funny things to do on a bike

Bad war plan? Compared to???? Name a war that has been won more
decisively with such little collateral damage. This was one for the
textbooks.

The military are still fighting a war. You only have to look at the way
battlefield tactics are used in civilian areas to quall the so called
militants. Don't you think that killing more and more innocent civilians
is just breeding a new generation of anti US feelings and possibly
terrorists? You don't see the British military using helicopter gunships
and AC-130s to control Basra. They learnt their bitter lesson in
Northern Ireland many years ago.

Richard

wrote:
Eric S. Sande writes:


We are the driving force behind Al Qaeda.


That's deep, Jobst. I have no argument with it other than to
suggest that we need to come to terms with our enemy and end the
killing.


Negotiation with "terrorists" is not our way.


This is not a negotiation situation. 9-11 was a response to the USA
financing of demeaning and humiliation of primarily Palestinians and
secondarily support of dictators like the Shah Pahlavi and Saddam
Hussein just as we supported Fulgencio Battista in Cuba and Trujillo
and Manuel Noriega in Panama and the assassination of Salvador Allende
to be replaced by Augusto Pinochet:

http://www.neravt.com/left/allende.htm
http://tinyurl.com/2np65


And I'm not a spokesman for Ariel Sharon.


I am not either but our enemies in the middle east know that Sharon is
nothing without support from Washington.


You will be aware that Al Qaeda offered negotiation with the EU after
the Madrid train station bombing, it was rejected.


What is there to negotiate? The USA needs to back of world domination
under the guise of liberating people from their government and
religion, when actually business interests are the driving force. In
Vietnam it was suspected offshore oil.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/vietnam.html


It is possible that a dialogue could be established with these people.
That would be a good first step.


You see what sort of dialog would ensue, considering the cover-up
about the prisoner treatment where "pfc guilty" is being brought to
trial. When a ship runs aground in port the captain is relieved of
duty. When this sort of interrogation occurs in prison, officers
fairly high in the chain of command are guilty along with the top man
who denies knowing anything about it. Liar liar pants on fire, is
about all people outside the USA can say. This is in face of
international Red Cross detailed reports.

The situation has reached a state that is difficult to recover. To me
it is apparent that the Bush administration cannot resolve the crisis
without admitting huge errors in judgment and diplomacy and lies that
got us into the situation. That alone means we must change leaders in
November if not sooner, but that still does not get us out of where we
are. There is no military solution. That should be clear to anyone
who can read history and project the course we are on.

We have dismantled the Iraqi military, police and other government
functions, and cannot turn the nation over to anyone to run it if we
pull out. What would follow is mayhem worse than what occurred after
the defeat of the army. There was destruction and looting in
magnitudes not seen even in WWII. This was allowed to occur by
Mr. Rumsfeld to "punish the Iraqis" as if they had a hand in the
causing anything that affected the USA.

I spent time in the US Army and the subject of civil order after
military victory was high priority. Highly important after defeating
an enemy force in cities was re-establishing to law and order. What
happened in Iraq is outlined in military texts in detail. If Rummy
says he didn't know or expect that, then he is unbelievably uneducated
or lying.

Jobst Brandt


Lying would be my bet, along with almost everyone else in the
administration being guilty of the same. We can only hope that November
brings someone else to power.

MOO,
Matt

"Pete" wrote in message ...
"JP" wrote

You're exactly right. We and the IDF are the ones doing the
brainwashing, though. Every time we drop a bomb and kill someone, that
someone's family members are left with a hatred and rage that will not
be satisfied unless they are able to kill some of the people that
killed their family members. Their hatred and rage is so consuming
that they are willing to die to gain their revenge. It does not matter
that we or the Israelis think that we are responding to terrorism and
that the deaths of their family members were unfortunate "collateral
damage". That the deaths were accidental does not make them hate us
any less. It should be obvious that there is no solution to this
spiral of violence except to kill every single Arab in the Middle
East, or find another way that doesn't require dropping bombs on
people.

It appears, in that particular situation, that there is no win for the
Israelis.

If they fight, they are 'the bad guys'. Big bad IDF with their tanks and
aircraft, against the gallant teenager with a bomb, 'trying to defend his
homeland'.
If they do nothing, become completely peaceful and loving, the countries
surrounding them would *still * want to push them out into the sea.
(not saying that all people in that region would subscribe to this, but
there are enough of them to push the issue)

Either way, they lose.

