blackascoal

FAIRNESS Your other statements indicate you are not interested in fairness. You are not neutral as to the Middle East conflict therefore you are necessarily unfair. Yoru concept of fairness, is to favour the Muslim world and be anti-Israel. You have made that clear in your statements. That means your comment above is meaningless. First, I apologize for the "we". I should have clarified that "we" is America. Secondly, given your rant, I doubt if anything other than total alligence to Israel would qualify as "fairness" to you .. which means that your comments are meaningless to me. If YOU took anytime to research the costs to US taxpayers for support and giveaways to Israel, perhaps you wouldn't make such ridiculous claims .. but then again, facts may not matter to you. I'd suggest that you read "The Costs to American Taxpayers of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: $3 Trillion" by Thomas R. Stauffer, a Washington, D.C.-based engineer and economist who writes and teaches about the economics of energy and the Middle East. Stauffer has taught at Harvard University and Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. Stauffer's findings were first presented at an October 2002 conference sponsored by the U.S. Army College and the University of Maine. Stauffer is just one of many who have done extensive research into the costs of US support and giveaways to Israel. If you have research that demonstrates that Israel pays back all loans and the US doesn't have to absorb the interest and often the principal of unpaid loans .. I'd like to see it. The cost to US taxpayers in the form of unpaid loans, giveaways, rising oil costs, and lost employment continues to rise. World Opinion poll after opinion poll demonstrate that "Israel is considered the most dangerous nation on earth", including polls by the European Union, and the US, because of our (America) unholy alliance with Israel, is close behind. What does that cost the US? I see no reason for going through a long litany of reasons why I disagree with our unbalanced and senseless course in the middle east to you. Obviously, your mind is made up, which I have no problem with. But, I'm a US taxpayer and I have a daughter in the US military, which makes my opinion more than meaningless. I'm part of a growing voice of US citizens who believe that our tax dollars can be better spent, want true balance in our mideast foreign policy, and who do not want to see a single US soldier ever dying again for Israel. Israel wants to see US soldiers dying in a foolish attack on Iran. The American people do not. America's foreign policy in the mideast has been reckless and senseless. We attacked Iraq without the slightest cause that has proven to be true and empowered Iran throughout the region. We've handed Iraq to Iran like a wonderful christmas present at the cost of tens of thousands of our own dead and wounded soldiers and nearly half-a-trillion dollars in US taxpayer money. The American people ain't (eb) buying another foolish attack in the name of Israel's security .. neither is the rest of the world. I have no problem with the Jewish people or the Jewish organizations I've worked with, like Jews for Justice, whose agenda is closer to what I believe than what you claim. My problem is with the Zionist government of Israel .. and I don't need your primer on Zionism. I've heard it from jews themselves. You have a right to whatever opinion you choose, but it's hardly as important or "fair" as you pretend it to be.

The clip says nothing about "some other right wingers" calling Obama a Halfrican American so Rush is not the only one who can make stuff up. First time I have ever heard him called a comedian though. Somehow that word just doesn't come to mind when I think of old Rush. Buffoon does come to mind.

Hanoi Jane, back after apologizing for her actions in the Vietnam war and helping the enemy. The slaughter has allready started, the insurgents are killing Iraqis with impunity. If the U.S. pulls out now it will be worse. The only solution I can think of is for thousands more troops from as many other places as possible, complete martial law and the borders sealed, that can't last forever either. Someone has to figure out how the US military can withdraw from Iraq without Iraq completely collapsing into worse anarchy. What would be the worst case scenario if the U.S. said they would pull out over the next year, sort it out yourselves. And no woulda, shoulda coulda. Predictions of a "nightmare scenario" if the US leaves is the same crap that was supposedly going to happen if we left Vietnam .. which of course did not happen. Other nations are not going to send troops to Iraq, in fact, they've been getting out as fast as they can, and the british are going to leave as soon as Blair's ass is kicked out the door. The US started this mindless misadventure and the rest of the world is leaving it to the US to figure out by itself. It is only a matter of time before the US faces its Saigon moment in Iraq and no one, including you, have any real possible solution that would allow the Bush Administration to save face or eek out the slightest modicum of a "victory". We've already given the victory to Iran. All that's left to do in Iraq for US troops is more dying.

