OT: reaction to Iraqi elections

[Michael A. Terrell]

richard mullens wrote:

It is tiresome to have to keep banging on about this,

Then shut up and do something useful with your sorry life.

--
Beware of those who post from srvinet.com!

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[richard mullens]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

richard mullens wrote:


It is tiresome to have to keep banging on about this,


Then shut up and do something useful with your sorry life.

I'll quit when your country stops killing and torturing people in the name of "democracy"

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 07:10:04 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <nurv11dhd4e8inq3c5q8pe2m1b1q3a4080@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: reaction to Iraqi elections', on Fri, 25 Feb 2005:

This is going to be the Pacific Century.

I hope that is true, without the capitals. 'Millennium' instead of
'century', too.

I meant "ocean" but "peaceful" would be OK too.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 04:17:37 GMT, richard mullens
<mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Well the countries of the world should unite to send a clear message.

Hahahaha. Good one! We do need more humor around here.

John

 

[richard mullens]

John Woodgate wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that richard mullens <mullensdeletethis
@ntlworld.com> wrote (in <D53Ud.2170$jY1.109@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net&gt
about 'OT: reaction to Iraqi elections', on Sat, 26 Feb 2005:


The citizens of Europe do not approve of your actions
and the politicians who have supported you will lose power.


Please furnish evidence that you speak for 300 million Europeans.

You are becoming tiresome, with your presumption and your blatant anti-
Americanism.

I don't speak for 300 million Europeans. I merely report the facts.
The majority of Europeans are against the carnage you have unleashed
in the middle east.

Even your own country is divided down the middle. Perhaps you hadn't noticed.

You are becoming tiresome too with your "my country right or wrong" attitude.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" someone said.

 

[richard mullens]

Jim Yanik wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer <rtp@example.net> wrote in
newsan.2005.02.26.17.53.10.326901@example.net:


On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 08:38:42 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:02:27 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 02:53:07 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

Richard the Dreaded Libertarian <eatmyshorts@doubleclick.net> wrote
in

Sounds like the world is arming up, since they don't know when
or where the behemoth is going to invade next.

It's funny that a "libertarian" would be against liberating people.
(which the US has been doing for a LONG time)

It's tragic that anyone can equate "killing people" with "liberating
people".

Sometimes that's what it takes. The Germans didn't give up France
voluntarily, nor the Japanese the Philipines.

And the Iraqis apparently don't want to give up Iraq voluntarily, now
do they? What? It's their _OWN COUNTRY????_ Imagine my surprise! >:-[


actually,it's been found that the "insurgents" are from OTHER
countries,Syria and Iran,some from Egypt,and some Baathists trying to
reinstate their thugocracy. Syrian people have admitted to funding,training
and running the "insurgents".

Keep telling yourself those lies - but don't expect anyone else to believe them.
The vast majority of the troops who have no business being there are American.

Of course there may be some "insurgents" from Syria and other places, but the
majority are from the indigenous population and take exception to the alien
invader.

 

[richard mullens]

John Woodgate wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that richard mullens <mullensdeletethis
@ntlworld.com> wrote (in <4c5Ud.1768$4R6.1664@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net&gt
about 'OT: reaction to Iraqi elections', on Sat, 26 Feb 2005:


I don't speak for 300 million Europeans. I merely report the facts.
The majority of Europeans are against the carnage you have unleashed
in the middle east.


You will be pleased to note that I am British and resident in UK. An
apology from you is in order, but I don't expect to get one.

I am not sure what it is that you want me to apologise for. I am British
too and resident in the UK. Unless I am mistaken, I was replying to a post
made by John Larkin. I certainly don't hold you responsible for the
carnage unleashed in the middle east. The "you" was shorthand for the
supporters of that carnage - who seem to be predominately American.

Probably I have offended some people, but what they are trying to justify
seems offensive to me. I judge from your posts that you perhaps believe
that the ends justify the means. With that I don't agree.

If I have offended you, then I apologise. You seem one of the more rational
people here.

Richard

 

[richard mullens]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 20:51:33 GMT, richard mullens
mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:


Jim Yanik wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer <rtp@example.net> wrote in
newsan.2005.02.26.17.53.10.326901@example.net:



On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 08:38:42 -0800, John Larkin wrote:


On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:02:27 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian


On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 02:53:07 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:


Richard the Dreaded Libertarian <eatmyshorts@doubleclick.net> wrote
in


Sounds like the world is arming up, since they don't know when
or where the behemoth is going to invade next.

