theloniusfleabag

Dear KK, I am not sure to whom 'on the left' you refer, but France did have huge interests in Iraqi military defense. They also sell arms without qualms, as do almost all arms dealers. TotalFinaElf would have given some of those munitions as gifts if it thought it would ensure billins in oil monies, as per existing contract. I'm sure it was TotalFinaElf that helped twist the gov'ts arm against intervention in Iraq. As any good 'Business' would do. Cluster bombs used as a delivery vehicle for WMDs? Possible, highly unlikely. How many bombers of fighter/bombers did Iraq use/employ against The US/Uk? How many could have struck Israel? I believe the answer is zero. Many 'factual'charges against Iraq are based on 'possibly could have'. Hardly proof.

Dear KK, I am not sure what currency you are trading into, but 4.4 billion euros is about 5.4 billion US . Mind you, Israel was given 1 Billion US cash and 8+ billion US in loan guarantees since the invasion of Iraq. To sum up that level playing field, 9 billion US to Israel. Most of it to 'fight fear'.( Wait, I mean lots of fear, like terror) The biggest fear of Israel is that they won't be able to take all of Palestine away from the Palestinians without loss of life. (mind you, underhanded murderers like suicide bombers should be held up to the world just as much) At to Arafat, I cannot believe the people that think he has done as much as he is credited/blamed for. He took credit where he had no hand, just to give rise to his ego. Many 'attacks he ordered' were claimed long after the fact (especially in 87-90) of the people of Palestine trying to decide for themselves, without Arafat, without Hamas and without Islamic Jihad.

Dear FastNed, I would think that Puerto Rico is as free to leave America as a hostage is free to bolt for the door. While I would not suggest that they are being 'held hostage', if they tried to secede and move in any direction REMOTELY left, they would be invaded faster than you can say "Papa Doc' Duvalier. The Phillipines were 'America's Jewel' in the Pacific because of the incredibly cheap labour a dictator named Marcos provided, and is going to become a major sore spot in the next 10-20 yrs as fanatical Islamism entrenches itself. The US just doesn't seem to learn.

Dear KK, I believe Arnold's first actual challenge (besides asking for federal money) is resolving the "(Wetback) Driver's License" issue. I don't follow US politics a whole lot, but it seems, to me, lunacy to give DLs to non-citizens without legitimate 'papers' such as a work or student visa, etc.

Dear KK, I would agree that many who were once pro-negotiation are fast becoming anti-Palestine. Just as many Arabs who were happy in Israel became involved with the 1987 Intifada from the inside. It seems to be a vicious circle, and circles have no end. Many Israelis and Arabs have co-existed peacefully, yet they are becoming the minority. According to the dictionary, they are all 'Semites'. Religion has made the ground under their feet 'holy' for different reasons.

Dear KK, I think it is a bit incorrect to say that "Israel offers land for peace'. Many Israelis are vehemently opposed to it and Israel is bitterly divided on the issue. Oddly enough, some Israelis are calling for this. The IDF would have to carry it out though. They seem to be one of the few sane participants in this conflict, however. The IDF has very high moral standards, unlike many of the settlers and some members of the Knesset who are without concern for law and equity, and are only driven by biblical interpretation and, of course, Mammon.

Dear KK, I would think that 'socialism', at least Mr. Marx's vision, would have been akin to the 'hunter-gatherer' portion of early human development. Those that could hunt, did, those that couldn't hunt, gathered, and the community benefitted. (From each according to his ability, yada yada) Marx only tried to apply this to modern industrialization, but he certainly didn't invent 'sharing'. With respect to Judaism, they certainly did contribute to human development, both politically and economically. They were one of the first monotheistic religions, certainly the first 'big one'. Mind you, the Jewish 'date of creation' is reckoned to be 3760 B.C., while copper smelting was taking place about 2000 yrs before that!. Judaism, founded by Abraham, (or Ibrahim, according to the Koran) was in about 1700 B.C. I'm sure most of the 'social structures' of society, monarchies, democracy, socialism and communism were dabbled with in some form by that time.