A couple of years ago the Saudis proposed land for peace. A consensus
could easily be found among Arab nations to guarantee Israel's right
to exist if they agreed to go back to their 1967 borders, abandon the
settlements and allow the establishment of a Palestinian state. The
Israelis did not respond to the Saudi (broadly Arab, actually)
proposal because Israeli politics are controlled by the right wing
settlers' parties that Sharon must have in his coalition, despite the
fact that a majority of Israelis think that all the West Bank
settlements should be abandoned- they are tired of paying the price so
that a very small (relatively speaking) number of radical Israelis can
hang on to their homes in the West Bank.

It is no longer about the survival of Israel, it is about the illegal
Israeli settlements.

The Palestinians could probably gain complete control of the situation
if they would adopt a Gandhian strategy- it would greatly clarify
issues for all observers because security would no longer be an excuse
for Israeli repression and land-grabbing; the Likud and the right-wing
Israeli political parties would be marginalized. Like the Bush
administration, they really got nuthin' (except for their own narrow
interests) if they can't feed off of their citizens' fears.

JP

Mark Hickey wrote:

Bad war plan? Compared to???? Name a war that has been won more
decisively with such little collateral damage. This was one for the
textbooks.

Winning the war is the easy part. Winning the peace is another thing.


--
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.

Thanks to all for the information that Kerry was lying when he said the
war was not about oil.

Looks like I will vote for Bush, at least he didn't shoot kill wounded
prisoners.

"JP" wrote in message
om...

The Palestinians could probably gain complete control of the situation
if they would adopt a Gandhian strategy- it would greatly clarify
issues for all observers because security would no longer be an excuse
for Israeli repression and land-grabbing; the Likud and the right-wing
Israeli political parties would be marginalized. Like the Bush
administration, they really got nuthin' (except for their own narrow
interests) if they can't feed off of their citizens' fears.

I have often said that what this conflict needs is a spiritual leader on the
level of a Gandhi or a Martin Luther King Jr., on either side of the
conflict. It only takes one to help people out of the wilderness of
violence, revenge, and fear. Unfortunately, neither side seems to have
him/her at present.


Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
Please replace earthlink for mouse-potato and .net for .com
Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

"Doug Purdy" wrote in message
ble.rogers.com...
And this is in a bike newsgroup because???

As the one who started the thread title -- and the original topic was, why
certain people hate cyclists, not why other certain people hate the U.S. --
I will make a cycling-related comment to tie the two together.

When people hate you because of who you represent, rather than who you truly
are -- and when they take actions to hurt you because of how they perceive
you, that reflects their own moral character. How you choose to respond, the
actions you subsequently take, reflect your own. Take responsibility for
both your noble intentions, and your dark impulses, and choose wisely.

Warm Regards,


Claire Petersky
Please replace earthlink for mouse-potato and .net for .com
Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

rowman wrote:

Bad war plan? Compared to???? Name a war that has been won more
decisively with such little collateral damage. This was one for the
textbooks.

The military are still fighting a war. You only have to look at the way
battlefield tactics are used in civilian areas to quall the so called
militants. Don't you think that killing more and more innocent civilians
is just breeding a new generation of anti US feelings and possibly
terrorists? You don't see the British military using helicopter gunships
and AC-130s to control Basra. They learnt their bitter lesson in
Northern Ireland many years ago.

The Iraqi insurgents use civilians as shields... and even if they
didn't, there is no way to wage a war that's in the streets without
collateral damage. So what do you do? Let any urban environment be a
safe haven for Baath party holdouts and terrorists?

A lot less Iraqis have died as a result of the US deposing Saddam than
would have been the case if they did the job themselves. And I still
predict that once the new Iraqi government is in place for a short
while, things will calm down dramatically (the power plays having
played out).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Baka Dasai wrote:

On Sun, 16 May 2004 07:44:26 -0700, Mark Hickey said (and I quote):
Great idea. Teach the radical fringe elements of the world that if
they cause enough damage, we'll give them an inordinate amount of
power to influence our society.

The unpleasant reality is that they already have a large amount of
influence over our society. They've got everybody running scared, and
have managed to get the US and other countries to introduce draconian
legislation. Face it - they've got a lot of power, and they're getting
stronger while the US flounders around doing stuff that might as well be
recruitment videos for Al Qaeda.

Any offers of negotiation from Al Qaeda should be snapped up.
Negotiation is far preferable to having them crash planes into
buildings.

Read the Al Qaeda charter sometime.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

"ML" wrote

Lying would be my bet, along with almost everyone else in the
administration being guilty of the same. We can only hope that November
brings someone else to power.

Why do you expect that any replacement administration would be any better?

Pete