|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Me: your agenda is now very clear. I first thought you were a misguided sole
trying to ask pathethetically dumb questions given the fact that 6,000+
people wee just murdered with an untold loss of our infrastructure. Your true
purpose is now very apparent, you're one of those left-wing zealots who
hasn't seen an enemy of freedom that you don't like. I bet you even hate your
parents and love all the new forms of sick art that's masqueraded around as
social questioning. Why don't you go back to the jerky Yahoo boards and argue
with the twits there? The one thing I hate most is that good people may have
to die to protect the freedoms of morons like you.
Me wrote:
> But Saddam is still in power, still idolized by many in the Middle
> East, still supporting terrorism, still making money on oil, still
> maintaining an army, still taunting us. No, we won a battle but lost
> the war. And now, seemingly unable to learn from our own or others
> history, we are on the eve of a potential war that will result in
> further death. Masked and promoted as a patriotic war on terrorism,
> this war is really just an excuse for more blood and revenge by the
> hawkish Christen right. Our God will beat your God, sigh...
>
> CNN is running a piece showing that the beginnings of a strong peace
> movement is forming at a number of the nations university's. I
> watched and listened to voices of reason from students who are young
> but able to think clearly, students saying that they didn't want to
> go to war, that waging a military war was not the path to a
> solution. Dissent is increasing in the USA and the "Bush without
> thinking" coalition is already beginning to fracture. Of 8 related
> letters to the editor in the SF Chronicle today, 5 are against
> present US actions, while 3 ask for support of Bush's initiives at
> all costs.
>
> Parents of Flight 93 victim call for peace
> They fear U.S. will retaliate in kind
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
> file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/22/MN123903.DTL
>
> ---
> JW
>
> --- In realtraders@xxxx, "Norman Winski" <nwinski@xxxx> wrote:
> > RS,
> >
> > The historical facts on the Gulf War are that we kicked Saddam's
> butt via we lost about 50 people and he lost 100,000. Bush Sr., due
> to the alliance (read European state craft advice) and to maintain
> some ba;amce of power in the region, made the flawed decision not to
> behead the Iraqi menace. Those are the facts. Ok, now you can go
> back to watching, what was it? KCN? Kabul Cable News?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Norman
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Rakesh Sahgal
> > To: realtraders@xxxx
> > Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 11:16 AM
> > Subject: Re: [RT] [Fwd: article]
> >
> >
> > Try watching the BBC. They have been presenting a much more
> objective assessment of U.S. capabilities. That should be sobering
> for all those gung ho cowboys on CNN who think it is going to be a
> cake walk.
> >
> > Once this issue snowballs into a Christianity vs Muslim thing,
> which it surely will given the irresponsible nonsense being bandied
> about, not only in the U.S.( by all and sundry excepting the senior
> levels of the U.S. administration) but in the muslim world as well,
> then the disruptions in the global energy supplies and the
> consequences are going to be unimaginable. The only saving grace here
> is the presence of the Euorpeans who have more experience in
> statecraft and have been much more restrained in their utterances and
> reactions.
> >
> > Already Pakistan is witnessing riots on the issue of support to
> the U.S. . While it is the fringe element that is creating problems
> right now, the refusal of the West to provide conclusive evidence is
> only making a hero of bin laden and making the vast majority wonder
> what do the western nations want to hide. The efforts to impose the
> puppet king Zahir Shah (deposed in a popular uprising decades ago) on
> Afghanistan by the U.S., racist attacks on South Asians and Arabs in
> North America and U.K. , offloading South Asian passengers from
> flights in the U.S. , insulting South Asian women , albeit by a few
> extreme right wing imbeciles, prohibiting mercantile vessels from
> most muslim origin ports entering the U.S. ports, are all playing
> into the hands of the people who orchestrated this damn nonsense.
> >
> > This response of "we are going to change the way they live" is
> nonsense. If the energy supplies dry up due to popular disaffection
> in the middle east, what will the west do, recolonize the gulf?
