I suspect you are referring to the imminent action against Saddam Hussein when you mention "the current nonsense."

If such is the case, might I respectfully point out that Saddam Hussein is the one who started the current war when he invaded
Kuwait back in the summer of 1990?  When his troops were ejected from Kuwait after looting and pillaging that country, killing
thousands of its citizens and setting fire to all the Kuwaiti oil wells, he entered into a cease-fire agreement with the US-led
coalition, which called for him to do numerous things.  A state of war still exists between Iraq and the coalition.  It is my
understanding the strategic plan of the current administration calls for ending this war by forcibly ejecting Saddam Hussein from
Iraq thus liberating its 23 million + citizens and getting rid of his arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction or Massive Death, take
you pick.


Denys

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Wirt Atmar
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 3:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OT : US uses Indian 'threat' to force Pak support on Iraq

Brice writes:

>  Maybe I did not state my case clearly enough?  My position
>  was that pacifist cultures never keep anything which can be
>  taken away by someone else who wants it and can take it.

And just the other day, Richard Perle, one of the architects of the current
nonsense, said on one of the Sunday morning talk shows that, "Democracies
don't start aggressive wars."

I just about fell out of my chair. So much for sophistries.

Wirt Atmar

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

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