|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I didn't start this thread and did not title it, but, I have no objection to
it. President Reagan was the one who started using it and it has caught on.
I view it as validating our love for America not necessarily promoting God.
Don't nitpick this stuff, it ain't worth it. You seem to be looking for just
about anything to attack me on.
One does not have reasoned discussions with thugs or
: terrorists. Nor does one need a majority opinion to defend
: oneself. The U.N. is based on the fallacious concept that
: somehow various barbarians can instruct the U.S. in
: determining what is correct & in our self-interest.
: Morality is not determined by majority rule.
So the representatives of the UN are thugs and terrorists, hmmmmmmm.
: It is frightening -- philosophically, psychologically, &
: practically -- that Bronke would be willing to place his
: life, & those of his loved-ones, in the hands of U.N.
: members, rather than in the U.S.; fortunately most of the
: U.S. will not relinquish the right of self-determination.
My life is not in the hands of the UN, what are you talking about?
. But for the moment
: I'll grant Bronke's clearly anti-American position stated
: above. I'll also grant for the moment that the entire
: world has reason to hate America.
This is not an anti-American position. I am pointing out a problem with our
policy and presenting a case where I feel that what has been exercised in
the UN is not diplomacy.
As far as being open to arguments you haven't made an effective one, really.
you didn't really hear what I said. I am a lover of America the only thing
that I am embarassed about is our record at the UN. That leaves a whole lot
else that I am proud of. I present these thoughts only as a basis for people
to think and rethink how we live in te world. heck, even Iran had a moment
of silence for us, now that's a switch. If we think of people as thugs and
terrorists we will forever come across to them as arrogant. There will never
be trust. That is not what the UN or diplomacy is about.
Jim Bronke
Phoenix, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Berger" <mberger@xxxxxxxx>
To: "OmegaList" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: God Bless America
: RE: Jim Bronke
: Phoenix, AZ
:
: I am a devoted atheist, but still take offense that Bronke
: places this argument (sic) under the title "God Bless
: America." Even atheists can respect the meaning of that
: phrase -- especially at a time such as this.
:
: One does not have reasoned discussions with thugs or
: terrorists. Nor does one need a majority opinion to defend
: oneself. The U.N. is based on the fallacious concept that
: somehow various barbarians can instruct the U.S. in
: determining what is correct & in our self-interest.
: Morality is not determined by majority rule.
:
: In a prior message Bronke mentioned retribution. That
: misses the point entirely. There are two basic issues: one
: is justice (which is quite different than retribution, or
: punishment). The second issue is even more selfish:
: self-defense.
:
: It is frightening -- philosophically, psychologically, &
: practically -- that Bronke would be willing to place his
: life, & those of his loved-ones, in the hands of U.N.
: members, rather than in the U.S.; fortunately most of the
: U.S. will not relinquish the right of self-determination.
:
: In a prior message Jim Bronke said:
: We have created fertile ground for the hatred of
: America by picking allies
: and over injecting ourselves in other parts of the
: world. For that we pay.
:
: Michael Berger continues:
: I contend the U.S. has provided the world with unparalleled
: political & economic freedom, and a standard of living far
: beyond the world could have conceived. But for the moment
: I'll grant Bronke's clearly anti-American position stated
: above. I'll also grant for the moment that the entire
: world has reason to hate America.
:
: But the span between the internal emotional state of hate,
: and externalizing that via terrorist action is massive.
: Bronke seems not to see, or make a distinction between the
: two. Thoughts are not the same as action. Wishing you have
: a million dollars, as your neighbor does, is not the same as
: taking his million dollars. And minor action, like some
: Iranians burning the American Flag, is not the same as an
: attack on the WTC.
:
: I'm not writing the above for Bronke. I'm rather confident
: he is not open to any arguments.
:
: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Jim Bronke" <jvbronke@xxxxxxxx>
: To: "Bob Heisler" <BHEISLER@xxxxxxxxx>;
: <bogeybunky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "MikeSuesserott"
: <MikeSuesserott@xxxxxxxxxxx>; <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>; <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
: <qcharts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
: Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 8:54 PM
: Subject: Re: God Bless America
:
:
: > Well with all due respect, I think you are missing
: something. The problem is
: > that there hasn't been any diplomatic effort, really. The
: US and Israel have
: > made up their mind on what to do and they don't care what
: anyone has to say.