It's funny that a "libertarian" would be against liberating people.
(which the US has been doing for a LONG time)

It's tragic that anyone can equate "killing people" with "liberating
people".

Sometimes that's what it takes. The Germans didn't give up France
voluntarily, nor the Japanese the Philipines.

And the Iraqis apparently don't want to give up Iraq voluntarily, now
do they? What? It's their _OWN COUNTRY????_ Imagine my surprise! >:-[


actually,it's been found that the "insurgents" are from OTHER
countries,Syria and Iran,some from Egypt,and some Baathists trying to
reinstate their thugocracy. Syrian people have admitted to funding,training
and running the "insurgents".


Keep telling yourself those lies - but don't expect anyone else to believe them.
The vast majority of the troops who have no business being there are American.

Of course there may be some "insurgents" from Syria and other places, but the
majority are from the indigenous population and take exception to the alien
invader.


Right. They are mainly minority Baathists, who formerly took exception
to the native population. Violent exception.

That I can agree with. Saddam's regime dealt with opposition brutally.
He also started a bloody war against Iran and occupied Kuwait. Under Saddam's
stewardship, the Sunni's got the best deal, but with the regime of no fly
zones and self rule in the kurdish region, the situation was stable -
although UN imposed sanctions did a lot of harm. Fast forward to the
situation now - chaos and bloodshed, the infrastructure completely shot,
as advertisements for American involvement go it's not very rosy.

 

[richard mullens]

John Woodgate wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that richard mullens <mullensdeletethis
@ntlworld.com> wrote (in <4c5Ud.1768$4R6.1664@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net&gt
about 'OT: reaction to Iraqi elections', on Sat, 26 Feb 2005:


I don't speak for 300 million Europeans. I merely report the facts.
The majority of Europeans are against the carnage you have unleashed
in the middle east.


You will be pleased to note that I am British and resident in UK. An
apology from you is in order, but I don't expect to get one.

Now I see that I made an error.

You asked:
"Please furnish evidence that you speak for 300 million Europeans"

And said:
"You are becoming tiresome, with your presumption and your blatant anti-Americanism"

I replied, I do not "speak for" 300 million Europeans, I merely report the facts.
And these facts are that the majority of Europeans don't support what America
has done in the middle east.

I don't presume to speak for you and I apologise if you find me tiresome.
With what has happened in Iraq I think that anti-americanism is in order
while there are those here who would continue to justify the slaughter in the
name of giving democracy to Iraq. It was not I who started this
inflammatory thread.

I apologise that I accused you of unleashing carnage in the middle East. It
was a mistake on my part.

 

[richard mullens]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

richard mullens wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

richard mullens wrote:



It is tiresome to have to keep banging on about this,


Then shut up and do something useful with your sorry life.


I'll quit when your country stops killing and torturing people in the name of "democracy"


More of your lies and misinformation. I've never owned a country and
at my age I wouldn't want the headaches of dealing with the world's
idoits. I have never tourched anyone, but I have stood up to bullies
several times in my life and kicked their ass so bad that they never
came back to start another fight.

What with all the whineing and hand wringing of people trying to run
the US from the outside, I'm to the point of just saying "Just nuke em
all", and get it over with. The longer this gets dragged out by
winpering morons like you who think you know better, the more people
have to die before things settle down.

Goodbye Richard. Say "Hello!" hello to Mister Killfile. Do not pass
Go. DO not collect $200. You aren't worth the time to read. This is
an electronics newsgroup, not a whining political cesspool.

You make my point.
It is the failure of those in control in the USA to listen that has resulted in this fiasco.

 

[Paul Burke]

John Woodgate wrote:

What's K's new party called, then?

Veritas.. without the vino.

Paul Burke

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:52:11 -0500, Mark Jones <abuse@127.0.0.1>
wrote:

Many Americans don't agree with the US government's direction either. Of
course, the capture of Bin Laden should (and did) warrant military action, but I
think the whole Iraq-thing stemmed from Bush Sr.'s failure to oust Saddam in his
term. (Bush Jr. is proving his daddy proud!) Did I mention that Bush is an
uber-moron?

