Xah Lee's Unixism

Greg Menke gregm-news at toadmail.com
Tue Sep 14 14:53:56 CEST 2004


jmfbahciv at aol.com writes:

> In article <m3pt4qc57f.fsf at europa.pienet>,
>    Greg Menke <gregm-news at toadmail.com> wrote:
> >Chuck Dillon <spam at nimblegen.com> writes:
> >
> >> Antony Sequeira wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Chuck Dillon wrote:
> >> > How is that related to Saqqddam Hussqqqqqain being a jackass and us
> >> > spending 100 or whatever billions on removing him and having 1000+
> >> > of Americans + unknown number of Iraqqqqqis getting killed. How does
> >> > that help avoid
> >> > 9 qqqq  11 or are you confused between Iraqqqqqis and Saudqqqqis ?
> >> 
> >> If you reread the post that you responded to you will see it has
> >> nothing to do with Iraq.
> >> 
> >> However, to answer your question: How does regime change in Iraq help
> >> avoid another 9/11...
> >> 	1) It removes one of the states that might consider sponsing
> >> such a future attach.
> >
> >Wouldn't it have made more sense to invade Saudi Arabia? 
> 
> No.  It would have been the stupidest thing to do.  Invasion
> of Islam's holiest place would have ensure that this mess
> turned into a 100% religious war.

They're pretty convinced of that already- after all Dubya called this
a crusade from day 1.  I thought this war was about threats, not
superstition.  You wingers keep changing it around.  In what way would
invading and occupying a country that supplies, trains, funds the
terrorists who performed 9/11 be the supidest thing?  Isn't the
stupidest thing really invading a country that neither trained nor
harbored 9/11 terrorists or even had much of any weapons suitable for
attacking a neighbor country?  If we invaded Iraq simply because its
<easier>, and then back off from laying waste to whatever we want
whenever we want inside the country, then we're not really sending a
convincing message are we?  And then, if we choose to get tough and
carpet bomb any city with insurgent activity, then we become the evil
country that we're accused of being.  This is one of the faces of
quagmire & we're stuck in it.

Kicking around the weak kids does not impress another bully enough to
leave you alone, you have to beat him up.  We started doing so in
Afganistan, then blew it in Iraq.

 
> > .. Thats where
> >the terrorist money and terrorist leadership is from. 
> 
> IIRC, Hitler came from Austria.  So we should have only 
> invaded Austria to gain control of Africa and Europe?

But Hitler was a real threat to his neighbors and was occupying other
countries.  Saddam could hardly feed his own troops much less invade
anybody.  10 years ago was different, I'm not vastly fond of Dubya
Sr., but I think he did the right things in Iraq; he was a better
president than his son in all respects.

 
> > .. Iraq is chump
> >change on that account-
> 
> It's an ideal place.  It's located right in the middle of
> all potential trouble makers; its people are more educated
> than the other countries' populations so getting them
> self-supporting doesn't need a cold start.  The country
> was already an enemy who had violated terms of cease fire
> over and over and over and over and over and over ...
> again.

Are you really advocating that we invade, depose, occupy, torture and
kill all for foreign policy convience?  And what in the world makes
you think the Iraqi economy is going to be self-sufficient anytime in
the next 5 years?  Their economy was a top to bottom disaster, a new
one isn't "started", its grown.  You'll be happy pumping untold
billions of dollars into their economy over there as long as you don't
have to pay for it with taxes over here.  GOP fantasy-land.

The "violations" of the cease-fire were the equivalent of kids
throwing rocks at passing airplanes.  Big deal.  Saddam's luck was
going to run out at some point- and keeping the lid on him was VASTLY
cheaper than taking over his country.

Well, you've gotten your legally entitled revenge- I hope you like it.


> > .. heck, even Iran or Syria would've made a much
> >better target on this basis.  Or are we such bullies that we'll pick
> >the weakest kid to beat up to show how strong we are?
> 
> Yes.  It's a good plan and the cheapest.

So you're feeling pretty good about the bodycount these days.  How
many dead US soldiers and Iraqiis will slake your bloodlust?

I will look forward to your spirited defense of any country in the
world invading another simply because they can & feel like it.

Gregm



More information about the Python-list mailing list