Let me get this straight, a study commissioned by members of this administration reported that
mistakes had been made in the past and suggested changes?
"Clovis Lark" <[email protected]
> wrote in message
> In rec.bicycles.racing Tom Kunich <[email protected]
> > Sergio, perhaps I ought to just put into words my feelings about
> > war:
> > The USA would prefer to stay completely out of the internal
> > of other countries but sometimes it pays for us to stick out noses
> Tom never heard of the PNAC and the study that Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc. commissioned and
> was delivered in September 2000. It clearly expresses an agenda to be nose, torso, and legs in the
> other countries. The foreign minister of Suadi Arabia spoke
> the concerns raised by this agenda. Tom, don't even bother baiting
> this. Here is the link. Whatever rebuttal you have, please address
> specifically to this link's contents. Help readers out and cite what
> you are discussing:
> > President Eisenhower had intended that we would supply a graceful
> > for France to exit Indochina (Vietnam) from which we would then
> > out in short order. Unfortunately Eisenhower was replaced with
> > who firstly caused a near catastrophe in Cuba and then tried to
> > Vietnam as an example to show that he really could wage a
> > military campaign. Johnson continued in that format and the
> > consequences of that sort of thinking are history.
> > But Iraq is not the same case. For one thing, when we were trying
> > befriend Iraq in an effort to have some moderating effect on their policies we sold Saddam some
> > presses ostensibly so that he could
> > high quality Iraqi currency. Saddam used these presses to
> > American money so lavishly that at one point one out of every five
> > bills was an Iraqi counterfeit so good that it couldn't be
> > anyone but the most skilled experts.
> > He used this money to build a staggering arsenal and to begin
> > seriously dangerous weapons of mass destruction. Perhaps you
> > Israel bombing the Iraqi nuclear site which we now all understand
> > primarily for generating weapons grade radioactive material. We
> Perhaps Tom remembers the famous handshake between Hussein and
> sealing the delivery of WMD in 1983? Make sure you adderss this.
> about me.
> > know that he was building a super cannon and perhaps what you
> > know is that cannon could have been capable of shooting a shell entirely around the world.
> > The expert he was using had a 'normal' cannon in his front yard on the border between
> > Montreal and the
> > He was quoted as saying that he couldn't reveal the range of that particular cannon but that
> > he could easily hit Mexico City. That's roughly 4,000 miles and a super version of such a
> > cannon would
> > him the power of an ICBM with a far smaller chance for
> > the weapon.
> > France and Germany, China and Russia have all been selling arms
> > materials to Saddam sub rosa, illegally and despite the fact that
> > of them signed on to the UN limitations.
> > Saddam also used the money to fund terrorists and terrorist
> > all over the world. This is almost impossible to prove openly
> > intelligence sources for this kind of thing are exceedingly
> > to trace and showing how the information is gotten would
> > using those sources in the future. So many of the real proofs of
> > Hussein has been doing must remain top secret for many decades. Remember that it was 50 years
> > before some really important
> > wources from WW II were revealed.
> > Most importantly Saddam has been trying to find an effective
> > organization to deliver some extremely dangerous weapons of mass destruction into the United
> > States. We have already arrested an American hispanic gang member who offered to set off a dirty
> > bomb in the USA and received $10,000 in cash to begin his
> > He was siezed at an airport with the money on him. Saddam has been courting bin Laden for many
> > years because he thought that Al Qaida
> > the best chance for delivering a biological or chemical weapon
> > American city. Fortunately for us, bin Laden can't stand Hussein
> > always turned him down.
> > Nevertheless it has become clear that Hussein is trying to attack
> > USA and to do it on an extremely dangerous level. It was no longer
> > question about if he could succeed, because 9/11 showed that eventually he would succeed.
> Back to the PNAC agenda that shows 911 was never the reason for the current agenda. But don't take
> me on. Please address the PNAC
> cites above and be sure to help us by referring to the specific
> take issue with.
> > All this has made it necessary to take this awful regime out now.
> > cannot wait for tens or hundreds of thousands of casualties. We
> > wait in case he tries his hand at lesser targets like Tel Aviv or Rome.
> > We are all preying for peace but it isn't Italian blood that would
> > spilled if we wait. And it is less important to you that American lives are lost than it is to
> > us. While you advise us to wait from
> > position of almost absolute ignorance, we have been advised by out
> > government with tens of thousands of information sources,
> > analysts and hundreds of advisors that this man is dangerous and growing more dangerous by the
> > second. How is it that you could possibly be better informed than these people and how is it
> > that they are all in a conspiracy to make a profit in this
> > Now that we are committed to the war we cannot turn back. Last
> > turned back tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians were tortured and murdered because they sought
> > their own freedoms. We cannot turn
> > second time and allow the very hope for freedom to die in the
> > of these people.
> Tell that to them...
> > For those who think that oil is an issue let me be the first to
> > Though not in the manner that many may think. Oil runs the whole world. Iraqi oil could threaten
> > Europe or it can run Europe. We
> > the later. It isn't important who is making the profits from the
> > as long a it's flowing and Europeans are eating and sleeping in
> > instead of warring on each other for valuable natural resources.
> > fact of the matter is that the USA is in a better position to live without Iraqi oil than
> > virtually the rest of the world.
> > "Sergio SERVADIO" <[email protected]
> wrote in message
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Though off-topic with bicycles, I feel the need to
> >> put into
> > for
> >> you, people I have corresponded with for some time and whom I
> > pretend
> >> to be acquainted with, a message written a while ago for an
> > friend
> >> of mine.
> >> Ride into PEACE.
> >> Sergio Pisa
> > _______
> >> > about the war ...
> >> ... we hold rather different opinions.
> >> There is no need for us to hide behind somebody else' rationale,
> > it
> >> honest or faudolent, to be in favor or against the war. So, your rebuttal of France's, Russia's
> >> and China's stands and
> > reasonings
> >> does not diminish the urge for your own evaluation and judgment.
> >> Never mind there are always people who are, almost genetically,
> > opposed
> >> to any initiative, ever unable to bear responsibility.
> >> In practise it is impossible to justify war, any war. It is so because its outburst goes too
> >> far beyond what has
> > it.
> >> War can never be morally acceptable, never a 'just' retaliation. All the more so, the more
> >> outbalanced are the contendants.
> >> Even worse, when the attacking party does so after such a long
> > propaganda
> >> campaign full of lies and alleged wrong reasons put forward with
> >> intent, so badly missed, to rally support from the international community.
> >> Which so bad faults against the U.S. can one ascribe to Saddam
> > Hussein?
> >> How much do you think the U.S. really care about the Kurds,
> > slaughtered
> >> and persecuted both in Irak and in Turkey? How much do the U.S. really value civil rights, the
> >> western
> > in
> >> other Countries? In which other Countries? Why there, and not
> > elsewhere?
> >> Have you forgotten Allende? Have you forgotten Vietnam?, where the heroic resistence was
> > universal and
> >> Ho Chi Min's Communist Party was only a component, initially only
> > minor
> >> component, of the liberation movement.
> >> Aren't there still so many countries where democracy, our style
> > course,
> >> is not established and which, nevertheless, are justly respected?
> >> When war, whichever war, outbrakes the party that thrusts it is
> > always at
> >> fault: for having brought the clash to such a dramatic level. The nation that gets attacked
> >> with such a fury has the right to
> > defend
> >> herself, with whatever means.
> >> Any defence war is just and heroic. Perhaps any revenge, for so much undured horror, is just.
> >> What follows then?
> >> Sergio