[Spam] Re: [Spam] [Vision2020] Breaking News: Bush sending us to war (again) in Haiti

[matt@moscowland.com]

The Alamo was an independant action of seperatists hoping to succed from the Mexican terratorial control and had hopes that after they would be anexed by the US. I assume that when yo say "we" you are not indicating you desire to live in the past. 

If I misquoted you I applogize. It just sickins me when someone dishoners the memories of our heros.

As for Haiti, your correct they need food, medicine and interest free loans. I am sure that the gangs controling the strets would very much like that. I have an idea, lets restore order then send those things in. I have to call the White House right away. Yo may be on to something.

The "Indian Wars" yea, that was terrible. I am not prepared to discuse the wars of other nations, or those of conquest dating back eons. How about the first "caveman" that clubed another for his cave. For that matter lets discuss the Cain & Able issue. I am an American and we were discussing the actions of our sitting President. 

The French. Come on think that through. Your the one who listed the Hundres Years War. They really did a good job in Indochina, Bierut, Somalia, Haiti, The Phillipines. Wait a second. All those places have something in common. I know, its were the French failed and we had to pick up the pieces. Sometimes unsucessfully. 

Granada? Whats wrong with a President sending in Troops to rescue American citizens being held hostage? You dont travel do you?

The French and Indian war? You need to read up on that one. Its where the Fench inlisted the Indians to kill Colonists. wemon and children included. Are you saying we should have not defended our families. 

1812? Thats the one where the British invaded our young nation and burned our Capital. I am missing your point on......no wait I think I get it. You think we should have remained subjects of the King, or yet never have come to these shores. 

How about Korea, defending against an aggressor and all that. Remeber the North invaded the South before we got involved. 

I suppose your one of those that feels we should not be involved in the Middle East, chanting "no blood for oil" while driving three blocks to work, wearing your rain coat and rubber boots on nasty days, enjoying all the comforts of home. When you protested the Gulf war, did you use OIL paint to make your signs. I bet you even complain when gas gets close to $2.00 per gallon. I know you still dont think its worth one life. You may be right. Before you take a stand, try for just one day to not use any products or materials that oil had a hand in producing. That includes food.

By preventing instability in the rest of the world we are defending our country. Remeber WWI(the one you indicatedwas not a moral war), by remaining isolationist the war got to the point where its was more costly then it needed to be. Wasnt that kind of the same problem in WWII, Neval? 

Yea, U.I.senat, hey thats great. Your not living in the past are you?

> In a message dated 3/1/2004 7:37:15 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
> matt@moscowland.com writes:
> I would expect you to attempt to legislate morality, dictate the thoughts of 
> others, surrender your will to those who say what you want to hear, only 
> express the popular view(even when its out of style) and to above all, not learn 
> from the past.
> Actually, you don't have to guess what legislation I passed at UI. I was a 
> Student Senator and all records of the bills I wrote and how I voted are on 
> record. I am sure you will find me very much a populist liberal that was over 
> protective of the poor and disadvantaged. 
> 
> 
> Actually I must admit that I very much enjoyed your response. I have not been 
> this excited since Bush invaded Haiti, 
> I am sorry to hear that.
> oh wait that was really just a humanitarian mission to help the innocents, or 
> havent you seen the pics from the island. Would you have complained if we had 
> done nothing?
> Nope, I would not have complained. Let the French do it. They are much better 
> at helping people than Bush.
> My question is, when we send help why is it always in the form of bombs, guns 
> and grenades? Every hear of medicine, food, and water? How about an interest 
> free loan? 
> 
> You indicated that all who die in wars die for nothing. This truely offends 
> me. Maybe you should ask the families of the men who died on Normandy, Gaudel 
> canal, Bastone, manchuria, The Phillipines, North Africa, Inchone, Iwo Jima, 
> Bunker Hill, Gettiesburg, Kuwaite, Boonesboro, Midway, The Magino line, 
> Waitsburg, Pearl Harbor, The Alamo and all the other countless battles where men gave 
> their lives for the good of other men. Instead of asking thier families, maybe 
> you should ask the families of those they saved, the MILLIONS that live under 
> thier own will because of the sacrifces of those brave men.
> Yes, If I did say that I would apologize for those insensitive words. But I 
> did not say that. I said that most men that die in war die for nothing but the 
> exchange of land and/or money from one government to another. ( exact words: 
> "Most people that die in war, die for absolutely no reason other than people in 
> power getting more land or money.")
> I never said that the men were not brave or honorable or that all men and 
> died for nothing. But face it. 100s of millions of men and women have died 
> because of war. How many of those wars and deaths of over 100,000 years of human 
> wars were for something that had a good outcome? Not many, maybe a handful. The 
> Revolutionary, Civil War and W.W.II were the only moral wars that the US was in 
> that I can recall. 
> Was the War against the Indians a valiant effort? I think not. Was stealing 
> land from Mexicans an honorable cause? I don't think so. The Alamo, was it 
> really worth dying to steal Texas from Mexico? 
> Those are just American Wars. The vast majority of wars took place long 
> before the US even existed. How about the 100 years war? Was that war worth 
> fighting? Or Granada, or Nicaragua, or Somalia, or the Russian Revolution? Or the War 
> of the Roses? The French American War? The war of 1812? I am sure good men 
> all gave their lives for them.
> The real question is, if you think so well of all these men, why do you want 
> to send them all off to die? If American Men wanted to die for Haiti, Somalia, 
> or Iraq, let them sign up for the military in those countries. We need are 
> men to defend our country, not to win a dick size contest between two national 
> leaders. The only overseas location our troops should be is Afghanistan, 
> looking for Osama Bin Forgotten. 
> 
> Sincerely,
> Donovan J Arnold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure you have seen the bumper sticker "If you can read this thank a 
> teacher." its missing the second part.
> "If you can read this in english, thank a Vet."
> 
> I agree that an avoidable war is an atrocity, but please do not dishoner the 
> memories of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice and won and preserved YOUR 
> freedom. 
>