home  bbs  files  messages ]

      ZZNY4436             nyc.general             32000 messages      

[ previous | next | reply ]

[ list messages | list forums ]

  Msg # 31687 of 32001 on ZZNY4436, Thursday 9-28-22, 11:22  
  From: IVAN GOWCH  
  To: ALL  
  Subj: Re: Another Classic Arab moment... (1/2)  
 XPost: calgary.general, can.general, tor.general 
 XPost: wash.general, chi.general 
 From: gowch@SPAMTHEENOThotmail.com 
  
 On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:54:14 -0500, "Jeff T"  wrote: 
  
 [snip] 
  
 IG: 
 ==>> Any starvation in Iraq prior to the illegal American 
 ==>> occupation was a direct result of the U.S.-enforced 
 ==>> sanctions against the country, and had little if 
 ==>> anything to do with Saddam Hussein's policies 
 ==>> or actions. 
  
 ==>WRONG! The UN sanctions against Iraq are a direct result of Saddam's 
 polices 
 ==>and actions. 
 ==>Namely his refusal to allow weapons inspectors in (until the 
 ==>last second), and his polices towards the Kurdish north. 
  
   Bullshit.  The UN sanctions against Iraq were the 
   direct result of American lies about Iraq's 
   harbouring "weapons of mass destruction" 
   and its supposed efforts to acquire offensive 
   nuclear weapons.  Saddam's policies presented 
   not the slightest threat to any country since Iraq's 
   forced retreat from Kuwait.  His policies towards 
   the Kurds may well have been brutal, but no more 
   so than Turkey's policies towards the Kurds, and 
   no more so than those of a number of repressive 
   regimes around the world towards various minorities -- 
   policies that did not (and do not) prompt a U.S. 
   invasion. 
  
   This excuse is lame in the extreme, and you know it. 
  
 ==> Secondly, the 
 ==>imbargo (sic) (UN sanctions) did not include food or medical supplies. 
  
   But the sanctions certainly did prevent Iraq from 
   carrying out normal trade, rendering it unable to 
   afford food or medical supplies.  The (U.S.' 
    self-serving) "oil-for-food" program was wholly 
   inadequate to supply the Iraqis with either food 
   or medicine -- a fact well-documented by 
   international aid agencies over the years. 
  
   You are either woefully ignorant, or a liar. 
  
 ==>In fact the 
 ==>US, amongst other countries, was sending food aid to Iraq, it just never 
 got 
 ==>to the people. 
  
   The U.S. may have been *selling* some food to 
   Iraq in exchange for "food-for-oil" revenues, 
   but your suggestion it donated food to Iraq 
   for presumably humanitarian purposes is a lie. 
   And if you have any evidence that food that 
   was supplied to Iraq did not  get to the people, 
   you'd better post it, because otherwise your 
   claim seems like just so much propaganda. 
  
 ==>The people starving IS a direct result of Saddam Insanes (sic) 
 ==>actions, and that of his regime. 
  
   Keep believing that.  It will aid you in your 
   desperate attempt to maintain your state of 
   denial. 
  
 [snip] 
  
 IG: 
 ==>> You are deliberately misusing the 
 ==>> language, and that doesn't help your argument. 
 ==>> I am a working man,  not a mercenary. 
 ==>> The term mercenary refers to those who 
 ==>> perform *military* services for money.  Sportwriters 
 ==>> sometimes use it whimsically to designate 
 ==>> professional athletes.  Attempting to broaden the term 
 ==>> to include all working people is dishonest and absurd. 
  
 [...] 
  
 ==>Etymology: Middle English, from Latin mercenarius, irregular from 
 merced-, 
 ==>merces wages -- more at MERCY 
 ==>: one that serves merely for wages; especially : a soldier hired into 
 ==>foreign service 
  
   As I said, a mercenary is a *soldier.* 
  
 ==>Now, it is generally accepted to mean soldier, 
  
   Yes, it is. 
  