He's just ahead of his time, because he sees the inevitable course of
history and wants to speed things along in that direction. Actually,
it seems to be working. Of course he's not an intellectual or a
genius, but he's smart enough to see the obvious, which most
intellectuals aren't.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On 26 Feb 2005 01:18:27 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in
news:kl7MPREkm2HCFwtu@jmwa.demon.co.uk:


But I agree with your 'somehow'. No country can 'bar' US from doing
anything, but China might be persuasive if it suited.

Would that be a reason why the EU is selling weaponry and dual-use
materials to Communist China?

Or just for the money.

John

 

[richard mullens]

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:18:18 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
eatmyshorts@doubleclick.net> wrote:


On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:13:22 -0800, John Larkin wrote:


On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 20:51:33 GMT, richard mullens

Keep telling yourself those lies - but don't expect anyone else to
believe them. The vast majority of the troops who have no business being
there are American.

Of course there may be some "insurgents" from Syria and other places,
but the majority are from the indigenous population and take exception
to the alien invader.

I really hate to disappoint you, but peace is threatening to break out
all over the place.

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/40527.htm

http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=EGYPT-02-28-05&cat=II

http://middle-east.news.designerz.com/palestinians-look-to-london-conference-to-pave-a-way-to-peace-gathering.html?d20050228

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200503/s1312937.htm

Yeah, Syria, Egypt, Palestine and Lebanon have all made overtures to
suck up to King George.



Ain't it great!


They know where the weapons of mass destruction really are, and whose
finger is on the button.


Exactly. So the question for you and Mr Mullens and others is:

If W's policies turn out, in the long run, to materially increase the
peace, prosperity, health, and democracy of the entire world, will you
be terribly disappointed?

No. I'll be flabbergasted.

The trouble with a question such as this, is that one never knows what would
have happened without the intervention. However we do know what has happened
as a result of the intervention. An example 125 died and 130 were wounded
yesterday in a car bombing on a people desperate for work in an environment
that has been completely destabilised by W's policies - isn't this part of the
equation ?

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 04:36:04 GMT, richard mullens
<mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:18:18 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
eatmyshorts@doubleclick.net> wrote:


On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:13:22 -0800, John Larkin wrote:


On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 20:51:33 GMT, richard mullens

Keep telling yourself those lies - but don't expect anyone else to
believe them. The vast majority of the troops who have no business being
there are American.

Of course there may be some "insurgents" from Syria and other places,
but the majority are from the indigenous population and take exception
to the alien invader.

I really hate to disappoint you, but peace is threatening to break out
all over the place.

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/40527.htm

http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=EGYPT-02-28-05&cat=II

http://middle-east.news.designerz.com/palestinians-look-to-london-conference-to-pave-a-way-to-peace-gathering.html?d20050228

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200503/s1312937.htm

Yeah, Syria, Egypt, Palestine and Lebanon have all made overtures to
suck up to King George.



Ain't it great!


They know where the weapons of mass destruction really are, and whose
finger is on the button.


Exactly. So the question for you and Mr Mullens and others is:

If W's policies turn out, in the long run, to materially increase the
peace, prosperity, health, and democracy of the entire world, will you
be terribly disappointed?


No.

Good!

I'll be flabbergasted.

Well, so would I. But in a good sort of way.

The trouble with a question such as this, is that one never knows what would
have happened without the intervention.

Right. Human affairs are immensely chaotic. But that's not a very good
excuse for doing nothing.

However we do know what has happened
as a result of the intervention. An example 125 died and 130 were wounded
yesterday in a car bombing on a people desperate for work in an environment
that has been completely destabilised by W's policies - isn't this part of the
equation ?

The killers are engaged in a very nasty struggle to prevent democracy
in the Muslim world. The bombers are *not* the friends of the Iraqui
people. The Arab world has been lethally unstable for centuries, and
the terrorists are the agents of chaos. Perhaps what's happening now
are the birth pangs of change. If not, and the crazies win, the
Iraquis probably won't be worse off than before. Saddam alone killed
about 2 million.

The news in the last few days is definitely promising. If we can get
the Arab world on the road to democracy, we (ideally, an
all-encompassing we) should start to work on Africa, which is the
disgrace of the world.

John

 

[Jim Yanik]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
newslc721llind5afjmb8qdbd8kg4nko48lrp@4ax.com:

Exactly. So the question for you and Mr Mullens and others is:

If W's policies turn out, in the long run, to materially increase the
peace, prosperity, health, and democracy of the entire world, will you
be terribly disappointed?

