Bush, Osama's Manchurian Candidate

[G.T.]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> "G.T." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Mark Hickey wrote:
>
>
>>>I consider myself an "evangelical". I have NEVER heard any suggestion by anyone in any of the
>>>churches I've attended that says we should be openly critical of other religions. Would we have
>>>dialog with them about the differences given the opportunity? Sure. Big difference.
>>
>>You must be an extremely liberal "evangelical" then. The evangelicals that I know won't stop
>>preaching until 100% of the world is Christian. And many of them wouldn't mind using government
>>intervention, bribery, or even a little force to achieve that goal.
>
>
> You're talking about a group of people I've never met, apparently.

Oh, come on, Mark, you either purposely shelter yourself from the types of people I'm talking about
or you're flat out lying, and either way your credibility is suffering for it.

Greg

--
"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late, the battles we fought were long and hard,
just not to be consumed by rock n' roll..." - The Mekons

 

[Mark Hickey]

"G.T." <[email protected]> wrote:

>Mark Hickey wrote:
>> "G.T." <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>Mark Hickey wrote:

>>>>I consider myself an "evangelical". I have NEVER heard any suggestion by anyone in any of the
>>>>churches I've attended that says we should be openly critical of other religions. Would we have
>>>>dialog with them about the differences given the opportunity? Sure. Big difference.
>>>
>>>You must be an extremely liberal "evangelical" then. The evangelicals that I know won't stop
>>>preaching until 100% of the world is Christian. And many of them wouldn't mind using government
>>>intervention, bribery, or even a little force to achieve that goal.

>> You're talking about a group of people I've never met, apparently.
>
>Oh, come on, Mark, you either purposely shelter yourself from the types of people I'm talking about
>or you're flat out lying, and either way your credibility is suffering for it.

Greg, I'm often surrounded by people who profess to be Christians, and am deeply involved in many of
the programs they (we) feel are important. We just sent a very large check to feed Afghan refugees.
We had an organized volunteer organization of women to accompany Muslim women shopping (or wherever
they needed to go) after 9/11 (many were feeling justifiably paranoid). Many participate in an
international student support program (myself included) where we show hospitality to foreign
students, and help them (like helping them buy a car, get a license, learn how to shop in the US,
etc.). FWIW, to be part of that program we had to go through training, part of which stressed the
need to be very sensitive to their culture and religious beliefs (and I didn't hear one gasp or
grumble when that was mentioned, either). ;-)

I suggest whoever it is you're talking about would stand out like a VERY sore thumb in the the
above group.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Mark Hickey]

Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:

>[email protected] says...

>> I agree you can't alter the behavior of the individual terrorist, but you CAN alter the behavior
>> of the governments who would consider producing WMD. Producing WMD takes infrastructure and
>> materials that can be controlled and monitored.
>
>Dream on, shipments of ballistic missiles have beeing going to North Korea for years under US
>noses. Many countries have completely disregarded the embargo on Iraq. Producing WMD requires a
>contact in an old USSR republic and a Radio Shack.

So what do we do about it? There's been way too much political positioning and dancing around these
under the table arrangements. I think Bush has served warning that we can't continue to do that as a
planet and NOT pay a heavy price. The alternative isn't free or easy either - but IMHO a lot less
dangerous.

>> They (the fringe element) hated us 10 years ago, and they'll hate us 10 years from now. There
>> were many attacks against us during the Clinton years, even though we were not in Iraq or
>> Afghanistan.
>
>Muslims seem to have a longer memory than you do, 10 years ago they were cooling off.

They sure showed it in a funny way - bombing the WTC, the Cole, embassies, barracks, etc. Oh, and
9/11. How much longer should we let them cool off?

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Chris Phillipo]

> >Dream on, shipments of ballistic missiles have beeing going to North Korea for years under US
> >noses. Many countries have completely disregarded the embargo on Iraq. Producing WMD requires a
> >contact in an old USSR republic and a Radio Shack.
>
> So what do we do about it? There's been way too much political positioning and dancing around
> these under the table arrangements. I think Bush has served warning that we can't continue to do
> that as a planet and NOT pay a heavy price. The alternative isn't free or easy either - but IMHO a
> lot less dangerous.