I don't believe that any of that will work for the right. They've been exposed and the American people aren't that stupid.

FAIRNESS Is that a country? A region? It's a policy that does not come with blowback. What we need more than Israel's bought "friendship" are the resources of arab lands, which we aren't powerful enough to simply take by force. The billions upon billions of dollars we've lavished on Israel would have gone a long way in formenting good relationships with everyone in the region. In spite of all the money and weapons we've given to Israel, they still spy on us and have become one of the reasons the rest of the world hates us. Not only was our unbalanced policy wrong in terms of the US long-term interests, it was also the worng thing to do morally.

This war has been lost for at least two years. All that's left to do is the dying. Those that proclaim the US can't leave now have no solution on how the US could possibly win .. because it simply is not possible. Of course, those who claim we should stay in spite of the fact that we've already lost, have the luxury of spouting such nonsense because they aren't spouting off from Iraq.

FAIRNESS

GREAT comment. If there was a draft called .. everybody in America would immediately become a liberal.

It appears that many nations are now wary of sending more troops and their continued presence in Afghanistan .. much like the beginning of their withdrawal fom Iraq. NATO appears to be following the footsteps of the "coalition". Perhaps it's because they are finding out that the "war on terror" has been a fraud from the very beginning. exerpt ... NATO Allies Wary of Adding Troops in Afghanistan http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/nyt846.html "America’s European allies remained noncommittal about sending additional troops to Afghanistan today, even as the Bush administration sought to inject new energy into the NATO mission against the Taliban by offering more American soldiers and money. Officially, the language at a NATO meeting here today reflected resolve and commitment on Afghanistan. NATO “is stepping up its game in Afghanistan on all fronts,” the alliance’s secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer of the Netherlands, said. “The fact that you saw so many people from the international community sitting around the table is a strong message itself.” But beyond the sound bytes, the realities that have troubled the NATO mission in Afghanistan since the 26-member trans-Atlantic alliance took command last year remained on display. France and Germany continued to limit their combat role; both countries have refused to deploy troops in the south of the country, where Taliban forces are strongest. Germany’s Parliament has yet to approve a proposal to send six Tornado reconnaissance jets to southern Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi is battling allies in own party and government who oppose the Afghan mission and want the government to set a deadline for withdrawing the country’s 1,800 troops. While Mr. Prodi’s government passed a decree today to renew financing for Italy’s troops in Afghanistan, it did so without the support of all of Mr. Prodi’s coalition partners, and Italian officials said it was unlikely that Mr. Prodi could rally support for any increase in Italy’s Afghanistan troop contribution."

M Dancer, Obviously you're not required to do anything but post what you think without proving or backing it up EVER. Once again, thanks for allowing me to prove my point .. by using your misguided unfounded comments .. OR .. how about this .. you win. Your intelligence and facts have overwhelmed me and I don't know what I'm talking about, in fact, I made it all up.

M. Dancer, All you've offered on this issue is what you think without any supporting evidence or documentation at all. Not once have you come back with a shred of either to challenge anything said or posted. Anytime your argument falls flat on its face, you just move to something else, because you have no evidence to back up what you think, or challenge what was presented. You claimed that no one would build a pipeline in "the midst of a civil war" .. I posted the unquestionable evidence that the pipeline is indeed being built .. and why and how it came to being built straight out of the Congressional Record, BBC, MSNBC, and CNN .. you just moved on. You have no challenge to the timeline and chronolgy of events that I posted on Aghanistan, nor do you have any evidence to challenge anything else. You simply moved on. Now you're down to a semantical argument about Bin Laden not being an "operative", which you claim "there's not a shred of evidence to support". That means that you have no clue about MAK, Bin Laden's organization, and it's ties to the CIA when America backed the Taliban against the Russian, or American involvement in their training and funding, or anything about that history at all. Unless you have some proof of what you've been claiming, while losing the argument badly, I"ll leave you to whatever it is you choose to believe .. but I thank you for the opportunity for me to prove my point.

