Re: an arteest

Daniel, it's really frustrating to argue with someone who doesn't read
what he's responding to very carefully :).

If you think I'm opposed to the current war with Iraq, you're wrong.
If you think I'm opposed to military intervention to topple butchers
like Hussein (or the use of the military on principle), you're wrong.
If you think I believe we should "sit on our hands" internationally,
you're wrong.
If you think I believe _all_ US foreign policy decisions are atrocious,
you're wrong.

You're wrong not only because I never affirmed any of these, but because
I affirmed exactly the opposite in my previous posts.

I won't ask you to re-read my previous posts, though. Just read the
very last one I sent -- the response to Scottie -- and go from there.

Jim

Yocum Daniel GS 21 CES/CEOE wrote:

>It is all apart of it. We can have a conversation on foriegn criticisms but
>you are the exception. I find it interesting that some can extoll the
>contributions of some literary figure for thier genius or contribution to
>the world but if some one wre to do this for some military contributions, it
>is rah rah crap. The sequitur is that you can't paint American policy with
>a brush using only one color and many use it as an opputunity to malign real
>contributions. There is, now days, in this worls a quick reaction to
>criticize and no desire for recognition of America. Sure we have bet on the
>wrong horse but often it was before they proved to be what they are. If
>America shits so often without cleaning it up, as you suggest, then we
>should sit on our hands the next time a Hitler, Stalin or whomever pops on
>the world scene. The south Americans can wipe thier own asses from now on.
>What do you think?
>Daniel
>
>

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Thu Apr 10 10:54:53 2003