🚀 go-pugleaf

Dan C wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 17:20:25 +0000, EvilBill wrote:
>
>>> You don't have to be an American to be a left-wing liberal whacko.
>
>> True. But I don't think it's justifiable to call someone a 'whacko'
>> for being opposed to unprovoked invasions and the removal of civil
>> rights.
>
> It is when the people making all the noise are doing it *ONLY* for
> political reasons, not their own beliefs, and doing nothing but
> attacking the conservative side (while offering no realistic
> solutions to anything).
>

Well, my beliefs are summed up quite nicely by this quote from - I think -
Benjamin Franklin - 'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve
neither'. The continual erosion of civil rights in the US and UK is utterly
unacceptable. And in the wider world, isn't it odd that a lot more people
hate us now since we started our rampage across the Middle East?

As for Bin Laden (and Saddam, for that matter), IMO a surgical strike by
special forces would have achieved the objectives of getting rid of al'Qaida
and the Saddam administration far more quickly with a minimum of civilian
casualties. Full-scale invasions and wars were not necessary.

>> (Guantanamo, anyone? Most of the people in *there* are innocent...)
>
> Perhaps *some* are, but I doubt the term *most*.  Besides, you weren't
> talking about Gitmo in the earlier posts.

No, I wasn't, but it is all part of the same situation. The four British
prisoners who were eventually released, three of them were arrested in
Pakistan after going there to attend a wedding (one of the guys was the
groom!) and the other was there to attend an Arabic language course.
(It seems as well that US forces were crossing the border into Pakistan to
arrest these people. Isn't this a violation of Pakistani sovereignty?)

-- 
-- 
"I hope you don't object to my badgering the witless!"

EvilBill - http://www.evilbill.org.uk
yahoo: evilbill_agqx