 ==> however the term is not 
 ==>exclusive to soldiering. 
  
   Well, I do apologize for choosing words according 
   to what they actually mean. . . . 
  
 ==> Now it can be used to describe the average working 
 ==>Joe, 
  
   No, it can't. Not if one cares a fig for 
   exactitude in language. 
  
 ==> esp if the individual has a habit of going from job to job, for an 
 ==>increase in pay. 
  
   No, the term for such a one is "itinerant 
   worker." 
  
   Nice try.  Wanna play again? 
  
 [...] 
  
 IG: 
 ==>> Because, historically, people are regarded as 
 ==>> justified in punishing countrymen who 
 ==>> co-operate with an oppressive invader.  Even 
 ==>> if you dispute its justifiability, it's still 
 ==>> historical fact.  If you don't understand this, you 
 ==>> need to go back and read some more history. 
  
 ==>True enough... But the comparisons to Nazi occupation certainly do not 
 match 
 ==>what is going on (even today). There is a complete lack of a round up and 
 ==>whole sale murder of civilians, say Sunni muslims. 
  
   There needs to be "whole sale (sic) murder of 
   civilians" for there to be reprisals against 
   selected collaborators?  Where is that written? 
   Can't find it?  Perhaps that's because you 
   just pulled that "fact" out of your ass. 
  
 [snip] 
  
 IG: 
 ==>> I'm intolerant towards hired killers, goons, thugs, 
 ==>> cowboy wannabes and swaggering bullies of 
 ==>> all types.  Especially the cowardly types who 
 ==>> wait until they feel their asses are protected by 
 ==>> a real army before they go in to sell their strong-arm 
 ==>> services for huge profits. 
  
 ==>The Blackwaters boys are NOT making HUGE profits. They are making more 
 then 
 ==>the average soldier there, but less then say a neurosurgeon. 
  
   As if the size of their paycheques makes any 
   difference at all.  Don't be more absurd than 
   necessary, OK? 
  
 ==>A lot of the persons in question originally joined the service of their 
 own 
 ==>countries out of a need to serve something bigger then they are. 
  
   Get serious.  How the hell would you know anything 
   about the motivations of these goons? 
  
   I say most of them joined up because they are 
   undiagnosed sociopaths who relish the idea 
   of blowing people away with automatic weapons. 
  
   Prove me wrong. 
  
 ==> After a 
 ==>couple of years of putting up with left wing PC types bullshit, they 
 become 
 ==>disillusioned and get out... 
  
   Aaah, yes . . . the U.S. military is simply rife with 
   "left wing PC types."  What the hell have you been 
   smoking (and where can I get some)? 
  
 ==>Guess what a qualified special forces operator is qualified to do after 
 ==>10-15 years of service to their country... 
  
   Uh, lemme guess . . . kill people? 
  
 ==> Unless they were getting a degree 
 ==>through corespondance, they would be qualified to be mall security 
 guards, 
 ==>dig trenches, and for some the police. 
  
   Exactly.  They're unschooled, ignorant goons 
   fit only for bully-boy-type employment.  Unskilled 
   losers, in other words. 
  
 ==> The police for these guys is not an 
 ==>option, because they no longer want to serve a greater purpose them 
 ==>themselves, because of all the ungrateful assholes in their respective 
 ==>countries... So that leaves two jobs that would cover car payments, let 
 ==>alone house, kids, medical bills. 
  
   Oh, my.  You've got my heart bleeding 
   copiously for all those poor, honourable, 
   underpaid hired killers.  Is there a charitable 
   organization for these misunderstood heroes 
   to which I might send a contributon? 
  
 ==>You want to put an end to mercenaries? The solution is easy, just be 
 ==>thankful for the ones who serve. 
  
   Only if they are serving me steak and lobster 
  
 [continued in next message] 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2) 

[ list messages | list forums | previous | next | reply ]

search for:

328,098 visits
(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca