With this groups propensity for off-topic rantings (yes, I'm
guilty too), how come I've seen no comments about the memos
surfacing that say the president can authorize torture?
My feeling is that we're in danger of becoming what we're
Note that our military, in general, is opposed to this because
the Geneva convention and other treaties provide protection for
our troops as well.
In this case, you have to fight fire with fire if the other side does not
abide by the rules. The enemy brought all this on upon them selves. They
thought they could hide behind the Geneva convention but not abide by the
Geneva convention. Can't have you cake and eat it.
I disagree Leon. Lowering our own standards will not further our cause.
To parallel past woodworking conversations, consider Delta's woes. To
compete with lesser quality imports they apparently lowered their own
quality standards in order to compete against this perceived (import)
threat and in the process still lost market since a segment of the
consumers valued quality over price.
The US needs to be the leader in human rights and conforming to
conventions and treaties - if one doesn't fit current times then take
the high road to change the agreements while still abiding by the rules
currently in place. An eye for an eye only makes the government look as
brutal and uncivilized as the perpetrators.
Owen Lowe and his Fly-by-Night Copper Company
Offering a shim for the Porter-Cable 557 type 2 fence design.
It's great that we can disagree. I wish we could have higher standards but
this is a different kind of enemy. They go after civilians. War is war and
you simply do not want to be on the loosing end. If the enemy understood
diplomacy we would not be at war.
I think the problem here is that way too many in the U.S. feel that they
have a right to things that perhaps do not have a right to have. Delta, and
I am sure the labor union that its workers belong to are both to blame.
Call me a bit cold hearted but the workers manufacturing the Unisaw and
other products here in the US are over paid plain and simple. Delta could
probably compete with a great product if it was not strangled with
overpaying its workers. While the workers probably have been loyal and know
their craft well, Delta has deminishing returns on its investment of
employees. Simply put, Delta could compete and build a better product, if
it could pay the employees what they are "really" worth. Lets get real
here. These tools are way behind the technology curve when it comes to
needing "know how" to manufacture them. The simple solution here is to
simply pay the workers what they are really worth so that Delta can compete
or Tax the hell out of the imports like the import automobiles are taxed.
Again I totally agree, but I would rather win the war that has been declared
against us rather than loose because we were the only ones following the
So what exactly is the tax rate on import automobiles?
And I guess the Japanese workers are also overpaid--the Japanese are moving
jobs to other countries with lower labor costs too.
How about the labor in the Third World is just _under_ paid? Because what
happens is that as soon as one of those countries gets any kind of real
economy going the labor rates climb right up to something approximating
First World levels.
In war, rule number 1: Survive. That has to be the first priority.
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
Looking at it the other way, tho, it's kind of hard to take the
moral high ground and declare the other side to be evil and
odious, when our leadership appears to be just as lacking in
moral standing as the enemy.
Most of us would prefer to be able to say "we're better than
them" rather than "it's OK for me because they did it first".
I agree. But we were the ones that were attacked. That changes everything
when it comes to war. We really do not want to loose the war. I personally
would rather not have Bin Laudens dream come true. Remember the old saying,
all is fair in love and war.
Really? We were attacked by Iraq? When? Must not have made the
evening news that day. I know, they coulda- mighta- maybe- well it's
possible they were thinking about making weapons of mass destruction 'n
such, but we invaded them. They never attacked us.
So uh,,, you believe that Iraq was totally inocent, had nothing to do
with, did not help in any way, those that attacked us. The attempted
assignation on Bush Sr. does not count?
I guess I look at all things in general and come up with the obvious.
Yes, I believe there is no proof that Iraq provided any aid at all to
the 9/11 attackers. Do you have any proof to the contrary?
The attempt on Bush Sr was 1993. We already bombed the Iraqis in
retaliation for that. See
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/content/?020930fr_archive02 . Seems a
bit like ancient history, doesn't it?
I use tha analogy that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells
like a duck, it must be a duck. Not everything in this world appears as
black and white. Some times you have to rely on life experiences to make
your decisions. Iraq had its chance to avoid problems and it chose to
ignore that chance.
And still this mess lingers because we did not do then what we are doing
I agree that not everything is black and white. But faulty logic like
yours is pretty obvious to spot. The fact is that our stated reasons
for going to war were bogus. Our intelligence on Iraq was all screwed
up. We have a bunch of guys running the government who think that
pretty much everything "looks like a duck."
I must have missed the part of Bush's election campaign where he
promised he would invade Iraq for what happened in 1993. If he had
really told the people that was his plan, somehow I don't think he
would be President now.
Yeah, in this particular instance, since the attack was based on what was
presumably going on in the field of WMDs in the immediate months before the
attack, Iraq was totally innocent. There seems to have been no al-Quaeda
involvement until recent months, which, no matter how you choose to tilt it,
doesn't ring true in tying Saddass Insane to the act.
When did Bush Sr. have an assassination attempt made on his life during his
"The test and the use of man's education is that he finds pleasure in the
exercise of his mind." Jacques Barzun
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:52:07 -0500, "Todd Fatheree"
Iraq didn't "repeatedly fire missiles at our aircraft" - they didn't
have them to spare. During the "no fly" phase, any Iraqi SA radar
that went as far as illuminating a target (and that's about as far as
they got) found itself attacked.
On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:38:57 +0100, Andy Dingley wrote:
Iraq shot at US and British aircraft in the no fly zones mostly with AAA,
but there most certainly were SA missiles fired also:
"If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.