Bush is under the impression you can kill all the terrorists and that will be the end of it. Fine,
lets make sure to kill all the potential terrorists too and the suspected terrorists and the
terrorist sympathizers, lets not forget those that harbour terrorists and those suspected of
harbouring terrorists. Hell lets take out everyone with a beard just to be safe. Suddenly people are
calling you ****** revisited and you too have a Gestapo hit squad. Sound familiar? Nice solution.

Iraq was contained, no Arab nation is going to get too lippy with Israel around anyway so the WMD
which haven't even been found yet is a poor argument. All this action is going to kill more
Americans than any previous terrorist attack and more to the point, the attacks will likely increase
as a result.

>Muslims seem to have a longer memory than you do, 10 years ago they >
were
> >cooling off.
>
> They sure showed it in a funny way - bombing the WTC, the Cole, embassies, barracks, etc. Oh, and
> 9/11. How much longer should we let them cool off?
>

They were cooling off 10 years ago until the US moved into the region to "liberate" Kuwait and then
didn't leave. You do know that US forces in so called "holy lands" is the main stick up Osama's ass
right? Or maybe you didn't...

--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com

 

[Mark Hickey]

Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:

>> So what do we do about it? There's been way too much political positioning and dancing around
>> these under the table arrangements. I think Bush has served warning that we can't continue to do
>> that as a planet and NOT pay a heavy price. The alternative isn't free or easy either - but IMHO
>> a lot less dangerous.
>
>Bush is under the impression you can kill all the terrorists and that will be the end of it. Fine,
>lets make sure to kill all the potential terrorists too and the suspected terrorists and the
>terrorist sympathizers, lets not forget those that harbour terrorists and those suspected of
>harbouring terrorists. Hell lets take out everyone with a beard just to be safe. Suddenly people
>are calling you ****** revisited and you too have a Gestapo hit squad. Sound familiar? Nice
>solution.

That's a pretty over-the-top assessment, don't you think? Let's try my version of the "plan".
First, you go after a couple high-profile developers of WMD. Sends a message it's no longer
acceptable. Then you break the chains of bondage in Afghanistan and Iraq to the dictatorial or
radical clerical leadership. The same leadership that tells them all their problems are the direct
result of Israel and the US. The standard of living goes through the roof. Freedom and prosperity
positively ooze from the two countries. The folks in Iran and Jordan and Egypt (etc.) start taking
notice. They force reform. So do the Palestinians. They boot Arafat out and institute a more
democratic form of government. Hey, check it out - the steady supply of hopeless and impressionable
young men just dried up. You start seeing "Teorrist wanted" signs popping up everywhere because no
one's applying any more.

>Iraq was contained, no Arab nation is going to get too lippy with Israel around anyway so the WMD
>which haven't even been found yet is a poor argument. All this action is going to kill more
>Americans than any previous terrorist attack and more to the point, the attacks will likely
>increase as a result.

Iraq is contained militarily, but you can't contain the flow of WMD. That's what makes them so
bloody dangerous - a few ounces and a major city is in chaos.

>> They sure showed it in a funny way - bombing the WTC, the Cole, embassies, barracks, etc. Oh, and
>> 9/11. How much longer should we let them cool off?
>
>They were cooling off 10 years ago until the US moved into the region to "liberate" Kuwait and then
>didn't leave. You do know that US forces in so called "holy lands" is the main stick up Osama's ass
>right? Or maybe you didn't...

That's been his claim (and yes, I did know that). Seems like he should take it up with the Egyptian
government, huh? They can tell us to pack up and get out any time they like.

Oh, and I wonder why you considered "liberating Kuwait" a parenthetical concept. If that didn't
constitute "liberation", I'm not quite sure what would.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Bomba]

Mark Hickey wrote:

> That's a pretty over-the-top assessment, don't you think? Let's try my version of the "plan".
> First, you go after a couple high-profile developers of WMD. Sends a message it's no longer
> acceptable. Then you break the chains of bondage in Afghanistan and Iraq to the dictatorial or
> radical clerical leadership. The same leadership that tells them all their problems are the direct
> result of Israel and the US. The standard of living goes through the roof. Freedom and prosperity
> positively ooze from the two countries. The folks in Iran and Jordan and Egypt (etc.) start taking
> notice. They force reform. So do the Palestinians. They boot Arafat out and institute a more
> democratic form of government. Hey, check it out - the steady supply of hopeless and
> impressionable young men just dried up. You start seeing "Teorrist wanted" signs popping up
> everywhere because no one's applying any more.

