Re: [OT] I hate being American

From: Franz Heymann (notfranz.heymann_at_btopenworld.com)
Date: 12/31/04 

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:57:42 +0000 (UTC)

"Everett Hickey" <everett@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:10t8vamnad16j2d@corp.supernews.com...
> "Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:cr1tib$nbd$1@titan.btinternet.com...
> >
> > "Everett Hickey" <everett@ev1.net> wrote in message
> > news:10t8dnjav3nvub7@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > For one thing, our military spending is considerably
> > > higher, because unlike many smaller countries we actually have
to
> > worry
> > > about being defensible...
> >
> > It is a great pity that Iraq did not worry more about being
defensible
> > before you barged in there.
>
> While people over here (the US) are generally upset over how the
thing was
> handled (both before and after), complaints about it having been
done at all
> don't affect us a great deal, considering that it's widely agreed
upon that
> it needed to be done.

If if needed to be done, it should be done by the Iraqis.
I notice you are not doing anything about Zimbabwe. Could it be that
there is not much oil there?

> It didn't need to be done as badly as it was, and the
> timing wasn't great... but unlike Iran and other neighbors of his
that we
> don't get along well with, he was the only one who had repeatedly
used ANY
> weapon at his disposal to kill ANYONE who stood in his way (just ask
Iran,
> or your average Kurd).

You seem to have forgotten the extent to which you supported Iraq when
it was fighting Iran.
And indeed how you supported the Taleban when the Russians were trying
to get rid of them
Was Osama not once one of your blue eyed boys?
You are the most opportunistivc gang of mafiosi on earth.

> We knew Iran had similar weapons, but have never
> been known to use them (plus they've always been a bit more honest,
if
> blunt, than Hussein - and they do change leadership periodically).

Why then did you support Iraq against Iran?

> How many unstoppable human disasters have occured in Europe (where
racial
> holocaust seems to be a somewhat common occurance) because everyone
was
> afraid to get their hands a little dirty until it was too late?
Once people
> begin to die by the millions (as they often do), it's a little late
to start
> worrying about putting a stop to what never should have been allowed
to
> start.

Have you ever head of the organisation called the United Nations?

> And Iraq DID worry about being defensible. What did you think most
of that
> UN Food program was paying for? Food? Another reason the US isn't
quite so
> big on shelling out cash to other countries - much better to give
them the
> goods we intended to give them,

Of course. That way you retain the profit on them.

> and not worry about what they're doing with
> the cash. If they're starving, give them food. If they're
freezing, give
> them heaters and blankets and clothing.

What the hell do you think the present disaster aid is about?

> If someone's harassing them, and
> their enemies aren't willing to talk, give them bullets - at
extremely high
> speed. If you look at the actual aid given out by the US, we supply
more
> FOOD for the rest of the world than even the most prosperous
agricultural
> nations, even after you count cash value.
>
> History, both recent and otherwise, demonstrates that talk is a
great way to
> resolve most disputes... but when it fails, it all means nothing if
the
> words weren't backed up by a willingness to act on them. That
applies to
> aid as well as anything else.

Get movinng and gather some aid for the disaster area. This is not
the time for talking bull***. The aid is neded NOW, TODAY, not some
time in the future.

Franz

Quantcast