"Intelligence doesn't work against a madman."

[shereads]

I see the majority of the citizens on both sides as victims, but I lost all respect for the Israeli govenment long ago.

I don't think much of the current gov't either, but I can more easily excuse aggression by a small nation that is surrounded by enemies than I can excuse it by my own government.

Yet I have enormous sympathy for the Palestinian people, and I agree with Ogg that the cycle of an-eye-for-an-eye is nothing but a downward spiral. Every violent incident provides the motive for the next incident.

There have been heros in the middle east on both sides of the Palestinian issue; assasinations took care of that. In each case, a leader was assasinated not by an enemy, but by a zealot from his own side who wanted to see the peace process fail.

I don't know enough about the history of Israel as a state to understand how and why that particular piece of the planet was cordoned off for them after WWII.

When I was a kid, I remember wondering why the Allies didn't take part of Germany away and turn that into Israel. Why remove people from their land, who didn't have anything to do with the Holocaust, if the purpose was to provide a refuge for a persecuted people?

It was simplistic because I was a child. But even now, I would have understood the justice of creating Israel from a portion of the state that made the creation of Israel seem necessary and just.

The only thing that seems clear is that the "developed world" is guilty of having interfered in the middle east to an extent that's almost incomprehensible, and that the entire world is paying the price for it now. The borders of nations have been drawn by people who don't live there and didn't foresee a time when they'd have to live with the consequences.

Before we invaded Iraq, I listened to an interview on public radio with a representative of the government of Syria. He made a challenge to the American government: Hold every country in the middle east to the same standard regarding weapons of mass destruction.

We can't, we won't. We know that Israel had a nuclear program, and we know they have used espionage against the U.S. to help achieve it. There are valid reasons why we remain the loyal "big brother," as Colly says. But the double standard means we can have no credibility in the Arab world, and makes our rant about the evils of WMD seem absurd.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I don't think much of the current gov't either, but I can more easily excuse aggression by a small nation that is surrounded by enemies than I can excuse it by my own government.

Yet I have enormous sympathy for the Palestinian people, and I agree with Ogg that the cycle of an-eye-for-an-eye is nothing but a downward spiral. Every violent incident provides the motive for the next incident.

There have been heros in the middle east on both sides of the Palestinian issue; assasinations took care of that. In each case, a leader was assasinated not by an enemy, but by a zealot from his own side who wanted to see the peace process fail.

I don't know enough about the history of Israel as a state to understand how and why that particular piece of the planet was cordoned off for them after WWII.

When I was a kid, I remember wondering why the Allies didn't take part of Germany away and turn that into Israel. Why remove people from their land, who didn't have anything to do with the Holocaust, if the purpose was to provide a refuge for a persecuted people?

It was simplistic because I was a child. But even now, I would have understood the justice of creating Israel from a portion of the state that made the creation of Israel seem necessary and just.

The only thing that seems clear is that the "developed world" is guilty of having interfered in the middle east to an extent that's almost incomprehensible, and that the entire world is paying the price for it now. The borders of nations have been drawn by people who don't live there and didn't foresee a time when they'd have to live with the consequences.

Before we invaded Iraq, I listened to an interview on public radio with a representative of the government of Syria. He made a challenge to the American government: Hold every country in the middle east to the same standard regarding weapons of mass destruction.

We can't, we won't. We know that Israel had a nuclear program, and we know they have used espionage against the U.S. to help achieve it. There are valid reasons why we remain the loyal "big brother," as Colly says. But the double standard means we can have no credibility in the Arab world, and makes our rant about the evils of WMD seem absurd.

Not going to bore you with a lot of historical references Sher, but in answer to your question. There was a thriving and active Jewish community in and around Jerusalem prior to Adolph Hitler. Palestine was a mandate from the treaty of Versallies. That particular plot of land has been part of one empire or another for more years than you would care to count. To the jews, it is thier promised land and they have clung to it tenaciously since pre Roman times.

Before Hitler began the "final solution" of the Jewish problem Germany promoted emmigration of Jews. Oh, they were fleeced of their worldly goods, but the idea was to get them out. One plan was to set up a colony on Madagascar, I think that was one of Hess's pet projects. The problem with emmigration was, very few countries wanted them. The jews have been convienient scapegoats in Eroupe since midevil times. Then someone comes up with the idea of sending them all back to their "promised land"

Anthony Eden, British home secretary under Churchil argued vehemently against such an idea, citing the British alliance with certain arabs and the row it would create. Chruchil listened and the Brits closed off most emmigration. When it became clear to Hitler that he couldn't get them out of Germany (or later europe) when he owned all of that, he turned to other means. After the war, the Jews had so much international sympathy they demanded thier homeland. The British, considering thier earlier policy and international pressure had no real choice but to allow them to go "home'. A lot of them. Enough to anger Arabs and to create a large enough community where nationalism sprang up.

The Britsh found the situation untenable, with Jews calling for a country of their own on one side and Arabs decrying it on the other. Add in that Jeruselem is a holy city to both of their religions and it got way to hot for them way fast. So the British decided to relinquish their mandate and an international commission was set up to decide how to do it. In the end they gave the majority Palestinians about 75% of the mandate and the Jews about 25%. They staked the jewish 25% and the Palestinian 75% to border in Jeruselem, thus giving both religions access to their holy places.

It was sensible, it was pretty fair and neither side should have had any reason to complain. The Jews got their homeland and the Arabs got control of their lands back. Both had aceess to the holy city and both had thier own country for the first time in god knows how long. Everyone should have been happy, but they weren't. The Pal's, along with other Arab nations attacked Isreal with the intntion of destryoing her before she was strong enough to resist. They got thier asses whipped and Isreal occupied some territory. The Arab attacks persited over the years until the IDF finally smashed them up and seized the areas they felt were critical staging areas and jump offpoints for invasion. The golan heights, the westbank and the gaza strip.

And there you have it. They occupy them, but don't really have any claim to them other than right of conquest. The palestinians lost their country and have beeen subjugated again. This time however it isn't by westerner christians, it's by jews and that they cannot abide. Also Arab nationalism had sprung up and there were other arab nations close at hand to keep the pressure on Israel.

Thats a sketchy synopsiys, but it's the best I can do woking from memory and on pain killers. Hope it helps you see some of the more far reaching and strange things that brought us to this point in history.

-Colly

 

[shereads]

Thank you, Colleen.

So, as my friend at the office said, "Why doesn't Palestine just leave Israel alone?"






P.S. You know way too much. Now we have to kill you.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Thank you, Colleen.

So, as my friend at the office said, "Why doesn't Palestine just leave Israel alone?"






P.S. You know way too much. Now we have to kill you.

LOL, long as ya kill me with kindness have at it


Ask your friend a simple question, if Canada conquered and occupied the U.S. would he feel like leaving them alone and being a nice subject?

-Colly

 

[shereads]

LOL, long as ya kill me with kindness have at it


Ask your friend a simple question, if Canada conquered and occupied the U.S. would he feel like leaving them alone and being a nice subject?

-Colly

I don't discuss politics with him anymore since he told me he's "very politically aware" but hasn't registered to vote because he doesn't want to be called for jury duty.

Which is too bad, because his church distributes a pamphlet before every election that explains the candidate's views on everything in a much clearer format than the newspapers.

 

[shereads]

...if Canada conquered and occupied the U.S.

-Colly

Maybe Canada and France could get together and conquer one of our canoes in Minnesota.



Meanwhile, speaking of our polyfleece-encased friends to the north, where is Gary C?

 

[oggbashan]

"Promised Land"

Please read the Old Testament - written by the Jews.

They conducted a war of aggression against the existing population to occupy the land promised to them by "their" God - nobody's else's God.

My namesake was killed and his kingdom was taken over by the Jews.

The setting up of a Jewish state was an international idea which the British resisted but we were overruled by 'big brother' US. There was no way that we could see a fair solution for all parties. The local inhabitants had fought with us against the Turks in WWI.

If a thousands of years old "Promised Land" is a valid argument then most of the Americas should be handed back to their indigenous populations some of whom no longer exist. England should belong to the Welsh; France should belong to the Bretons; Australia to the Aborigines who colonised an empty land. Go back far enough and every country belongs to the original occupants of Africa's Rift Valley or ...



The Iraqis.

Og

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: "Promised Land"

Please read the Old Testament - written by the Jews.

They conducted a war of aggression against the existing population to occupy the land promised to them by "their" God - nobody's else's God.

My namesake was killed and his kingdom was taken over by the Jews.

The setting up of a Jewish state was an international idea which the British resisted but we were overruled by 'big brother' US. There was no way that we could see a fair solution for all parties. The local inhabitants had fought with us against the Turks in WWI.

If a thousands of years old "Promised Land" is a valid argument then most of the Americas should be handed back to their indigenous populations some of whom no longer exist. England should belong to the Welsh; France should belong to the Bretons; Australia to the Aborigines who colonised an empty land. Go back far enough and every country belongs to the original occupants of Africa's Rift Valley or ...



The Iraqis.

Og

In this case I believe the idea of returning the Jews to their promised land was Rudolph Hess's and was propogated on German Radio by Geobbles.

No one is blaming the British for the mess. The true problem with Palestine is that no one has a very strong rightful claim. The original inhabitants lost it by right of conquest which was accepted in those times are being legitimate. The winners there, the Jews lost to a succession of overlords from the Babalonians, to the hitites, assyrians, summerians and eventually the Romans.

Roman rule gave way to the byzantines, then the salukids, the mamalukes, ottoman turks ect ect. That parcel of land has been a prize of war since long before even the British empire was born. At the end of World War I it pased into British hands as a mandate under the league of nations which of course became defunct. I wasn't aware the the U.S. took a lead role in the creation of Israel, it does explain a lot. Thank you for that bit of information.

If my short synopsis gave the impression I was trying to pass the blame onto anyone, I apologize. There was no intent to do so on my part. Just like the question of who truely has the right to the land I think the question of blame would be highly subjective at best.

-Colly

p.s. My personal apologies if I offended you in any way.

 

[oggbashan]

Re: Re: "Promised Land"

-Colly

p.s. My personal apologies if I offended you in any way.

No. I'm not offended. I enjoy exchanging views with you. I have a different viewpoint from many in the US. I don't support either the Palestinians or the Israelis.

Eventually they have to deal with each other. Every bomb and missile defers the process. The bombers know that. Both sides must 'lose' so that both can 'win'. As long as people react to every death then the deaths will continue.

Unfortunately there are many people who DO NOT WANT peace.

Og (long dead. I've forgiven the Jews even for writing psalms about killing me. Their singing of those psalms is dreadful. The Methodists sing better.)

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Re: Re: "Promised Land"

No. I'm not offended. I enjoy exchanging views with you. I have a different viewpoint from many in the US. I don't support either the Palestinians or the Israelis.

Eventually they have to deal with each other. Every bomb and missile defers the process. The bombers know that. Both sides must 'lose' so that both can 'win'. As long as people react to every death then the deaths will continue.

Unfortunately there are many people who DO NOT WANT peace.

Og (long dead. I've forgiven the Jews even for writing psalms about killing me. Their singing of those psalms is dreadful. The Methodists sing better.)

I am glad. It is very instructive for me to exchange views with someone who isn't american and isn't partisan.

-Colly

 

[shereads]

Does this make anyone else sick? If not, why not?

 

[shereads]

I once flew a plane.

I wonder if that makes me an Elite Force aviator?

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Re: Re: "Promised Land"

I am glad. It is very instructive for me to exchange views with someone who isn't american and isn't partisan.

-Colly

I think GWB has turned most Europeans into Democrats, Colly. It's not official, though, and we aren't allowed to count their dangling chads.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Promised Land"

I think GWB has turned most Europeans into Democrats, Colly. It's not official, though, and we aren't allowed to count their dangling chads.

Love the new quote sher

Europeans have been democrats for a long while now. They prefer us outraged over sex scandals to not being out raged over abuse of power I think.

-Colly

 

[OldnotDead]

Naw, just envious

Does this make anyone else sick? If not, why not?

No, but it has very little to do with politics.

Years ago I applied to and was accepted at NAVROCS (Naval Aviation Reserve Officer Candidate School). Unfortunately I failed the physical due to a virus that had damaged my middle ear bones.

Later I got my pilot's license on my own nickel.

I always wanted to be Carrier Qualified with Naval Aviator's wings. It would appear that my only avenue to now do so is become President of the US. *sigh* I'm just envious as hell.

 

[oggbashan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Promised Land"

Europeans have been democrats for a long while now. They prefer us outraged over sex scandals to not being out raged over abuse of power I think.

-Colly

We may be democratic. We are not Democrats. Or Republicans.

Getting the European Parliament to agree on anything is almost impossible because there are so many party groupings and what might appear to be "Democrats" in one country look like "Republicans" from another country.

Tony Blair, who is Labour, has been ejected from the Socialist grouping in Europe for being too right-wing. However some European 'communist' parties are conservative with a small 'c' and have rejected Marxist/Leninist or Maoist versions.

We have 3 major parties in the UK. If we had nationwide proportional representation we would have a parliament with a third of the members from each party. How do you form a government? We'd have to ask some of our European neighbours who have had governments with up to 10 parties ?working together. If that alliance falls, so does the government.

Politics is the art of the possible. In Europe, sometimes, nothing seems possible yet we muddle through without killing each other any more.

That is the main justification for a democracy. It allows a change of government without bloodshed. Most other systems require killing to change the rulers.

Og

Edited for PS: I have been catapulted from a carrier as a civilian passenger. Does that make me eligible for wings? It scared the **** out of me.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Promised Land"

We may be democratic. We are not Democrats. Or Republicans.

Getting the European Parliament to agree on anything is almost impossible because there are so many party groupings and what might appear to be "Democrats" in one country look like "Republicans" from another country.

Tony Blair, who is Labour, has been ejected from the Socialist grouping in Europe for being too right-wing. However some European 'communist' parties are conservative with a small 'c' and have rejected Marxist/Leninist or Maoist versions.

We have 3 major parties in the UK. If we had nationwide proportional representation we would have a parliament with a third of the members from each party. How do you form a government? We'd have to ask some of our European neighbours who have had governments with up to 10 parties ?working together. If that alliance falls, so does the government.

Politics is the art of the possible. In Europe, sometimes, nothing seems possible yet we muddle through without killing each other any more.

That is the main justification for a democracy. It allows a change of government without bloodshed. Most other systems require killing to change the rulers.

Og

Edited for PS: I have been catapulted from a carrier as a civilian passenger. Does that make me eligible for wings? It scared the **** out of me.

LOL,

Two nations divided by a common language My comment was meant to be a joke about our two parties and what they get into trouble about over here

-Colly

 

[minsue]

Maybe Canada and France could get together and conquer one of our canoes in Minnesota.



Meanwhile, speaking of our polyfleece-encased friends to the north, where is Gary C?

New job so no time to come play. If I recall correctly, he should be back around any day now.

 

[shereads]

Re: Naw, just envious

Later I got my pilot's license on my own nickel.

I always wanted to be Carrier Qualified with Naval Aviator's wings. It would appear that my only avenue to now do so is become President of the US. *sigh* I'm just envious as hell.

You've flown airplanes. You should envy no one, Oldnot.

I learned to fly ultralights years ago, to my utter surprise. Never had any interest in learning to fly until I went for a ride in a two-seat light sportplane (not legally an ultralight because of the extra weight and power required to carry a passenger) and the owner of the plane, who had been a Navy instructor, let me take the controls for a while. I remember gripping the stick (go ahead, pornsters) so hard my hand hurt at first - as if I had to hold the plane up with it.



Then he signaled to me to turn toward a small puffy cloud to our left and below us. There wasn't much talking; even with radio helmets the noise of an open-cockpit plane with a snowmobile engine is about all you can hear.

He cut had me dive us through the middle of that little cloud. I forgot to be afraid and just steered the way that felt right, and there we were.

We were inside a cloud. We could smell it; it smelled like a thunderstorm. But it was bright bright white inside, lit by the sun and glowing. Water droplets formed on the little plastic windshield. Outside it was a 90-degree day; inside it was cold.

It lasted a couple of seconds, but when we popped out on the other side and I saw another cloud I could steer for, I was laughing and crying at the same time. It was the most powerful feeling.

I had forty solo hours in a tiny single-seat ultralight before I had to give it up. I'd like to say I miss it, but what I really miss isn't as much the physical experience of flying as how it made me feel about myself. When I flew alone I knew that nothing whatever happened to me was either my fault or to my credit, and that if I panicked when I was afraid, I simply wouldn't survive.

I never got over being afraid of being alone at the controls of a plane. I'm afraid of heights - - so I used to fly low to the ground, the most dangerous thing you can do. My brain refused to accept that at 300 feet I could die from an engine failure that I'd survive at 3000. Didn't care; just hated the idea of falling that far.

Every time I made a smooth landing, I was amazed that I had done it. My hands would shake. My first solo flight scared the hell out of me. If not for the fact that it was getting dark outside and the field had no lights and I was running out of fuel, I'd probably still be making aborted landings. When I finally made a smooth landing out of necessity, I was trembling so hard I couldn't use the rudder pedals to steer the plane back to the hanger. I cut the engine off, left it in the field, and ran to hug my flight instructor. I thought I was the bravest woman alive.

Don't ever envy anyone, Oldnot. You existed in a world with an extra dimension. Even if you never get to do it again, you did it.

I scuba dive now. One extreme to the other. Diving scares me too.

Were you afraid of it?

 

[shereads]

I prefer the lives lost to be "thems" and not "uses" (if thats a word) and I accept that if we are at war it often comes down to the lives of the enemy or the lives of our service men.

You just used the word "enemy" in a question about civilian casualties. Weren't we there for their benefit, to liberate them from the dictator?

Osama Bin Laden said that the deaths of innocents were necessary to achieve the greater victory. Essentially he was using the same justification everyone uses: it's them or us.

So we're back to the question of motive in determining whether a terrorist action that targets civilians is essentially different from a military action that accepts the likelihood of civilian casualties.

And no, I don't accept that saving five justifies killing one, or that saving an American civilian justifies killing an Iraqi civilian. I don't have that kind of nationalism in me. I don't get it. We are Americans by the luck of having been born here. It makes our children more fortunate than an Iraqi child, but it doesn't make our children's lives more valuable.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

You just used the word "enemy" in a question about civilian casualties. Weren't we there for their benefit, to liberate them from the dictator?

Osama Bin Laden said that the deaths of innocents were necessary to achieve the greater victory. Essentially he was using the same justification everyone uses: it's them or us.

So we're back to the question of motive in determining whether a terrorist action that targets civilians is essentially different from a military action that accepts the likelihood of civilian casualties.

And no, I don't accept that saving five justifies killing one, or that saving an American civilian justifies killing an Iraqi civilian. I don't have that kind of nationalism in me. I don't get it. We are Americans by the luck of having been born here. It makes our children more fortunate than an Iraqi child, but it doesn't make our children's lives more valuable.

Spoken like a true pacifist. If you can seize that moral high ground and hold it then I envy you. I can't. I don't even try. I acept that wars happen and I aceept that in certain cases they are neccessary. In accepting that I also accept that American lives will be at risk. Do I know Pfc. Dirk Ungerslinger from BF of E Montanna? No. Do I know Karem Ussef? No. If hey meet in a dark alley in Kabul and both open fire do I hope Dirk makes it and Kareem dosen't? Yes.

I am an American and while I don't subscribe to the my country right or wrong school of thought, I do subscribe to the we are all Americans school of thought. Are we better than others simply because we are Americans? No. Do I feel more for Americans and a certian kinship with them? Yes.

-Colly

 

[Pure]

Hi Colly,

Your examples have a black white quality,e.g Ungerslinger meets Kareem for Clint Eastwood style shoot out. I agree *GIVEN THAT KAREEM IS THE ENEMY AND IS READY TO KILL UNGERSLINGER*, let's have U pop K.

To illustrate the problem however: Scenario 2.

Ungerslinger is on patrol, in the evening, and sees what looks like a 20 yr old male, up the street. U yells 'stop' and the figure ducks into a house. U approaches the house and says "Open, come out." (In Arabic, he's learned). A shot rings out. It's from across the street, but U isn't absolutely sure, so he unleashes a blast from his M 16 at the front door, and hurtles himself into the house. He sees a large figure, arms raised, screaming and isn't about to see if it has a knife, and he shoots point blank. A lamp is lit. He sees he's shot the mom of the house; the kids are cowering in the corner. Protecting them, with her arms is the only other adult, Yasmeen, the 18 year old sister, who, at a distance U had mistaken for a male.


Scenario 3.
Ungerslinger does not approach the house, seeing it's on a narrow street. He calls for an armed helicopter to support, which shows up momentarily. Hovering above the house, using a loudspeaker, "Everybody out; lie face down". In Arabic. Nothing happens and in two minutes the helicopter releases two RPGs to the roof of the house. Screams. Ungerslinger enters. Mom and older sister Yasmeen (the one he mistook) are dead under fallen debris; under them, the kids are alive and whimpering.

