact a war criminal. Do you not recognize your
own hypocricy?
>
> "I also want Saddam to be removed but not on the cost of a mountain of
> civilian Iraqui corpses, which will be a war crime."
>
> So you want Saddam removed, but at the cost of not a single Iraqi
Civilian?
> I would ask then, how many corpses has Saddam himself racked up?
> Conservatives estimates, as others on list have mentioned, are around
> 200,000. How many need he rack up before losing one Iraqi civilian
(Perhaps
> one he has tied to his front door) to remove him becomes just? Your
policy
> of absolutely no civilian casualities if implemented in *any* past war
would
> have lead to the immediate and catrastrophic rise to power of any and all
> totalatrian regimes, we would today be the peoples planet of the soviet
> union. If you considered Bush a war criminal, would killing one civilian
be
> just in ousting his tryannical regime, what if he has all-ready killed
> 100,000s of thousands, and there is no reason to suspect he will stop?
>
> In short, you seem ready to jump on the 'remove the murderous bastard'
> bandwagon only if it is Bush who is the 'murderous bastard'. Please
outline
> also a course of action that you would consider just in removing murderous
> tyrants from power.
>
> "I never would have thought that I would ever have to defend a pacifist
> attitude here on the list when I started reading extropian mails in 1996."
>
> I never thought it would be overun with moral relativist apologist hippies
> who don't care for the lives of anyone but the individuals in thier own
> countries. Take a look at the number of human kills racked up by
murderous
> tyrannical regimes. R.J. Rummels excellent site "Power Kills" estimates
> that in the 20th century alone these governments have killed 170 million
> people. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM I have heard of no
> german forces fighting the murderous North Vietnames attemptes to
slaughter
> and enslave the entire population of Indochina.
>
> "I am amazed how many rednecks are assembled here."
>
> I am amazed at your lack of understanding of these geopolitical issues.
> Your absolute pacifism is irrational and illogical, and would lead to a
> system that actually rewards murderous expansionist regimes. Try plugging
> 'always cooperate' into any game strategy program and see how long it
lasts.
> Cooperate with a force invading your country? Coopoerate with a force
> invading another country you are allied with? Cooperate with a murderous
> government killing its own people? Where does this cooperation lead?
>
> "but I do support their stance against the Iraq war which is a disarmament
> founded on peaceful methods and more patience."
>
> You seem oblivious or ignorant of the fact that the inspectors would not
> even *be* in Iraq were it not for the credible threat of force from the
US.
> Note 'Credible' in that statement. This is why the inspectors were absent
> for the past 12 years. What if Saddam, as a murderous tyrant, is not
> interested in 'disarmament founded on a peaceful method'? What would you
> propose be done then, just wait and hope he changes his mind, while he
> contiues to kill thousands of people?
>
> Why so ready to depose Bush for the same crimes that Saddam routinely
> commits?
>
> And for the record, I am proudly quite pale.
>
> Michael Dickey
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Mar 17 2003 - 12:49:19 MST