From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 10:56:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.032348.8456@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> cassidy@cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy) writes:
>In article <14084.2acc9fe4@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu> vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Oct2.174315.17999@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>> Listen--I saw the photos from the 1988 gas attack on the Kurdish
>>> villages--I was sickened by that like everyone else.
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>
>>But being a blind supporter of Ray-Gun and Fearless Leader you turned your
>>head and looked away, ignoring it. Lets face it, the Republiclones armed
>>Saddam, they are at total fault and bear total responsibility for the
>>whole thing happening in the first place. When the Little Dictator stopped
>>cowtowing to Bush and started acting on his own initiative THEN it was
>>time to stop them.
>>
>>The problem with these Republiclones is that they are only concerned with
>>immediate consequences, they never look farther than their nose to see
>>what it is that they are really doing. Fools.
>>
>>-Garrett
>>
>       Like dropping the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

*       Development initiated by a letter from Einstein, ordered by
*       Roosevelt, bombing ordered by Truman.

>        Like forcing hoards of Japanese citizens into concentration
>       camps -- and then depriving them of property afterword?

*       Ordered by Roosevelt.

>        Like entering into every single war in this century before the
>       Gulf War?

*       Horseshit! I'd bet you can't even name every war in this century.

>       Like trying to add 8 new members to the Supreme Court ( guess
>       who gets to pick em too? ) ?

*       I guess that any party would try this.  To the victor belongs the
*       spoils.

>       Like creating the mean and evil C.I.A ?

*       Executive order from Truman.  I suspect defective sarcasm here.

>       Like installing Fidel Castro into power ?

*       This happened under Eisenhower.  Batista was a U.S. puppet.

>       Like coming to head with the CCCP over the missles subsequently
>       placed in Cuba?

*       They were REMOVED as a result of the faceoff between Kennedy and
*       Kruschev.

>       Like inventing the policy of "Mutually Assured Destruction"?

*       Invented by Herman Kahn.  I doubt that his politics came into it.

>       Like inventing the "Domino Theory"?

*       I seem to remember this as an inspiration of Dean Rusk.

>       Like bringing the murderous Shah of Iran to this country,
>       forcing the Iranians to take hostages in reaction?

*       Forcing the Iranians to take hostages?  Really interesting logic
*       here: if you don't take hostages, we'll expel the Shah.  The
*       Shah was brought to power as a result of the collaboration
*       between the British and the Truman administration (may have been
*       Eisenhower).  The only real contribution of the U.S. was when
*       Kermit Roosevelt (yes, a relation) paid the hired muscle.  The
*       impetus was almost solely British (wanted their oil fields back).

>
>( Yeah, I know there's Watergate and McCarthy on the other side.  Oooh.
>  But neither of those two fiascos are currently perpetuated as the
>fault of the other party, similar to the way the above is thought to be
>the domain of the Republican party. )

	One could mention Allende and United Fruit coup in Central
	America, but I won't.  Your own grasp of history seems to be
	a little shaky.  Check the facts before you put words into
	other peoples mouths.

>
>       Any good liberal should know that the atomic bomb is the most
>horrid thing on this earth.  Courtesy the Democrats.  They researched
>it, they developed it and they used it.  And then they thought it
>comforting to think that both parties being mutaully assured of

*       Under the circumstances, would a Republican administration
*       have refused to develop the bomb?

>destruction, were less likely to bomb each other.  Yet when Reagon dealt
>with the same reasoning, he was considered insane.  And when he proposed
>SDI as an alternative, was told that he was messing up the balance of a
>mutually assured destruction.  Lord, that sounds so comforting.

*       Nope, it looked like he was abrogating a treaty that had given
*       a measure of stability on the basis of what many suspected, and
*       was later shown, to be a bill of goods (the X-ray laser).

	Alec Chambers