In message <[log in to unmask]>, Brice Yokem
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>Mr Brown -

>I still don't know what your point is.  You have spent a lot of time
>telling me what it isn't.

Well, no, I made my point a while back, and I didn't really have
anything much to add to it, and it seemed clear enough to me. You can
still look back, or use Raven's archive, to see what it was.

And I haven't spent a lot of time telling you what my point isn't, so
much as I have spent it pointing out that your counter-arguments don't
in the least address what I said. I think that when and if you can do
that, we can proceed.

>About the only thing I am sure about is you are uncomfortable with
>the word 'pacify'.  That was not the best word to use to mean what
>I intended it to mean.

Yes, I know, and it's weird. You said it, a bunch of people on both
sides were rather uncomfortable with it and said so, and you
acknowledged that. Done deal, no problem.

Then you said it again. Hmm. Freudian slip?

>  I think what I intended to say should have
>been clear, and I think what we are doing in Iraq is trying only
>to target the armed opposition, and that is not always possible.
>I don't know if you will even concede that.

Sure I will. I guess I have the same problem with 'pacify' that I have
with 'collateral damage' - when and how they are used have overtones, in
both stance and it how they represent the person saying them. I guess
that just as ''collateral damage' sounds better than 'slaughtering
innocent bystanders', so 'pacify' sounds better than what it usually
entails - something with rather less surgical precision than 'targeting
the armed opposition'...

> You seem to take great joy in hammering me on the word 'pacify'.

It gives me no joy, I assure you.

> I am sure if I just admit I used the wrong word, you will pound on
>that, then.

Nope. Only if, having admitted that, you go and do it again straight
away.

Mind you, 'pacifiers' may be the right word for the ruling councils the
Coalition are trying to make the handover to in Iraq after all.

As I understand the American usage, from watching Maggie, on The
Simpsons, it means sticking a bunch of dummies in to quell the howls of
protest and make sure the recipients keep their mouths shut....
--
Roy Brown        'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd     useful, or believe to be beautiful'  William Morris

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