Re: {warning, longwinded] Re: Dissuasion vs. Persuasion, was Re: [Iraq] The r...

From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Mon Jun 09 2003 - 02:04:59 MDT

  • Next message: Anders Sandberg: "Re: Fw: [Para-Discuss] faster than light?"

    You have wandered out in the rhetorical tall grass, and you have done so
    without me. Good day.

    On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 20:24:40 EDT, <Spudboy100@aol.com> wrote:

    > -Who decides when military action is not taken, when it is called for? -
    > You are concerned that the CIC is a religious fundamentalist. The irony
    > is that said fundamentalist had to ask his Mom whether, myself, as a
    > member of a certain group whether I was going to hell >;) His Mom
    > directed the future prez to have a chat with Billy Graham for answers. If
    > I am not pestered by the prez's religious affiliations, crazy white boy
    > that you are, why should you be :-) ??
    >
    > If Iraq breaks up into religious geographic sections, why should this
    > trouble you? As far as the idea that the dog is being wagged by the
    > Republican tail, kindly imagine what a 12 kiloton yield nuke detonating
    > in central DC will have on this list, the economy, the country, the
    > world. Then, you really will have a dictatorship to worry about, if
    > you're lucky. Also, count the USA out as a participant is space
    > exploration, and scientific pursuits.
    >
    > The chance option for retaliation against a radical Islamic group, who
    > doesn't mind dying for Allah, would be really low in the case of nuclear
    > guerilla warfare, unless such as option is already in place, with
    > suspected targets already identified. You, indeed are here as part of a
    > civilization that is being targeted for attack. Now what is the best way
    > we can defend it? The question of targeting is not paranoia, the wisest
    > response is. Denial is not an option, for either of us.
    >
    > Mitch
    >
    >
    > MMB Said, Greviously
    > <<<I -If NO military action is taken when called for, grievous.
    >
    > -If military action is/was taken and bystanders become more polarized,
    > grievous.
    >
    > -If grasping abusive shortsighted people subjugate others, grievous--
    > whether they're thug-protected corporations or simple gun-bearing thugs.
    >
    > -If Iraq collapses into Shi'ite Shariya, grievous.
    >
    > -If the actions taken by the US contribute to instability, grievous.
    >
    > -If the US uses such instability to justify further incursions ("Hey,
    > look, we tried, but them camel jockeys just aren't ready for anything but
    > subjugaton...") with a further net bad effect, grievous.
    >
    > -If those who claim to speak for the US continue to spin, oversimplify
    > and misrepresent things, grievous.
    >
    > -If the media continue to pump up the US population as easily spooked
    > fragile victims, grievous.>>

    -- 
    I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a civilization. 
    Sometimes I forget.
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 09 2003 - 02:15:47 MDT