: > Now we have to put up with the brainwashing attempts by
: the Prime Minister
: > of Israel and other friends of Israel when for quite some
: time now they have
: > been the problem and refuse to listen. For example, do you
: know how many
: > other nations supported the US and Israel on six
: resolutions involving
: > Palestine and the middle east back on December 1,2000?
: > Zero, and as much as 145 nations voting against Israel.
: This is something
: > they keep quiet. They have found a big brother who will
: help them bully
: > others around and they won't listen to anybody. Go to
: Press release GA/9838
: > of the United Nations. It is this kind of thing that makes
: for fertile
: > ground for terrorism. Diplomacy means listening to others,
: not giving them
: > lip service. The kind of dipolomacy that you are referring
: to is just that,
: > lip service. The friends of Israel in this country care
: more about Israel
: > than they do about this country and wake up in the morning
: asking what can
: > they do for Israel, not what can they do for this country.
: The result is
: > that it is the US and Israel vs the world on many middle
: east issues. That
: > is not diplomacy. The folllowing is the URL for that paper
: >
: http://srch1.un.org/plweb-cgi/fastweb?state_id=1000599246&vi
: ew=unsearch&numh
: >
: itsfound=1&query=ga%2F9838&&docid=2277&docdb=pr2000&dbname=w
: eb&sorting=BYREL
: > EVANCE&operator=adj&TemplateName=predoc.tmpl&setCookie=1
: > If that doesn't work go to www.un.org and search for
: GA/9838.
: >
: > The other issue is our presence in Iraq. There is no
: question that the
: > leadership over there is incorrigible and that their
: country has made no
: > substantial changes in their war machine philosophy since
: they invaded
: > Kuwait, but, does that really justify that we should stay
: there monitoring
: > everything that they do(slapping their hand occasionally),
: and if we do,
: > what are the consequences? By virtue of the fact that we
: are still over
: > there occasionally making bombing runs means that we
: already are technically
: > at war. This gets lost on americans who end up watching
: the latest police
: > chase du jour at night instead of there being real
: discussion and concern
: > about these issues. I believe that we have worn out our
: welcome over there
: > in the middle east for a number of years. Meaning that we
: had the support of
: > all the nations when Iraq invaded Kuwait, but, if we took
: a poll right now
: > we would find that the other nations don't want us there.
: So, this becomes a
: > sticky issue that people have to really consider if you
: really want to do
: > what is best. On the surface the middle east nations play
: along with us,
: > but, underneath some are seething. The only way you can
: read in to this is
: > by how they vote. We should have a policy that requires us
: to have support
: > for continued military intervention. This would require
: that we have
: > approval of the UN or neighboring nations when ever
: conflict and military
: > intervention extends for more than a year. We ought to
: continue to seek this
: > approval. If we don't then we are really arrogant, and, we
: hurt ourselves in
: > the long run.
: >
: > I just listened to an interview of Henry Kissinger, and
: for the first time,
: > I felt that he had nothing of real value to say. I'm
: starting to see the
: > truth in him. He is a blind supporter of our support and
: alliance with
: > Israel. He and others like him want to brainwash the
: American public in to
: > believing that this is a war against terrorism. It is a
: diplomatic war and
: > if we were managing our foreign affairs well Israel would
: have to take a
: > back seat in ours. That is an option he doesn't want to
: consider. It is an
: > option Americans ought to consider.
: >
: > I consider that the involvement of the US with Israel is
: analogous to
: > picking a favorite in a family feud(like the Hatfields and
: McCoys) and
: > expecting that the unchosen one will not be pissed and
: come after you. Good
: > luck.
: >
: > We pulled one over on the British in 1776 when we started
: hiding behind
: > trees, now the only revenge that people can get is
: terrorism. There is no
: > buildings and no military to strike here.
: >
: >
: > Jim Bronke
: > Phoenix, AZ
: >
: >
:
:
|