From: spwim@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Wim Degroot)
Subject: Re: Elections
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date:  5 Nov 1992 11:08 EST  

In article <1992Nov4.210818.12360@nevada.edu>, messiah@nevada.edu (mw) writes...


>sacrifice? If my neighbor goes to war and I don't, and he comes back home
>wounded (or not at all), can I look him in the eye honestly and tell him
>"I didn't go because of conscientious objections?"

I would look him in the eye and would say exactly that, and would add that he
was quite stupid to travel halfway around the world to kill or get killed
because some moron in the white house decides that he has to protect your
"freedom" (we will not get into the real reason why he wants to go there) by
supporting some dictator (Nguyen, Ky, or whoever) to continue to suppress
a people that have been suppressed for dacades, and to prevent those people
to exercise their own right to "freedom". When are your kind going to quit
to tell other people how and why they can live?

> 
>Thousands of civilians killed in Panama? Its been close to three years since
>the Panamanian invasian, but that's news to me. As I recall, the short 
>military action inflicted casualties primarily on Noreiga's military.
> 

Poor and homeless people in Panama had set up shantytowns of shacks around
Noriegas military bases because some of the spills of these bases. The US forces
strafed and bombed the bases and the towns at night without warning. The nature of
of such shantytowns are that they are extremely densely populated. Media were 
no allowed in till the whole area was bulldozed by the army. The Pentagon 
estimates that 200-300 civilians in those towns were killed. Amnesty Int'l
thinks that it is closer to 10 to 15 times that much. But those people were
poor and who cares anyway. Maybe someone on the net from Europe can give some
more accurate numbers on the civilian toll.

>
>>are three consecutive mistakes in MY judgement:
>>1. Keep on selling weapons to Iraq
> 
>Since Iraq and Iran are enemies, and at the time Iran was less in favour 
>with the US than Iraq, it makes sense to me that at that time Bush was 
>supporting US national interests.

Bush kept on selling even after Iran was out of the picture and Iraq began to
be much more of a threat (read the media on this one)

> 
>>2. Indicate a hands off policy in case of invasion, and
> 
>[refers to Iraqi winvasion of Kuwait]. Yeah I've heard that before too,
>but I consider it to be either a mis-quote, exaggeration, or soemthing else

Exactly, you only want to beleive what you want to beleive, and ignore memos,
taped conversation, witnesses and concrete evidence. But hey, what is all that
proof against Bushes words anyway. 

> 
>>3. Send American boys to go and be killed because of your previous judgement
>>And this was NOT to uphold democracy in Kuwait 
> 
>If you are saying that the action to liberate Kuwait was primarilly motivated
>by economic concerns about keeping the world oil market competitive, then that
>is *precisely* my point as well. There are a lot of idealists around who seem
>to think that if a nation has economic interests at heart then this discounts
>its motives as invalid. I say that's RUBISH.
> 

Exactly, and that was my original reason why I did not argue with you. I do not
beleive that it is justified to send some other people overseas to kill or get
killed to protect my wallet. Clinton was smart enough to realize that, and as
such I salute him. However, you probably look the veteran straight in the eye
and say:"I am glad that you went over there to kill (and lost your leg in the
process) so I can still drive my car at $1.00 a gallon instead of $1.25). There
is exactly our difference in values. And no, I am not an idealist.

>
>Who said anything about "refusing to believe?" Someone in another post even
>went so far as to say I was "a gullible fool." (to that person I 
>respectfully suggest that he take a long walk off a short pier :-) )
>

I respectfully agree with that someone. And no I am not willing to walk off a 
short pier to accomodate your economic agenda. There are better causes to die
for.

> 
>Its not *you guys*. I'm Dutch { :-) } I just support Republican philosophy.

It is clear that you do not understand that by "you guys" I mean those people
with the same philosophy and not US vs Dutch. There are probably just as many 
decent Americans as there are Dutch. (Nationalists always seem to drag
nationality in there somehow). 

>Also, no its not right. It never was, and I didn't say that it was. But if
>they all do it then you can not single out Bush for it just because he's
>the one that you don't like. Democracy?

Not democracy, but the interpretation and abuse of democracy to further ones 
own economic goals (and by ones own I mean private, and not national).

>wide-scale than is actually the case. If there is significance to these
>allegations, then I'm surprised it did not get more media coverage outside
>of the public TV arena. 

Because it is not new to Bush. Reagan instituted that type of nepotism. 
Furthermore (I did not metion it because it is national politics), it was
shown in the same program that Bush signed a bill to divert water from 
cities and rivers in northern California (and thus killing the fisherie and
driving the price of city water up) just 9 days after a group of big farm
owners from the valley (who by the way mostly live in Washington) had a
fundraiser to raise 10 million dollar for the Bush campaign. Of course, all the
water went to the farms. (But in the trade talks with Europe, that is not 
considered farm subsidies)

>I guess that settles it, Bush lost. I hope Clinton learns fast, cause he's 
>got a hell of a lotta catchin up to do.
> 
>C-ya... Marco, LV, NV, USA
> 

I consider this discussion closed too. It is useless after all. 
_Wim

> 
************************************************************************************
|   |   |       |    /      \    Wim de Groot  NASA Lewis Research Center
|   |   |     __|   |     ___    E-mail: spwim@scivax.lerc.nasa.gov
|   |   |   /   |   |       |    Fax.  : (216) 356 - 9444 
 \__|__/    \ __|    \_____/|    Tel.  : (216) 977 - 7485
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.culture.netherlands