What a happy-wappy, fluffy solution. As usual, the US knows how best to improve a region by
implementing their own ideals. I imagine a cursory glance through history will show this
doesn't work.

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm

 

[Shaun Rimmer]

Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >
> > Doug Taylor <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > "Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > > Today, I'd rather have a few less friends and have my enemies fear
me
> > > > than have a more friends and enemies who don't think twice about attacking me.
> > >
> > > Kind of like how the Palestinians fear the Israelis? Years of
superior
> > > manpower, firepower, and technology sure have deterred the homocide
> > bombers,
> > > now, haven't they? You can't scare insane fanatics.
> > >
> > > C'mon, Mark, the Muslim world doesn't fear us,
> >
> > The 'Muslim world' should have nothing to fear at all.
> >
> > > it hates us,
> >
> > Outright? No it does not - a comparatively small group of fanatics
calling
> > themselves 'Muslims' are the problem. Your sweeping generalisations, as
well
> > as those of others in the world, only serve to further exacerbate
existing
> > problems. They may well have a hatred due to current events, but who
could
> > blame them?
> >
>
> While I agree that all muslims do not fall into this category, your assertion that the group of
> people in the region is comparitivly small holds true only if your base line is the population
> of China.

No - comparitive to the total number of Muslims in the world, it is small. There are a lot of
Muslims who dislike America, but then again, there are at least asd many non-Muslims that also do. I
object to the repeated singling out of one group of people in this way.

> Their hatred is not born of current events and until they start teaching some middleast history in
> US schools, I fear we will be doomed to repeat this every 10 years until all the oil is gone.

Indeed.

> Watching Bush on TV the other night I wonder if daddy even told him that as the then director of
> the CIA he largely responsible for Saddam's rise to power.

Heh - I doubt it ',;~}

Shaun aRe

 

[Chris Phillipo]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> > While I agree that all muslims do not fall into this category, your assertion that the group of
> > people in the region is comparitivly small holds true only if your base line is the population
> > of China.
>
> No - comparitive to the total number of Muslims in the world, it is small. There are a lot of
> Muslims who dislike America, but then again, there are at least asd many non-Muslims that also do.
> I object to the repeated singling out of one group of people in this way.
>

Well that's kind of the problem really, we are not talking about the total number of Muslims in
the world, we are talking about the total number of people in the region that hate the US compared
to those that love it. I notice Cheney and Rumsfeld (who seems increasing frazzled as the battle
to Baghdad drags on) always use the line that a small percentage of Muslims are hostile towards
the US, I don't think I've ever heard them say the majority of the middleast population welcomes
their presence.

--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com

 

[Mark Hickey]

bomba <[email protected]> wrote:

>What a happy-wappy, fluffy solution. As usual, the US knows how best to improve a region by
>implementing their own ideals. I imagine a cursory glance through history will show this
>doesn't work.

I think Japan and Germany did OK. And I have no doubt that the folks in Afghanistan are better off
already than they were under Taliban rule. Whether or not it turns out as well as I hope remains to
be seen of course, but I still think it's the right approach.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Mark Hickey]

Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>> > While I agree that all muslims do not fall into this category, your assertion that the group of
>> > people in the region is comparitivly small holds true only if your base line is the population
>> > of China.
>>
>> No - comparitive to the total number of Muslims in the world, it is small. There are a lot of
>> Muslims who dislike America, but then again, there are at least asd many non-Muslims that also
>> do. I object to the repeated singling out of one group of people in this way.

>Well that's kind of the problem really, we are not talking about the total number of Muslims in the
>world, we are talking about the total number of people in the region that hate the US compared to
>those that love it. I notice Cheney and Rumsfeld (who seems increasing frazzled as the battle to
>Baghdad drags on) always use the line that a small percentage of Muslims are hostile towards the
>US, I don't think I've ever heard them say the majority of the middleast population welcomes their
>presence.