This is all about OIL and it has been planned long before 9/11. If one is truly interested in truth .. it's right in front of you. An 8th grader could figure it out. Start by looking at the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), and take a look at who they are. Don't take my or anybody else's word for it, take a look for yourself. PNAC claims that the US has a right to subjugate the world through an imperialist agenda based on military expansionism and dominance. PNAC also believes that the US should be creating in "...advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool". .. In other words, race-specific murder. Why is PNAC important and do they have the influence to carry out their plans? This is an exerpt from a letter they sent to then President Bill Clinton in 1998, just before his State of the Union address .. Dear Mr. President: We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor. "... in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons." "... if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard." "The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy." http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm Who are these people that believe in US world domination by military force and that we should remove Saddam whether he has weapons or not and that we should be creating demonic weapons that target specific races of people? .. Here's who they are .. Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush R. James Woolsey Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz William Schneider, Jr. William Kristol Richard Perle Richard L. Armitage John Bolton Heard any of these names before? They had a plan and they don't care if you read it .. because they didn't think there would be anything you can do about it .. and they were right .. http://www.newamericancentury.org/ .. "Rebulding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources" They had a plan, and all they needed to set the plan in motion was, in their words, "a catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor". On September 11, 2001 .. they got it. There is little mystery left to the horror of the wars for oil, just an unwillingness to face a truth that lies clearly in front of you.

Nonsense. What's more there is not a shred of evidence he was an operative. Note, there is a huge differene between receiveing funds and weapons and being an operative. If that was the case, every afghan mujeehadin, every mercenary there awere operatives..... That distintion though is lost on the partisan brigade. I suggest that you actually research what you claim .. which does not appear to be the case. Bin Laden comes home to roost His CIA ties are only the beginning of a woeful story By Michael Moran MSNBC http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1245.htm NEW YORK, Aug. 24, 1998 — At the CIA, it happens often enough to have a code name: Blowback. Simply defined, this is the term that describes an agent, an operative or an operation that has turned on its creators. Osama bin Laden, our new public enemy Number 1, is the personification of blowback. And the fact that he is viewed as a hero by millions in the Islamic world proves again the old adage: Reap what you sow ----------------------------------------- Osama Bin Laden CIA’s Toy Gone Awry http://www.worldpress.org/1101binladen_cia.htm Here's how it works in the real world. You make a fantastic claim, I call bullshit. You must come up with proof that backs up your claim. I read the first MSM article and could find now where where it says Bin Laden was an operative of the CIA. After that I don't bother reading spam. NO .. here's how it works .. feel free to believe whatever you want. I didn't come here to teach you anything. You call it bullshit .. so what? In the world of intelligent people, someone makes a claim that you don't believe, you research it for yourself. I've presented a plethora of information that anyone who seeks truth can dig into to discover if it's true or is this just the musings of a "moonbat". Additionally, you and I have been down this road before and I already know that even if you were looking at classified CIA documents, you still wouldn't believe it. You've made claims that I immediately proved incorrect. It's your turn, prove what you claim is true .. I already have.