> >
> > All those in the United States who think they are going to do a
> Grenada here(the only notable victory the U.S has had in an
> engagement on the ground after world War 2 or maybe Panama - please
> do correct me if I am wrong ) are going to get a rude jolt. The only
> problem is it might be too bloody late for the rest of us that live
> in the region.
> >
> >
> > Rakesh
> >
> >
> > At 08:11 AM 9/22/01 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> > Sending this to the list as it is certainly worth reading.
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> > Return-Path: <royfeld3@xxxx>
> > Received: from hotmail.com ([64.4.17.239]) by almond.epix.net
> with ESMTP
> > id <20010922032221.XPAV23831.almond@xxxx>
> > for <ariel@xxxx>; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:22:21 -0400
> > Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with
> Microsoft SMTPSVC;
> > Fri, 21 Sep 2001 20:22:21 -0700
> > Received: from 63.28.34.73 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with
> HTTP;
> > Sat, 22 Sep 2001 03:22:20 GMT
> > X-Originating-IP: [63.28.34.73]
> > From: "Roy Feld" <royfeld3@xxxx>
> > To: ariel@xxxx
> > Subject: article
> > Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:22:20 -0400
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> > Message-ID: <F239LzEDYZqB2xyPaZI000029b4@xxxx>
> > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Sep 2001 03:22:21.0074 (UTC) FILETIME=
> [CA509F20:01C14315]
> > X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
> >
> >
> > Truth or Consequences
> > By William Saletan
> >
> > Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2001, at 4:00 p.m. PT
> >
> > Why do they hate us?
> >
> > That's the question many people are asking about the
> terrorists who struck
> > the Pentagon and the World Trade Center last week. At first,
> the question
> > was raised simply to make sense of the tragedy. Then it was
> posed for
> > investigative reasons, to understand who was involved in the
> crime and what
> > they might do next. Now the purpose of the question is
> changing again.
> > Commentators are wondering how we made the terrorists angry
> enough to hurt
> > us and how we might change our behavior to avoid further
> attacks.
> >
> > These writers don't exactly fault the United States. They
> simply argue that
> > the attacks were a consequence of American behavior. "The
> suicide attacks in
> > Israel-and now in the United States-are reactions to specific
> actions and
> > policies," writes The Nation's David Corn. In The New Yorker,
> Susan Sontag
> > says the terrorist strikes were "undertaken as a consequence
> of specific
> > American alliances and actions." Salon Executive Editor Gary
> Kamiya
> > concludes that "our only real defense will be winning the
> hearts and minds
> > of those who hate us. . We must pressure Israel to take the
> concrete steps
> > necessary to provide justice for the Palestinian people."
> >
> > The practical point made by these consequentialists is that
> we can't stop
> > terrorism without addressing its causes. A diagnostic
> approach, they argue,
> > is wiser than simply lashing out in anger. They're right
> about that. But
> > their wisdom falls short of the next insight:
> Consequentialism is a two-way
> > street. It's true that terrorists can impose consequences on
> us. But it's
> > just as true that we can impose consequences on terrorists.
> >
> > Superficially, it's empowering to analyze every situation in
> terms of the
> > consequences of our own acts. Understanding how we can change
> the enemy's
> > behavior by changing our own appears to put control in our
> hands. It also
> > gratifies our egos by preserving our sense of free will while
> interpreting
> > the enemy's conduct as causally determined. We're the
> subjects; they're the
> > objects. But the empowerment and the ego gratification are
> illusory. By
> > accepting as a mechanical fact the enemy's aggressive
> response to our
> > offending behavior, we surrender control of the most
> important part of the
> > sequence.