If by "hostile" they mean willing to take up arms and shoot at our troops, I agree with them. If the
US really worried about those who "just don't like us" we'd be the most psychotic nation on earth.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Bomba]

Mark Hickey wrote:

>>What a happy-wappy, fluffy solution. As usual, the US knows how best to improve a region by
>>implementing their own ideals. I imagine a cursory glance through history will show this
>>doesn't work.
>
>
> I think Japan and Germany did OK.

True.

And I have no doubt that the folks
> in Afghanistan are better off already than they were under Taliban rule.

Afghanistan is nowhere near a democracy and is controlled by fundamentalist warlords who, according
to the US, provide 'security and stability'. At least one of these warlords, that the US promoted,
is being investigated by the UN for war crimes.

I'm not saying Afghanistan is worse off than under a Taliban regime, but it's arguable as to whether
anything has improved.

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm

 

[Mark Hickey]

bomba <[email protected]> wrote:

>Mark Hickey wrote:

>And I have no doubt that the folks
>> in Afghanistan are better off already than they were under Taliban rule.
>
>Afghanistan is nowhere near a democracy and is controlled by fundamentalist warlords who, according
>to the US, provide 'security and stability'. At least one of these warlords, that the US promoted,
>is being investigated by the UN for war crimes.
>
>I'm not saying Afghanistan is worse off than under a Taliban regime, but it's arguable as to
>whether anything has improved.

I agree it's not going to be nirvana any time soon - and no doubt there are some "bad guys" still in
the mix (hopefully soon to be removed). But with a large enough stabilizing influence (not
necessarily military presence though) hopefully they can rise above the "rule by warlord" concept.
FWIW, we seem to be disarming more than just suspected Taliban supporters. Hope so.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Doug Taylor]

Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:

>I agree it's not going to be nirvana any time soon -

Mark - don't you mean "heaven?" As a Buddhist, I protest your choice of words. I mean if we're going
to continue a "religious war" let's all stay firmly in our own camps. You wouldn't want to be
accused of being pluralistic, would you? ;-) --dt

 

[Chris Phillipo]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> bomba <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >What a happy-wappy, fluffy solution. As usual, the US knows how best to improve a region by
> >implementing their own ideals. I imagine a cursory glance through history will show this
> >doesn't work.
>
> I think Japan and Germany did OK. And I have no doubt that the folks in Afghanistan are better off
> already than they were under Taliban rule. Whether or not it turns out as well as I hope remains
> to be seen of course, but I still think it's the right approach.
>
> Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
>

No question, just as long as you remeber than if the Taliban had played ball with the USA in 2000,
they would still be running the place.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com

 

[Chris Phillipo]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I agree it's not going to be nirvana any time soon -
>
> Mark - don't you mean "heaven?" As a Buddhist, I protest your choice of words. I mean if we're
> going to continue a "religious war" let's all stay firmly in our own camps. You wouldn't want to
> be accused of being pluralistic, would you? ;-) --dt
>

One, two, three, four, I declare a holy war!
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com

 

[Mark Hickey]

Doug Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

>Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I agree it's not going to be nirvana any time soon -
>
>Mark - don't you mean "heaven?" As a Buddhist, I protest your choice of words. I mean if we're
>going to continue a "religious war" let's all stay firmly in our own camps. You wouldn't want to be
>accused of being pluralistic, would you? ;-)

Busted! ;-) I guess with my Cherokee background I should be up on Shamanism. Maybe I should stick to
the secular and compare the ideal state to "Disney"...

Naaaaaah, too many tourists.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Mark Hickey]

Chris Phillipo <[email protected]> wrote:

>One, two, three, four, I declare a holy war!

five, six, seven, eight, we're only there to liberate!

(couldn't think of anything that rhymed with WMD)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Chris Phillipo]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Doug Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>I agree it's not going to be nirvana any time soon -
> >
> >Mark - don't you mean "heaven?" As a Buddhist, I protest your choice of words. I mean if we're
> >going to continue a "religious war" let's all stay firmly in our own camps. You wouldn't want to
> >be accused of being pluralistic, would you? ;-)
>
> Busted! ;-) I guess with my Cherokee background I should be up on Shamanism. Maybe I should stick
> to the secular and compare the ideal state to "Disney"...
>
> Naaaaaah, too many tourists.
>
> Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
>

Worshiping false gods in the form of Mickey Mouse, Loki is gonna get medieval on your ass!
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-online.com