From: hubert mania (humania@t-online.de)
Date: Sun Mar 30 2003 - 13:17:34 MST
Okay, Mr. Dickey, one more time:
The United States can be the greatest power in the World. I do not mind at
all. And I have stated this a dozen times before. You Americans can be the
winner in all human categories, in all sports, art and anything else. I do
not mind. Because I have symathy with the loosers and the weak. Winners and
heroes do not necessarily attract me.
But what I FEAR is one war after the other on countries that seem unpopular
to the US.
----- Original Message -----
From: "matus" <matus@snet.net>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 8:58 PM
Subject: RE: IRAQ Reasons for War (was: RE: First Announcement of the
Secretary of PUKE...)
> Mania said
>
> > But what I fear is that this war might be the first step towards
> > a new world
> > order where the law of the strongest, i. e. USA reigns.
>
> Ah, so the truth finally comes out! The sole reason mania opposes this
war
> is because the US is too big and strong! God forbid a free, democractic
> constitutional republic be the worlds strongest power!! As MaxPlumm has
> repeatedly pointed out, no country has done more than the US to spread
> democracy throughout the world, yet Mania sees such a country as the
worlds
> strongest as a bad thing!
>
> I would invite Mania, and others, to consider a world where either one of
> these countries were the strongest in the world
>
> Saddam Hussains IRAQ
> Kim Jong Il's North Korea
> Mao Ze Dong's China
>
> > I will not stop shouting, I am against THIS war. You are deadly wrong
and
> > you should hear it again every day!
> >
>
> Well the more you shout the more likely we are to listen to you, correct?
> As I said in my post, unless you address the reasons why those who support
> the war support it, you will not disuade anyone. It seems your primary
> motivation for opposing this war *anyway* is that you merely dont want the
> US to be strong. Instead of Might makes right, its now might makes wrong!
>
> And I should further point out, that at least for Robert Bradbury and I,
you
> are deadly wrong, and your opinions may lead to the end of the human race.
>
> Samantha said:
>
> > >>As Robert Bradbury pointed out, leaving Saddam in power will cause
more
> > >>deaths of Iraqi people then taking him out of power. He asked anyone
> > >>to present a reasonable challenge to that notion, and received no
> > >>responses as of yet.
> > >
> >
> > I didn't reply because I don't believe the general case or
> > especially this specific case can be reduced to such simple
> > equations. If it a few less people die due to one course over
> > the other immediately but set into motion a series of
> > repurcussions that lead to many more deaths this clearly would
> > not be a win. But there is no way to easily quantify these
> > fuller costs. Those the equation is not of much value to me at
> > this time.
> >
>
> Samantha, as I just pointed out to Mania, to at least Robert and I, *your*
> opinions could lead to the end of all human life on earth. Perhaps with
> this perspective of ours you will understand why we (and perhaps other
> supporters of this war) do not find your arguments in the least bit
> compelling.
>
> > I am not in the least "clueless" about this. Unfortunately for
> > your argument it has nothing to with our current actions in
> > Iraq. Do you believe with Mr. Bush that they "want us dead" just
> > because they are E-V-I-L and we are so filled with Light and all
> > that is Good?
>
> Aha! I say... Here I get the feeling the ultimate objection that Samantha
> (and possibly Mania have) is that to acknowledge this war is just is to
> acknowledge that there is *actually* a country out there that is indeed
> worse than the United States.
>
> Michael Dickey
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 30 2003 - 13:24:44 MST