> >
> > Imagine yourself as a rat in a behavioral experiment. You're
> put in a cage
> > with three levers. When you press the first lever, you get
> food. When you
> > press the second, you get water. When you press the third,
> you get an
> > electric shock. You quickly learn to press the first two
> levers and not the
> > third. You think you're in control because you're choosing
> the levers that
> > get you what you want. But the real power belongs to the
> scientists who
> > built the cage and run the experiment, because they determine
> which acts
> > produce which consequences.
> >
> > Now imagine yourself as a battered wife. Every so often, your
> husband gets
> > angry and hits you. Why? You struggle to understand the
> connection between
> > your behavior and his response. What are you doing that
> causes him to react
> > this way? You hope that by identifying and avoiding the
> offending behavior,
> > you can regain domestic peace and a sense of control. You're
> deluding
> > yourself. As long as your husband decides which of your acts
> will earn you a
> > beating, he's the master, and you're the slave.
> >
> > This is the problem with the consequentialist argument for
> revising U.S.
> > policy in the Middle East. Maybe it's true, for other
> reasons, that we
> > should rethink our position in the Israeli-Palestinian
> conflict, withdraw
> > our troops from Saudi Arabia, or ease sanctions on Iraq. But
> if we do these
> > things to avoid further attacks on our cities, we're granting
> terrorists the
> > power to dictate our acts by dictating the consequences.
> >
> > The consequentialists present themselves as humanitarians and
> idealists.
> > They purport to speak up for the plights, principles, and
> aspirations of
> > people who are driven to commit acts of terror. But their
> mechanistic
> > analysis dehumanizes these people. Terrorists aren't animals.
> No law of
> > nature compels them to blow up buildings when they're angry.
> We don't have
> > to accept their violent reactions to our policies. We can
> break that causal
> > chain.
> >
> > How? By turning consequentialism on its head. We can dictate
> what happens to
> > people who attack us. Suicidal terrorists may be impervious
> to this logic,
> > but their commanders and sponsors aren't. Launder money for a
> man who
> > destroys the World Trade Center, and your assets will be
> confiscated.
> > Shelter an organization that crashes a plane into the
> Pentagon, and your
> > government buildings will be leveled. Expel terrorists from
> your country,
> > freeze their bank accounts, and you'll be liberated from
> sanctions and debt.
> >
> > Will this approach succeed? We don't know how each would-be
> terrorist or
> > sponsor will respond. It's an open question. But that's the
> point. As long
> > as we view it the other way around-ourselves as the actors,
> and our enemies
> > as the imposers of consequences-the question is closed. Our
> enemies'
> > reactions, and therefore our options, are rigidly defined. We
> can have
> > troops in Saudi Arabia, or we can have peace at home, but we
> can't have
> > both.
> >
> > Challenging the false objectivity of these dilemmas doesn't
> require us to
> > ignore the potential consequences of our acts. Some of our
> Middle East
> > policies do anger many Arabs or Muslims. We ought to worry
> when others don't
> > like our behavior. But just as surely, they ought to worry
> when we don't
> > like theirs.
> >
> > Two years ago, when President Clinton waged war against
> ethnic cleansing in
> > Kosovo, consequentialists on the American right blamed him
> for the
> > bloodshed. His aggression, they argued, had provoked the
> Serbs to violence.
> > Now that President Bush is girding for war, consequentialism
> has broken out
> > on the left. To his credit, Bush is defying it with equal
> vigor. The
> > terrorists who struck the Pentagon and the World Trade
> Center "are clearly
> > determined to try to force the United States of America and
> our values to
> > withdraw from the world," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
> observed
> > yesterday. "We have a choice: either to change the way we
> live, which is
> > unacceptable; or to change the way that they live. And we
> chose the latter."
> > Amen.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
> > Rakesh Sahgal
> > Online Status:
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> > Start here...
> >
> > Height:
> > 345678 ft 01234567891011in
> >
> > Weight:
> > lbs. kg.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
Ralph => E-mail => rjv@xxxxxxxxxx
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/MDsVHB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|