From: Hermit (hidden@lucifer.com)
Date: Thu Aug 01 2002 - 19:53:08 MDT
[Hermit 1] But you remind me of another point. If an "objective perspective" results in Joe Dees' conclusions, then how come the Whitehouse now sees "Around the world, from western Europe to the far east, many see the United States as arrogant, hypocritical, self-absorbed, self-indulgent, and contemptuous of others." and "that Washington itself had done a lot to undermine America's standing by its rejection of international treaties on the environment, the international criminal court and the global arms race."
[Hermit 1] Which is what, I think, I have been saying for quite a while to the apparent discomfort of our "objective" friend.
[Joe Dees 2] That may be the opinion of some
[Hermit] No. That is what the vast majority of civilized people, including many Americans are saying. Based on "objective facts." Remember:?
[*]International Criminal Court http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,762663,00.html
[*]Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,764631,00.html
[*]UN Protocol on Torture http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,762663,00.html
[*]Funding for the United Nations population fund (UNFPA) http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,761987,00.html
[*]1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty http://www.guardian.co.uk/theissues/article/0,6512,542020,00.html
[*]1972 convention on biological and toxin weapons http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,494257,00.html
[*]Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons http://www.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,3604,689478,00.html
[*]Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,640593,00.html
[*]UN conference on small arms http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,525877,00.html
[*]Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,710728,00.html
[Hermit 3] Which makes the following non-responsive. But I will address it anyway.
[Joe Dees 2] , but outside of the rabid Dar-al-Islami Ummah, practically no nation or people I can think of objects to put pursuit of Al Quaeda operatives wherever we can find them, with the 'host' nation's help if they will give it, and without it if they will not.
[Hermit 3] The objections are not to apprehending al Qu'aeda. It is how this is achieved and what it costs - and how precipitating war in the Middle East is going to achieve it.
[Hermit 3] Given the infamy of the assault, obtaining UN sanction for reasonable action should not have been difficult. The US instead chase to "go it alone" - and the immediate result of that decision has been the destabilization of the world, the demolition of structures built over the course of in excess of a century - usually after nasty episodes which persuaded people that what had happened was so unacceptable that they should not allow it to reoccur and the provision of a reason for anyone who feels they have an excuse to bypass the UN and simply go to war. That makes the world a much more dangerous place for everyone, Americans included.
[Hermit 3] In any case, the people of Afghanistan had done nothing to the US. Yet many more Afghan civilians have died at the hands of Americans than Americans died on 911. Worth noting that this may be incompetence more than malice. After all, more American soldiers have died in Afghanistan of "own fire" than have been killed by the Taliban and al Qu'aeda combined. Even so, while the dead don't care, their relatives and those who empathise with them, do. This does not make the world a safer or better place.
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2002 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;threadid=25862>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:50 MDT