John

I suspect they woud rather have less peace and security than have it
originate due to President Bush's efforts.

They certainly would never admit to his efforts being the reason for such
improvements.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:20:16 GMT, richard mullens
<mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Jim Yanik wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
newslc721llind5afjmb8qdbd8kg4nko48lrp@4ax.com:


Exactly. So the question for you and Mr Mullens and others is:

If W's policies turn out, in the long run, to materially increase the
peace, prosperity, health, and democracy of the entire world, will you
be terribly disappointed?

John




I suspect they woud rather have less peace and security than have it
originate due to President Bush's efforts.


Since you characterise me that way, may I suggest that you would rather
close your eyes to the mammoth cock-up made by your elected leader than
admit that so far it has been a complete failure.

No WMD found
Thousands of innocents and US servicemen killed.
A copious new supply of terrorist formed.
US relations with the rest of the world in tatters.
A whole country rendered extremely dangerous especially to foreigners.
30 or so Iraqi Bathist party members apprehended.
A puppet government installed.
Rather than liberating the Iraqi oil, it is now scarcer than ever.
Another $82 billion to be spent in munitions and soldiers wages.
US & UK army respect tainted by torture scandals.
And so on.

It hasn't been very successful so far has it ?

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-mideast-new-era,0,3357830,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

This reminds me of the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia around
1989. Exciting times, then and now.

John

 

[richard mullens]

John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:20:16 GMT, richard mullens
mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:


Jim Yanik wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
newslc721llind5afjmb8qdbd8kg4nko48lrp@4ax.com:



Exactly. So the question for you and Mr Mullens and others is:

If W's policies turn out, in the long run, to materially increase the
peace, prosperity, health, and democracy of the entire world, will you
be terribly disappointed?

John




I suspect they woud rather have less peace and security than have it
originate due to President Bush's efforts.


Since you characterise me that way, may I suggest that you would rather
close your eyes to the mammoth cock-up made by your elected leader than
admit that so far it has been a complete failure.

No WMD found
Thousands of innocents and US servicemen killed.
A copious new supply of terrorist formed.
US relations with the rest of the world in tatters.
A whole country rendered extremely dangerous especially to foreigners.
30 or so Iraqi Bathist party members apprehended.
A puppet government installed.
Rather than liberating the Iraqi oil, it is now scarcer than ever.
Another $82 billion to be spent in munitions and soldiers wages.
US & UK army respect tainted by torture scandals.
And so on.

It hasn't been very successful so far has it ?



http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-mideast-new-era,0,3357830,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

This reminds me of the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia around
1989. Exciting times, then and now.

If it happened in America, wouldn't you characterise them as hippies or malcontents ?

There is one precedent - the fall of the Iron curtain. Successful in some places, but not so in Chechnia.

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:33:34 GMT, richard mullens
<mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:

It hasn't been very successful so far has it ?



http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-mideast-new-era,0,3357830,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

This reminds me of the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia around
1989. Exciting times, then and now.


If it happened in America, wouldn't you characterise them as hippies or malcontents ?

The comparison is more accurately to the Civil Rights marchers of the
1960's. And they won, big-time; today they are generally honored as
heroes.

Your cynicism is impressive; you seem to be able to put a negative
spin on anything.

John

 

[richard mullens]

John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:33:34 GMT, richard mullens
mullensdeletethis@ntlworld.com> wrote:



It hasn't been very successful so far has it ?



http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-mideast-new-era,0,3357830,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

This reminds me of the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia around
1989. Exciting times, then and now.


If it happened in America, wouldn't you characterise them as hippies or malcontents ?



The comparison is more accurately to the Civil Rights marchers of the
1960's. And they won, big-time; today they are generally honored as
heroes.

Your cynicism is impressive; you seem to be able to put a negative
spin on anything.

I did mention the fall of the Iron Curtain - which has had a good outcome except in Chechnia.
I try to keep a check on my cynicism, but now you mention it the precedent of the Prague spring was not so good. Though now it
is OK - and I will be playing Go there this summer.

The fall of the Iron curtain / Berlin wall happened peacfully brought about perhaps by the US outspending the USSR on defence.
What has been going on recently has been rather a more bloody affair with not much success. Impatience on GWB's part perhaps.