Dear Hugo, A valid point, but the unborn is not yet (or always, depending how you look at it) a woman. I suppose the biggest line in the sand of 'abortion' vs murder is what constitutes a person. If a person is broken down into component parts, one will find a pharmacy and a compost heap, all in one. Potassium, oxygen, hydrogen, iodine, etc. I read somewhere that the actual value of the components of a human are about 4 dollars. Yet these components aren't a 'person'. A person is made up of common elements, but does not become a person until......what? Life experience? Memory? Decision making"? Conception? At conception, those chemicals and elements will 'probably' evolve into a person. The debate seems to be, are you a person under federal law at conception? Not at the moment. Should they be? Perhaps.

Dear Hugo, 'Sexual conditioning' can be applied to heterosexuals, as well, to control their 'condition'. I refer you to the somewhat tongue-in-cheek movie "A Clockwork Orange". Is it right to condition behaviour? (Mind you, the media does it 24/7 by way of advertisments). A speech was given by William Burroughs on the subject of sexual conditioning, and of homosexuality. I will not post it here, but you can find it if you would like to look. It was very interesting, as Mr. Burroughs can sometimes be.

Dear FastNed, An excellent post. As to your question about preservation of societal values, while trying to be inclusive, I believe anti-discrimination laws would suffice. The rest is up to the individual. We have laws against racism, but it doesn't mean people still aren't racist. Bigotry, too, has become more 'unacceptable' due to awareness and 'political correctness' but it still exists.

Dear Hugo, It seems to me that your point is from a perspective against homosexuality. Promiscuity in the 'gay community' must be in, large part, attributed to the fact that same sex couples were frowned upon, spat upon, or burned at the stake for millenia. It would have been well nigh impossible for same-sex couples to have monogamous relationships because they would have been 'found out'. The only safety homosexuals had, and indeed for some, still have, is anonymity.

Dear SirRiff, I agree with most of what you state, however: Many (and especially the US) argue that 'the means justifies the end' and therefore overlook brutalities in favour of their own end. When the 'end' is something they dislike in an 'enemy', they will not confront that 'end', but rather attack the means, even if they had employed those same means.

Dear KK, and all, Not exactly. If I may offer a couple of quotes from 'Intifada', (By Ze'ef Schiff and Ehud Ya'ari, 1987) Here is a quote from the same book about 'collective punishment' (the destruction of the houses of the families of 'terrorists') and it's 'success'. I do apologize for the lenght of this post, but one last recent quote caught my eye. Sometimes things just jump off the page at you. This quote is from 'Ask the Rabbi', a Q&A site from Arutz Sheva, the Israeli National News. A person asked about the 'occupied territories', and of Syria, Jordan, and the possibility of Israel 'annexing', say, a remote Pacific Island, and whether it would be considered 'holy' to farm there. Methinks religious fervor must be checked on all fronts.

Dear all, Arnold as govenor shall be as much of a success as Ronald Reagan was. An actor placed in the role (of Governor of California and then President of the USA) firmly directed by big business and lobby groups, with no independent thought required nor asked for. Reagan was a puppet of George H.W. Bush and there is no reason to think his neither his son nor Arnold will perform otherwise.

Dear Lost In Manitoba, Hitler said the same thing. Marx too. I guess it is to what degree the individual is willing to sacrifice to the good of the whole vs individual that determines the 'lean from centre' the politics of a contry. Also, in certain cases, the army.

Dear KK, I was in Great Falls, Montana (for the cheap beer) and after closing, it seemed that the 'good ol boys' thought that there was nothing more exciting than to be in a fist fight in the parking lot. My friend and I thought it was great fun to break up fights and ask what they were about. We made an awful lot of friends that night, but still, I think it tainted my view of the average US citizen. I had not seenanything like it before. County fairs? I wish Canada had more of them. Community is the strongest bond humans have except to ourselves, but the US seeks to sever the ties to 'community' as leftist, extollng individual gain above all.

