From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Tue Nov 16 2004 - 15:34:47 GMT
On 16 Nov 2004 at 8:36, Ascmjk@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 11/15/2004 9:24:54 PM Central Standard Time,
markheyman@infoproconsulting.com writes:
Let's set aside for the moment the historical fact that the US most
certainly has deliberately killed civilians, in Dresden, Nagasaki,
Hiroshima, Royan in France at the very end of WWII for no military
reason other than wanting to test Napalm, which would then be used to
kill more civilians in North and South Vietnam, Laos, illegal and
secret carpet-bombing of Cambodia... Not to mention financial,
military, and diplomatic support of Indonesia's genocide in East
Timor, direct military, financial, and logistical support for death
squads in El Salvador and Guatemala, direct terrorist strikes against
the democratically elected government of Nicaragua..... Well, it
goes on and on, and back to the very beginnings of the country.
jon:
Translation: See, the United States is a fundamentally evil,
murdering nation, all the way back to its very beginning. Anything
good it has accomplished isinconsequential compared to
itsoverwhelming contribution to human misery and an unforgivable
roadblock to ultimate utopia.
msh says:
No. Simply a little history lesson. Everything I've said above is
easily verifiable by anyone interested in so doing. I've never
denied and often acclaimed the positive accomplishments of the
citizens of the United States, including securing and maintaining, at
least till now, an impressive list of personal freedoms. This has
nothing to due with the humanitarian crimes the U.S. Government
carries out against citizens of OTHER countries around the world.
BTW, this behavior is not unique to the U.S. or unique in history.
Ancient Greece was a country of magnificent freedoms for its citizens
(not its slaves, of course). Yet it was unspeakably brutal in its
dealings with non-Greeks. The U.S. just happens to be the biggest
dog on the block, right now and, as a U.S. citizen, I feel it is my
MORAL responsibility to speak out against it.
MSH:
Instead, let's focus on the first few days and nights of the recent
US invasion of Iraq, when hundreds of Cruise missiles were fired into
Baghdad business and government centers and surrounding
neighborhoods. Conservative estimates put the civilian death toll at
well over a thousand due to these missile attacks alone. In what
sense, precisely, is this not intentionally murdering civilians?
What's the argument? "Well, we didn't tell them to be sleeping
there, in their homes, at 3am, dammit. They got in the way!"
JON:
Again, you prove me fundamental point about intent. You're actually
suggesting that civilians being killed accidentally is the SAME as
the civilians who have been beheaded?
msh:
No, in the passage above, I am claiming that the killing of civilians
was NOT accidental. Which means there was intent. Why not address
the points I actually raise?
jon:
Again, INTENT. If you set out to "prove" that killing civilians
accidentally is the SAME as proudly holding up a severed head, you're
going to sound increasingly foolish.
msh:
I've set out to prove no such thing.
jon:
And if civilian killing were actually a goal of the US, wouldn't it
be a lot easier to simply round up some innocents off the street, and
execute them?
msh:
Killing civilians is not the goal. The USG would have been delighted
if everyone in Iraq had just packed up and moved. The goal is to
conquer the geography of Iraq. If intentionally killing civilians
advances that goal, then so be it.
MSH:
Jon, your little essay is nonsense, the rantings of a mind horribly
brain-washed of historical reality. Sorry. Nothing personal: you
can probably blame it on your parents, or maybe Rush Limbaugh or
something, Bill O'Reilly. Or have you been hanging around with my
friend Platt? Anyway...thanks for the fantasy diversion.
JON:
Translation: Obviously, anyone who disagrees with your unspeakably
powerful logic must be insane. After all, you speak of self-evident
truths, right?
msh says:
Again, the truth of what I've said is verifiable by anyone who wants
to look into it. As for my crack about insanity, you're right. It
was uncalled for. But honestly, I was having trouble believing you
were being serious, so my tone turned a little flip at the end.
jon:
Sorry you can't handle the possibility of being wrong about Iraq and
the United States.
msh:
I would be happy to be proved wrong about this. Will you be the one
to address my evidence and argument? So far, you haven't.
jon:
Funny how you can't discuss views that are different from yours
without A: making personal comments/observations about the mind of
the posters, or B: telling the posters how they are supposed to
respond to you.
msh says:
Never? If you look back over my many hundreds of posts you'll see
that this happens very rarely, and only in response to those few
people who don't address my arguments and evidence, nor advance any
argument and evidence of their own, yet, somehow, feel that it's ok
to keep repeating their disputed statements as fact. This is
promoting propaganda, not debate; and it is is intellectually
dishonest.
Thanks,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
everything." -- Henri Poincare'
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 17 2004 - 02:35:33 GMT