 

[Pure]

Sher said,

So we're back to the question of motive in determining whether a terrorist action that targets civilians is essentially different from a military action that accepts the likelihood of civilian casualties.

I think that's a good statement. With the qualifier that the civilian casualties are massive (men women children), this fits Dresden or Nagasaki.

In Viet Nam or Afghani situations, the formula is more like this:
Compare: A terrorist action targeting civilians (setting a bomb in a cafe frequented by american diplomatic staff).

and a military action *based on the presumptive presence of an enemy, OR SOMETHING OF VALUE TO HIM*, which is certain to inflict casualties, presumed to include some of the enemy.

I'm thinking of a 'free fire' zone; or a zone designated for Agent Orange in Viet Nam. In the former, there's been an effort to clear a tract--forcibly remove villagers-- and that area and the surrounding jungle is then declared a 'free fire zone'. As for the deserted village and surrounding area, a plane or helicopter flying overhead may and does shoot any thing that moves, or demolish any structure (e.g. house presumed to be an enemy arms storage depot.)

In the case of Agent Orange, it's presumed that some 'enemy' will be hit, but the overall aim is to deprive the enemy of jungle (to hide in) and rice crops.

The babies in the families that eat what rice remains, have a higher rate of birth defects, and the American soldiers who must pass through the area become ill, for an extended period (the old 'poison gas' problem--it can come back on ya).

It's the murkiness of the military objective, together with the massive and continuing infliction of suffering, forseeable if not directly sought, that make these actions fall near the 'bomb in the cafe' situation, as far as moral judgements go. IMO.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Hi Colly,

Your examples have a black white quality,e.g Ungerslinger meets Kareem for Clint Eastwood style shoot out. I agree *GIVEN THAT KAREEM IS THE ENEMY AND IS READY TO KILL UNGERSLINGER*, let's have U pop K.

To illustrate the problem however: Scenario 2.

Ungerslinger is on patrol, in the evening, and sees what looks like a 20 yr old male, up the street. U yells 'stop' and the figure ducks into a house. U approaches the house and says "Open, come out." (In Arabic, he's learned). A shot rings out. It's from across the street, but U isn't absolutely sure, so he unleashes a blast from his M 16 at the front door, and hurtles himself into the house. He sees a large figure, arms raised, screaming and isn't about to see if it has a knife, and he shoots point blank. A lamp is lit. He sees he's shot the mom of the house; the kids are cowering in the corner. Protecting them, with her arms is the only other adult, Yasmeen, the 18 year old sister, who, at a distance U had mistaken for a male.


Scenario 3.
Ungerslinger does not approach the house, seeing it's on a narrow street. He calls for an armed helicopter to support, which shows up momentarily. Hovering above the house, using a loudspeaker, "Everybody out; lie face down". In Arabic. Nothing happens and in two minutes the helicopter releases two RPGs to the roof of the house. Screams. Ungerslinger enters. Mom and older sister Yasmeen (the one he mistook) are dead under fallen debris; under them, the kids are alive and whimpering.

Scenario 1: Woohoo...love a good Clint Eastwood style shootout.
Scenario 2: Probably has happened, but gimme a break.
Scenario 3: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Have you ever served in the U.S. military? Just Curious, as these situations are so unlikely to occur in any of the above mentioned fashions.

It damn near takes an act of congress to arrange an extra phone call to your wife, or get an extra box of ass-wipe for your guys...let alone having the go ahead to kill folks at random simply because they saw a dark shadow run into a house.

It is very much like not being able to shoot an intruder in your own home. You are more likely to be persecuted for defending yourself than otherwise, especially if you were mistaken initially.

I feel the worst sympathy for our soldiers over there whose hands are often tied, even when being shot at and car bombed every other day. And if you want sources...you'll have to wait until my brothers get back and write books.

~lucky

we are not, by rule, killing machines (fuck!)
and the people that have to manage such situations come home and kill their wives, because of the terror they are required to inflict upon terrorists.

 

[shereads]

I am an American and while I don't subscribe to the my country right or wrong school of thought, I do subscribe to the we are all Americans school of thought. Are we better than others simply because we are Americans? No. Do I feel more for Americans and a certian kinship with them? Yes.

Of course I do as well, Colly. I simply can't see the moral difference that you see when children are bombed by Americans versus Other.