Dear KK, You are correct, yet it would seem to me that a suicide terrorist would not have any qualms about 'the morality of WMDs'. Even Osama Bin Laden couldn't procure them, else he would have used them. They would have been far more difficult to track than passenger lists.

Dear Mr. Locke, I suggest we take your limited supply away. You give up yours to me and we'll see who lasts longer.

Dear Mr Read, For whom? For only one species. That is the great tragedy.

Dear FastNed, When President Bush announced the "Road Map" for Palestinian progress in a peace process, many of us in America (myself included) thought he was loosing it but once again, he has shown he is a man who says what he means and means what he says. I suggest you read the news from Arutz Sheva, a 'conservative' Israeli news source, or any other. They hate the 'road map' worse than the Palestinians. I do believe you about the 60%, that sounds about right. Their 'long stated goal' comment, however, smacks of political, rather than religious, fervor. I do think that the problem is of religious, not political, overtones. The Muslims hate Zionism, more than Judaism. However, at the end of the day, there is not much difference between them.

Dear KK, I agree that size multiplies the risk factor. However, I will stand by my assertation that the US has the most disproportionate rate of friendly-fire casualties. Not just by sheer rate of conflict but in each conflict. Only if it were a teetotaling affair! j/k lol.

Dear KK, I believe one of the telling signs about WMDs and Iraq are the hard and solid facts about exactly how much WMD materiel was already 'exported' before the Iraqi invasion. Saddam had: Previous WMDs. Used them. Had ample emnity towards 'the Zionist Entity' Had ample emnity towards the US. Has he exported WMDs? No. They most certainly would have been used by now. How much time elapsed after Resolution 1441 before invasion? 30 days. Yet the US inspection team wants 9 more months? Besides, the military repercussions of resolution 1441 were lifted from resolution from 1991!

Dear SirRiff, A very good post. Amen. Including the peaceful absence of 'organized religion'. 'Till Whitey came. lol

Dear KK, When was the last time you saw Canadian or Australian troops repeatedly kill their own or their allies? In WWII, the Canadians nor the Ghurkas shot down transport planes full of their own reinforcements. I read somewhere that 85% of gun deaths in the US are from the owner's own gun, not from intruders. Certainly, active warfare (or gun ownership) increases the risk of friendly-fire accordingly. According to my own made-up stats, one fifth of 200,000 is about forty thousand Canadian troops, who could have gotten the same job done, with minimum to no friendly-fire casualties, and probably would have earned the respect of those we had fought. The Brits used 'tally-ho!', the Japanese ,' Banzai!', the Afrika Korps 'Heia Safari!, while the American battle cry is still "Yahoo!".

Dear Hugo, I'll grant you that friendly-fire incidents were probably grossly under-reported by the Russians in WWII and probably since. However, my father (who lost his arm against the Germans) and 3 uncles served in different services in WWII, and all told me that the US Army was the biggest bunch of trigger-happy nitwits of any armed force. History will prove this out. Omaha beach, for example, was only 'bloody Omaha' because the US scorned the use of 'funnies', specialized yet unconventional modified tanks for beach landings. 'The Bobbin'( a device mounted on a tank to lay down matting across soft sand), the Crab,( with chain 'flails' at the front for setting off mines) and the Mulberries, (portable harbours for resupply) for example. If you recall the Gulf I stats, I believe US friendly-fire casualties were over 50% of the total in the conflict. In Afganistan, they managed to kill Canadians and now, in Iraq, they killed a bunch of Iraqi policemen who were on their side. To say that they are no more prone to this than any other army, should be true. But it isn't. They seem to have the philosophy of 'shoot first, think later, (or not at all.)'