In rec.bicycles.racing Tom Kunich <
[email protected]> wrote:
> 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?
Nope, you didn't get it straight. A manefesto was crafted by future members of this administration
laying out precisely the agenda now in progress. The agenda clearly outlines a grandiose plan to
maintain such a presence as to render the sovereignty of those nations meaningless.
However, the administration publically claims 911 is the reason for its actions. 911 happened more
than a yaer later.
> college.
Another brilliant Kunichism. When are you upping and joining the crusade?
> "Clovis Lark" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
>
news:[email protected]...
>> In rec.bicycles.racing Tom Kunich <
[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Sergio, perhaps I ought to just put into words my feelings about
> this
>> > war:
>>
>> > The USA would prefer to stay completely out of the internal
> workings
>> > of other countries but sometimes it pays for us to stick out noses
> in.
>>
>> 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
> working of
>> other countries. The foreign minister of Suadi Arabia spoke
> directly to
>> the concerns raised by this agenda. Tom, don't even bother baiting
> me on
>> this. Here is the link. Whatever rebuttal you have, please address
> it
>> specifically to this link's contents. Help readers out and cite what
> pages
>> you are discussing:
>>
>>
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>> > President Eisenhower had intended that we would supply a graceful
> way
>> > for France to exit Indochina (Vietnam) from which we would then
> bow
>> > out in short order. Unfortunately Eisenhower was replaced with
> Kennedy
>> > who firstly caused a near catastrophe in Cuba and then tried to
> use
>> > Vietnam as an example to show that he really could wage a
> successful
>> > military campaign. Johnson continued in that format and the
> terrible
>> > consequences of that sort of thinking are history.
>>
>> > But Iraq is not the same case. For one thing, when we were trying
> to
>> > befriend Iraq in an effort to have some moderating effect on their policies we sold Saddam some
>> > presses ostensibly so that he could
> print
>> > high quality Iraqi currency. Saddam used these presses to
> counterfeit
>> > American money so lavishly that at one point one out of every five
> $20
>> > bills was an Iraqi counterfeit so good that it couldn't be
> detected by
>> > anyone but the most skilled experts.
>>
>> > He used this money to build a staggering arsenal and to begin
> building
>> > seriously dangerous weapons of mass destruction. Perhaps you
> remember
>> > Israel bombing the Iraqi nuclear site which we now all understand
> was
>> > primarily for generating weapons grade radioactive material. We
> also
>>
>> Perhaps Tom remembers the famous handshake between Hussein and
> Rumsfeld
>> sealing the delivery of WMD in 1983? Make sure you adderss this.
> Forget
>> about me.
>>
>> > know that he was building a super cannon and perhaps what you
> don't
>> > 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
> USA.
>> > 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
> give
>> > him the power of an ICBM with a far smaller chance for
> intercepting
>> > the weapon.
>>
>> > France and Germany, China and Russia have all been selling arms
> and
>> > materials to Saddam sub rosa, illegally and despite the fact that
> all
>> > of them signed on to the UN limitations.
>>
>> > Saddam also used the money to fund terrorists and terrorist
> activities
>> > all over the world. This is almost impossible to prove openly
> because
>> > intelligence sources for this kind of thing are exceedingly
> dificult
>> > to trace and showing how the information is gotten would
> invalidate
>> > using those sources in the future. So many of the real proofs of
> what
>> > Hussein has been doing must remain top secret for many decades. Remember that it was 50 years
>> > before some really important
> intellgence
>> > wources from WW II were revealed.
>>
>> > Most importantly Saddam has been trying to find an effective
> terrorist
>> > 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
> (nuclear)
>> > bomb in the USA and received $10,000 in cash to begin his
> operation.
>> > 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
> was
>> > the best chance for delivering a biological or chemical weapon
> into an
>> > American city. Fortunately for us, bin Laden can't stand Hussein
> and
>> > always turned him down.
>>
>> > Nevertheless it has become clear that Hussein is trying to attack
> the
>> > USA and to do it on an extremely dangerous level. It was no longer
> a
>> > 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
> document
>> cites above and be sure to help us by referring to the specific
> pages you
>> take issue with.
>>
>> > All this has made it necessary to take this awful regime out now.
> We
>> > cannot wait for tens or hundreds of thousands of casualties. We
> cannot
>> > 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
> be
>> > 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
> a
>> > position of almost absolute ignorance, we have been advised by out
> own
>> > government with tens of thousands of information sources,
> thousands of
>> > 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
> possible
>> > that they are all in a conspiracy to make a profit in this
> endevor?
>>
>> > Now that we are committed to the war we cannot turn back. Last
> time we
>> > turned back tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians were tortured and murdered because they sought
>> > their own freedoms. We cannot turn
> back a
>> > second time and allow the very hope for freedom to die in the
> hearts
>> > of these people.
>>
>> Tell that to them...
>>
>> > For those who think that oil is an issue let me be the first to
> agree.
>> > 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
> prefer
>> > the later. It isn't important who is making the profits from the
> oil
>> > as long a it's flowing and Europeans are eating and sleeping in
> peace
>> > instead of warring on each other for valuable natural resources.
> The
>> > 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
>> >
>
news[email protected]...
>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Though off-topic with bicycles, I feel the need to put
>> >> into
> English
>> > 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
> Italian
>> > 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,
> be
>> > 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
> preceeded
>> > 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
> the
>> >> 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
> style,
>> > 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
> a
>> > minor
>> >> component, of the liberation movement.
>> >>
>> >> Aren't there still so many countries where democracy, our style
> of
>> > 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
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>