Richard Barker opines:
> The American propaganda machine starts up.
...
> Please remember all you see especially in American has a very
> biased view on it.
Roger that. Our press has gotten nearly as bad as yours.

> If you put it into perspective, America seems the most dangerous
> country in the world, so maybe they shouldn't be allowed
> "Nukes".  America
> is the only country to have used bombs of this type, in
> conflict, twice.
And, it is the only nation in history that, in time of war, has had the
means to conquer anyone and everyone, and then, did not use it. After WWII,
we could pretty much have made British Imperialism seem like a dress
rehearsal, walked into any and every capital city, and set our own policies.
Don't like it? This bomb's for you. Cities proved easy enough to rebuild.

> Has probably been involved in more conflicts than any other
> nation in the world, in the last 60 years.
This is a matter of record. But, you are offering opinion, with no semblance
of fact.

> Am I to understand that you know Saddam personally, you know
> him so well.
...
> Lets be honest, Bush is hardly the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Pop quiz for our resident Bush biographer and close chum:
1) Where did Al Gore go to college?
2) Where did George W. Bush go to college?
3) Where did George W. Bush get his Masters? (hint: see 1).
There seems to be a fine liberal tradition of responding to conservative
argument with a pity "Yeah, well, you're just stupid". Clearly, anyone who
disagrees with the benighted just must not be capable of such clarion
reasoning. Reagan couldn't remember squat, and took naps. Dan Quayle that
they spoke Latin in Latin America. W is a dimwit. After all, if they have to
argue "Am not stupid", that just seems pathetic, now doesn't it?

> The BBC News, yesterday, showed some interviews with Iraqis
> on the street
> and of course I don't know how representative of the
> population it was, but
> the ones interviewed thought that the West should stay out of
> it.  Hardly a nation desperate for a new leader.
Excuse me, where those all the ones interview, or just those that the BBC
chose to air?

> If the U.S. pulled out all political and military support for
> Israel and
> supported the UN's calls for condemnation of Israel's
> actions, American [sic]
> would win a lot more friends in the area and maybe avoid
> future acts of
> terrorism, probably saving many lives.
And, if you pay the bully in the bathroom fifty cents, he won't beat you up.
Repeat as necessary. Where's the love? I don't see us winning enough friends
so as to render our enemies in the area a non-factor. Some analysts suggest
that one of the problems is that Israel and America work; we have built
nations whose successes can only be envied.

U.S. support of Israel is largely implied, even inferred. While we have
military presence in more than one place in the Middle East, Israel is not
one of them. As for Israel's actions in response to the terrorism they face,
the facts do seem elusive. I believe that more than one academic is making a
full time job out of trying to understand the situation. I have seen web
sites claiming remarkable atrocities, but with a suspicion lack of detail.

Greg Stigers
insert std disclaimers

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *