the elephant in the room

On Oct 17, 12:20*pm, wrote:


Here´s a prediction for you, you´ll still be a nasty stupid
mother****er tomorrow.

On Oct 17, 2:37*am, wrote:


Dave
General Washington himself established the doctrine in the
Revolutionary Army that, unlike the British and their German
hirelings, the Revolutionary Army would not execute or torture
prisoners. This policy became a significant advantage as word spread
that surrendered Brits and Hessians could become Americans and build a
new life in the new world.

EUREKA! *That's it, there's the answer - the US should just offer bin
Laden "American" citizenship and maybe a hack license or a nice little
bodega in a lively Manhattan neighborhood or a 10k gold jewelry cart in
a busy mall or something and he'll forget all about that "DEATH TO
INFIDELS!!" shtick...

Sheesh,
R- Hide quoted text -


So I guess you are also against our current policy of safe haven and
paying "sons of Iraq" fighters to come over to the Iraqi govt side?
Its one of the few things per war fighting policy that most Ds and Rs
agree on.

Dave

On Oct 17, 8:06*pm, DaveS wrote:

So I guess you are also against our current policy of safe haven and
paying "sons of Iraq" fighters to come over to the Iraqi govt side?
Its one of the few things per war fighting policy that most Ds and Rs
agree on.

Dave

All well and good, until they open a sandwich shop.

On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT), DaveS
wrote:

On Oct 17, 2:37*am, wrote:


Dave
General Washington himself established the doctrine in the
Revolutionary Army that, unlike the British and their German
hirelings, the Revolutionary Army would not execute or torture
prisoners. This policy became a significant advantage as word spread
that surrendered Brits and Hessians could become Americans and build a
new life in the new world.

EUREKA! *That's it, there's the answer - the US should just offer bin
Laden "American" citizenship and maybe a hack license or a nice little
bodega in a lively Manhattan neighborhood or a 10k gold jewelry cart in
a busy mall or something and he'll forget all about that "DEATH TO
INFIDELS!!" shtick...

Sheesh,
R- Hide quoted text -


So I guess you are also against our current policy of safe haven and
paying "sons of Iraq" fighters to come over to the Iraqi govt side?
Its one of the few things per war fighting policy that most Ds and Rs
agree on.

You can't effectively buy hearts and minds, you can only somewhat
effectively rent trigger fingers, so I have no illusions that paying
people to "come over to the Iraqi govt side" is anything more than a
waste of money unless what is really being bought is mercenary service.
And that's fine if that is what is called for under a particular set of
circumstances. OTOH, what can be done is to show that their interests
are best served aligning with the US' interests or that their interests
are in serious and grave danger by opposing the US' interests. Generally
speaking, a mix of the two, weighted heavily toward the alignment rather
than the fear, is the best course.

HTH,
R

Dave

On Oct 17, 12:07*pm, wrote:
- Show quoted text -

WOW, maybe you should have thought this way BEFORE you voted last
election. You could have made a few suggestions.

Dave

In article
,
DaveS wrote:

On Oct 16, 3:34*pm, Lazarus Cooke
wrote:
Since you guys are obsessed with your own local elections, here's the
elephant:

http://tinyurl.com/4hgyuh

It's sad that no-one's talking about it.

L

Has anybody been punished for authorising or being a member of the
death squads the British used to execute Irish dissidents in Northern
Ireland? Or participants in the Israeli assassination program who hold
dual citizenship and even have book and speaking tours in the US and
Europe? Or the CIA personnel who acceded to the execution of their
fellow American citizens in Chile? Or the Dutch troops who stood aside
while the Serbs executed at least 7000 Muslims in Bosnia? Or the
European businessmen who supplied both sides in the Congo wars that
have killed something like 2 million people? Etc etc.

No. I agree with all of this. And it's a disgrace, and we should all
do what we can to change it. (Mind you, Pinochet was held for a while
in custody, which may have helped a little to encourage the others. It
is shameful that he was let go by the English, but all the same, good
for the Spaniard who indicted him).

I believe that what the US has done is wrong and the purps need to be
put on trial.

Exactly

However, the US doesn't hold a monopoly on extra
judicial proceedings

Absolutely

as some in Europe seem to believe nowadays.

I'm sure some in Europe do, but they're wrong (and probably both
ignorant and stupid as well).

(I know a lot about the death squads in Northern Ireland. I was there
at the time. It was actually Protestant Northern Irish killing Catholic
Northern Irish on the whole, but it was done with connivance of
Westminster)

Lazarus

I agree with Stella Rimington, who used to head the British MI5, when
she says that the Al Qaida attacks on the US were "another terrorist
incident" but not qualitatively different from any others.

http://tinyurl.com/6bg866

The lurid US/British overreaction has been astonishingly
counter-productive.

When the US and Britain invaded Iraq, there was no Al Qaida presence
there, just as (cf DaveS's comment sup.) when the Brits went on the
streets in Northern Ireland, the IRA to all intents and purposes didn't
exist.

Curiously, populations never seem to blame their government's colossal
cock-ups in these respects. The Brits have sadly never blamed their
government for the colossal and entirely unneccessary mess in Northern
Ireland.

They did get shirty over Iraq though (once it started to go wrong) and
threw out Tony Blair.

I'm just trying to get Americans to behave better than Brits.

Surely that's not asking too much?

Lazarus

On Oct 18, 11:36*pm, Lazarus Cooke
wrote:
I agree with Stella Rimington, who used to head the British MI5, when
she says *that the Al Qaida attacks on the US were "another terrorist
incident" but not qualitatively different from any others.

http://tinyurl.com/6bg866

The lurid US/British overreaction has been astonishingly
counter-productive.

When the US and Britain invaded Iraq, there was no Al Qaida presence
there, just as *(cf DaveS's comment sup.) when the Brits went on the
streets in Northern Ireland, the IRA to all intents and purposes didn't
exist.

Curiously, populations never seem to blame their government's colossal
cock-ups in these respects. The Brits have sadly never blamed their
government for the colossal and entirely unneccessary mess in Northern
Ireland.

They did get shirty over Iraq though (once it started to go wrong) and
threw out Tony Blair.

I'm just trying to get Americans to behave better than Brits.

Surely that's not asking too much?

Lazarus

Of some, it obviously is. Apart from which, it is a fruitless
endeavour, as they are all only people, some good some bad, some
stupid, some nasty, quite regardless of nationality.