Nonsense. What's more there is not a shred of evidence he was an operative. Note, there is a huge differene between receiveing funds and weapons and being an operative. If that was the case, every afghan mujeehadin, every mercenary there awere operatives..... That distintion though is lost on the partisan brigade. I suggest that you actually research what you claim .. which does not appear to be the case. Bin Laden comes home to roost His CIA ties are only the beginning of a woeful story By Michael Moran MSNBC http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1245.htm NEW YORK, Aug. 24, 1998 — At the CIA, it happens often enough to have a code name: Blowback. Simply defined, this is the term that describes an agent, an operative or an operation that has turned on its creators. Osama bin Laden, our new public enemy Number 1, is the personification of blowback. And the fact that he is viewed as a hero by millions in the Islamic world proves again the old adage: Reap what you sow ----------------------------------------- Osama Bin Laden CIA’s Toy Gone Awry http://www.worldpress.org/1101binladen_cia.htm Ranjit Bhushan, Outlook (independent weekly), New Delhi, India, Sept. 17, 2001. Ironic as it may sound, Osama bin Laden, the most-wanted man in the world and the perceived symbol of evil, received his first lessons in the art of clandestine operations and subterfuge from the CIA. Rewind to the late ’70s. It was at the Jawora base near Host, Afghanistan, that U.S. intelligence set up a training ground to equip young men to fight a guerrilla battle against the erstwhile U.S.S.R. Belonging to the royal Saudi family, Bin Laden was a VIP student of the CIA. Fired by a strong anti-left stand, Bin Laden launched his operations against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan with religious fervor. Indeed, when the then-Soviet Politburo decided to send an army of “infidels” into Afghanistan, Bin Laden knew his call had come. He audaciously shifted his business from Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan with hundreds of loyal workers, along with state-of-the-art construction equipment, and began to erect military lines of communication and bases of resistance there. He also teamed up with Abdullah Azam, who was in charge of a Palestinian organization called the Muslim Brotherhood. It was through the Brotherhood that they set up recruitment offices all over the Islamic world. The once-favored pupil of the CIA is the one man the agency now badly wants. But he has proved supremely elusive. And as the hunt takes on a new dimension following Black Tuesday, the CIA can dip into its own records of this millennium’s Dr. No. --------------------------------------------- Most people would call this more than just a "shred of evidence" .. and there is much much more. None of this is a secret, and in fact, is WIDELY known.

Bin Laden was NEVER the priority. He was a CIA operative prior to 9/11. The Bush Administration NEVER put in adequate manpower to catch him if they wanted, allowed him to escape from Tora Bora, and called off the team to capture him. Bin Laden didn't lure us into Afghanistan, but the Bush Administration lured other nations like Canada there .. then on to Iraq to rape their oil reserves. SEE: Iraq Oil Law

I know it's just coincidence, happenstance, and pure luck that since the invasion, energy companies have made the highest record profits of any corporations in the history of Man. And about that ridiculous claim that anyone would build an "energy infrastructire in the midst of a war zone" .. It's being built as we speak.

Knowledge is a wonderful thing ... From the 1998 Congressional Record http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlr.../hfa48119_0.HTM STATEMENT OF JOHN J. MARESCA, VICE PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, UNOCAL CORPORATION excerpts.. I would like to focus today on three issues. First, the need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources. Second, the need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements to the conflicts in the region, including Afghanistan. Third, the need for structured assistance to encourage economic reforms and the development of appropriate investment climates in the region. In this regard, we specifically support repeal or removal of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act. The second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company. Mr. Chairman, the Caspian region contains tremendous untapped hydrocarbon reserves. Just to give an idea of the scale, proven natural gas reserves equal more than 236 trillion cubic feet. The region's total oil reserves may well reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil. Some estimates are as high as 200 billion barrels. In 1995, the region was producing only 870,000 barrels per day. By 2010, western companies could increase production to about 4.5 million barrels a day, an increase of more than 500 percent in only 15 years. If this occurs, the region would represent about 5 percent of the world's total oil production As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place. --------------------------------------------- The US government saw the Taliban regime "as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia" from the rich oilfields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean. Until now, "the oil and gas reserves of Central Asia have been controlled by Russia. The Bush government wanted to change all that." The Bush administratino began to negotiate with the Taliban immediately after coming into power in February. US and Taliban diplomatic representatives met several times in Washington, Berlin and Islamabad. But, confronted with Taliban's refusal to accept US conditions, "this rationale of energy security changed into a military one", the authors claim. "At one moment during the negotiations, the US representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs,'" ------------------------------------------------- The US informs other governments of its plan to invade Afghanistan months before 9/11 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/preplanned.html September 9, 2001: Bush given Afghanistan invasion plan http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/qf911.html October 7, 2001: Bush announces opening of Afghanistan attacks http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/10/07/ret.attack.bush/ June 13, 2002: Former UNOCAL Consultant, Hamid Karzai, elected as new Afghan leader. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2042040.stm December 27, 2002: Afghanistan pipeline deal signed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2608713.stm ------------------------------------------------- Every word is verifiable and most of it public record. But feel free to maintain any belief you choose. After all, gotta be careful of "moonbats"

Perhaps we (Americans) know a bit more about 9/11 and our attack on Afghanistan than the Canadians who support this fraud do. Perhaps the Canadians who support this fraud don't know that the attack on Afghanistan was planned long before 9/11. Perhaps those Canadians don't know of the UNOCOL pipeline component of this fraud. Perhaps they don't know how "We will carpet you in gold, or carpet you in bombs" plays into this fraud. Perhaps the Canadians who support this fraud don't know why the Bush Administrtation doesn't care about Bin Laden and never did. Perhaps the Canadians who support this fraud because of 9/11 should ask themselves how many Americans believe that 19 guys from caves could defeat the most sophisticated defense system on the planet armed with box cutters. Perhaps they should ask themselves why in the hell are they trusting the Bush Administration when Americans don't. Perhaps Canadians should be asking why your leaders led you into this without asking these questions.

I'll tell you what. Having an allied state of Israel is a whole lot cheaper than maintaining the old colonial system. The West has to do something to maintain some semblance of order in that part of the world. You call what is happening in the middle east a "semblance of order"? This has nothing to do with "order" and everything to do with oil, the subjegation of arabs who possess the oil, and zionist intentions.

For the First Time, Americans Oppose Afghan War http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/...em/itemID/14497 Many adults in the United States express dissatisfaction with the war on terrorism, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 52 per cent of respondents oppose the U.S. conflict in Afghanistan, up four points since September. --------------------------- U.S. extends combat tours in Afghanistan http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/4496899.html WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has decided to extend the combat tour of 3,200 soldiers from a 10th Mountain Division brigade in Afghanistan for four months in hopes of quelling the violence. The decision comes a week after Defense Secretary Robert Gates met with commanders in Afghanistan and heard a request for more troops. Already, President Bush's plan to send more than 21,000 additional troops to Iraq is running into criticism on Capitol Hill as he struggles to persuade the Democratic-controlled Congress and a weary public to have patience with his war policies. The decision further stresses a military straining to wage major wars on two fronts. Army and Marine Corps leaders, meanwhile, are telling Congress they are concerned about the readiness levels of their units at home. The extension also raises questions about the future course of the conflict in Afghanistan. NATO and U.S. troops have struggled to control an increased flow of Taliban fighters into the country and a stubborn drug trade that has financed the insurgency. ------------------------------------------------------ The foolish, needless misadventures of Iraq and Afghanistan have already been lost. It doesn't matter what the US does at this point, America has already been defeated.

Carter Wins Applause at Brandeis Defends stance on Palestinians; critic speaks later http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0124-10.htm excerpt .. Jimmy Carter, in a carefully orchestrated visit, received multiple ovations last night during his speech at Brandeis University. Loud applause greeted his rebuttal of critics who have called him an anti-Semite because of his views on Israel. Carter had turned down an initial invitation to appear after it was suggested that he debate Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. Some questioned whether the debate proposal was denying free speech and whether Brandeis was truly open to views critical of Israel. Ultimately, after more than 100 students and faculty signed a petition inviting him without strings, Carter agreed to speak. Dershowitz was kept out of the gym during the speech, but allowed to give a rebuttal after Carter left. Carter, president from 1977 to 1981, brokered the 1978 Camp David peace accord between Israel and Egypt and received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. In response to the efforts to have him debate Dershowitz, the former president said to loud applause: "I didn't think Brandeis needed a Harvard professor to come" and tell them how to think. After Carter's speech, roughly half of the audience remained to hear Dershowitz's rebuttal.

I'm halfway through Carter's Palestine, Peace not Apartheid right now and I have learned so much that is not mentioned in the official "Israel wants peace" argument.... Read Avi Shlaim's "The Iron Wall" and Tom Segev's "One Palestine Complete". You'll learn a lot more. Oh, I'm not sure I can. I got about halfway through this one a few weeks ago, it's taken me that long to get to the 3/4 mark. I can't read past five or ten pages without getting nauseated... literally. Every time an Israeli dies in the hands of a Palestinian, we are bombarded with such images. Everyone, it seems, has the mantra of "Israel has a right to protect itself" and "Israel is a true democracy" down to a tee. Yet, although I had heard about the Palestinian plight, I had NO IDEA of the depth to which such injustice takes place. Not allowing them to sell their agriculture, building a wall that cuts-off families from other families and entrap the Palestinians geographically by encircling them, the continual settlments and blatant disregard of international law... We all know the Israeli side of the other argument, but the Palestinian argument is an obscure watered-down sound-byte it seems. Even I, who thought I knew more than the average person about the Palestinian side of the argument, had no clue about how bad the situation is. Reading Carter's book, to me, has been the equivalent of reading about sex-slavery in the Far-East or the famine of Africa. I can't believe it's happening in the year 2007 and nobody seems to care. Excellent post and I agree with every single word. To the credit of the posters, at least we haven't been bombarded with claims of "anti-semitism" .. which has to be the biggest misnomer, mischaracterization, missed-intelligent word ever spoken. Arabs are every bit as "semitic" as Jews .. as are all people who speak an Afro-Asiatic language. Claims of "racism" are equally as false given that there is no race called "Jews", a religious distinction. The good news is that the walls of censorship of all things Jewish, particularly in the US, are tumbling down. Although Carter is taking a lot of heat for his honesty, there have been a great many eyes opened by it. The Iraq war has also opened the eyes of many as our sons and daughters march off to needless death and maiming for the welfare state of Israel, which gets billions upon billions of US taxpayer dollars .. and which also needs to come to an end.

The Isreali people are just as much victims of Zionism as the American people have been victims of the neocon cabal .. and Isreal is in violation of more UN Resolutions that any nation in history. But it's always the arabs fault.

Thge moral argument is irrelevant to this particular topic, but it keeps popping up. I don't belive there's a moral equivilance betwene the U.S. and China. Period. As to the rest: I think America, by virtue of its system of government and it's philosophical foundations is less capable of evil than China. I understand you believe that but "less" is not the point. Is the US capable of evil? .. Absolutely. Does China not only have the right, but duty to defend itself against an adversary capable of evil, no matter how one quantifies that evil? .. Absolutely. That's my point.

Black Dog, I couldn't agree with you more .. which kinda' makes my point. We apply the shiny veneer to our foreign policy decisions, many of which couldn't pass, nor could the American people accept without it. Just to let you know my brother, I have no emotional attachment to "anti-american", "unpatriotic", or any other Matrix-driven buzzwords. That's for people who do not understand the difference from being a citizen or being a subject of the Crown. That's for Americans who do not understand and have probably never read the Declaration of Independence. I'm a Jeffersonian American and I understand that in today's mind-warp political climate, Thomas Jefferson would be called "anti-american". Puts me in good company. Thanks AND, although you reject it, you are again using a moral equivlent for your argument. Doing more or less or any level of evil is not, in my opinion, relevant to this argument .. only that all sides are capable of the same evil. I agree with much of what you've said here .. and it isn't space weapons that worry me either as much as the military/industrial complex and their need for blood. America is in the business of war .. and that does not bode well for our future. I agree with General Smedley Butler .. War is a Racket http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm