"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

That would be your typo. I don't distinguish between liars.

LOL. I think you do.

Max

too much work.

I think you're right. I distinguish between obscene liars and
ones who lie about blow jobs.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

That would be your typo. I don't distinguish between liars.

LOL. I think you do.

Max

Horass?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

I don't know. Are you simple-minded?

No. But I can point toward someone who most assuredly is.

Max

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Donal" wrote in message
...


Do you deny that you hate my country and everything about it?

Absolutely! What on Earth gave you that idea?

Do you deny
that when presented with possibilities regarding the USA that you'll
always
accept as gospel that which denegrates her?

Yes! I invite you investigate Google Groups. Please look into my posts
around the time of the invasion of Afghanistan. After you read a few of
these posts, I know that you will realise that you have misunderstood my
recent posts. In fact, I suspect that you are man enough to admit that you
have made a mistake. Am I right?




You sarcastically asked if al qaeda had been weakened since the fall
of
Saddam. I gave reasons why the organization had been weakened,

You said, .. and I quote "Al qaeda has been weakened, but only because
they've been kept busy
shoveling ignorant, uneducated dupes (suicide bombers) and money into
Iraq".

Are you intellectually incapable of understanding that you have said
that
you are pleased that Al Qaeda have been diverted into Iraq? Do you
really
feel that they have been weakened?

Put words in you own mouth, Donal, and thoughts into you own distorted
mind.
Do NOT put them in mine. You, it would appear, are intellectually
incapable
of realizing that that was statement of fact, not of preference or
pleasure.

I agree that less US citizens were murdered by Al Qaeda after the invasion
of Iraq. However, Al Qaeda have killed more innocent people in the last 12
months than they killed on 9/11. I cannot understand why you think that
they have been "weakened" unless you place a lower value on Iraqi lives than
US lives.


But then you are so filled with hatred for my country that you
simply are unable to be anything but derogatory.

I would suggest that you are so filled with Republical propaganda, that you
are unable to see the truth.



but made no
morality judgments whatsoever toward the innocents being slaughtered
in
Iraq
vs. those in the US.

Yes you did.

Hogwash. Only in your decidedly myopic view.

You feel that Al Qaeda have been weakened. Yet many more
innocent civilians have been killed in Iraq than were killed in the WTC
incident. Is it anti-American to tell the truth?

If al qaeda's mission was to kill innocents anywhere, I'd have to agree
that
they'd not been weakened. If their goal was to disrupt political and
economic processes in any old country, I'd agree. But it is not. They
(bin
Laden, others) have stated unequivocally that the US is their target. Not
Iraq, not Britain, not Ireland. The USA.

Al qaeda's prime target is and has been the US and its
citizens, by its own admission repeatedly.

I think that you need to do some research, Al Qaeda's prime target is
the
"West".

Hmmm? I was unaware that Iraq was included in "the west."

Huh?



Beyond attacking US soldiers and
US contractors in Iraq, it has been ineffective in that regard.

You don't use aircraft, do you? Anybody who flies on commercial
airlines
will be aware of the effect of Al Qaeda.

I'm well aware of the changes in airline security. How much I fly is none
of your business. But suffice it to say that these same near-draconian
measures have been taken by El Al for decades. Do you consider the
increased security as an al qaeda success? Strange logic indeed, and I've
no doubt bin Laden would strongly disagree with you.





That
translates to weakened. Now, if you'd care to discuss my feelings
toward
ANY needless victims of al qaeda, including OTHER coalition soldiers,
civilians of OTHER countries, and the innocent Iraqis you mentioned,
that's
another matter entirely.

And shame on you for attempting to place blame for terrorism on the US
or
anyone other than Islamic extremists.


Terrorism *is* terrorism. I don't make any attempt to justify the
murder
of any humans.

Did I accuse you of attempting "to justify the murder of any humans?"
Your
debating skills are, um . . . arcane.

You seem to posesss a remarkable ability to discount the death of Iraqi
"humans".

Regards


Donal
--

"Donal" wrote in message

You seem to posesss a remarkable ability to discount the death of Iraqi
"humans".

This seems to be at issue here, so I'll address this rather than each line
you posted.

First, I place human life above all other forms of life in this universe.
That applies to any human life, including that of terrorists. I find it
abhorent that anyone must die over political or religious issues. But I'm a
realist. People have died and continue to die for reasons of conceptual
dispute. In a perfect world this would not happen. But this is not a
perfect world. Far from it.

Second, one of my closest friends is the daughter of an Iraqi engineer
personally executed by Saddam just prior to Desert Storm in '91. My friend
has (had?) an extensive family living in three locations in Iraq. She has
been unable to contact all but three of them since May of last year. I've
met several of her relatives, and found them to be intelligent, kind, and
friendly people. All of her relatives wanted Saddam toppled and the
Ba'athists out of power at any cost. I'm not sure that they meant at the
cost of their lives, but that may have been the price. Only time will tell,
and until my friend knows the disposition of her family members she grieves
and all of her friends empathize. Including me.

Third, I was opposed to Bush's rush to attack Saddam's regime. I wanted the
UN inspection team to have more time. But he didn't consult me.
Subsequently Saddam is gone, and Iraq is generally better off for it. But
the people of Iraq have suffered through a war that killed many of them, and
continues to plague them with terrorist activity. Today a number of them
died while simply waiting in line in hopes of getting jobs. How meaningless
and intolerable.

Fourth, I support our presence in Iraq. We have no choice now. We cut and
ran from Afghanistan years ago and left the innocent citizens at the mercy
(or lack thereof) of the Taliban, a Muslim fundamentalist faction that
places the rights of women alongside those of insects and dogs. We are
staying in Afghanistan, and we'll stay in Iraq. It's the right thing to do
now, regardless of the propriety of going into either country in the first
place. To cut and run from Iraq or Afghanistan now would leave the
innocents prey to Muslim extremists and plunge both countries into ruling
religious oligarchies. Read: worse than Saddam's Iraq, if that's possible.

Fifth, I grieve for those who lost their lives in the attacks on this
country on 9/11. I also grieve for those who've lost service men in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and anywhere else soldiers from ANYcountry happen to be in
harm's way.

Sixth, I choose to believe (perhaps hope is a better term) that al qaeda has
been redirected from its prime target, and subsequently made less effective
(weakened), by our movement against Iraq, our improvements in homeland
security, and our resolve to never let them attack us again, ala 9/11.

Now, do you honestly believe I discount the deaths of Iraqi humans? Or any
humans?

Max

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Donal" wrote in message

You seem to posesss a remarkable ability to discount the death of Iraqi
"humans".

This seems to be at issue here, so I'll address this rather than each line
you posted.

First, I place human life above all other forms of life in this universe.
That applies to any human life, including that of terrorists. I find it
abhorent that anyone must die over political or religious issues. But I'm
a
realist. People have died and continue to die for reasons of conceptual
dispute. In a perfect world this would not happen. But this is not a
perfect world. Far from it.

Second, one of my closest friends is the daughter of an Iraqi engineer
personally executed by Saddam just prior to Desert Storm in '91. My
friend
has (had?) an extensive family living in three locations in Iraq. She has
been unable to contact all but three of them since May of last year. I've
met several of her relatives, and found them to be intelligent, kind, and
friendly people. All of her relatives wanted Saddam toppled and the
Ba'athists out of power at any cost. I'm not sure that they meant at the
cost of their lives, but that may have been the price. Only time will
tell,
and until my friend knows the disposition of her family members she
grieves
and all of her friends empathize. Including me.

Third, I was opposed to Bush's rush to attack Saddam's regime. I wanted
the
UN inspection team to have more time. But he didn't consult me.
Subsequently Saddam is gone, and Iraq is generally better off for it. But
the people of Iraq have suffered through a war that killed many of them,
and
continues to plague them with terrorist activity. Today a number of them
died while simply waiting in line in hopes of getting jobs. How
meaningless
and intolerable.

Fourth, I support our presence in Iraq. We have no choice now. We cut
and
ran from Afghanistan years ago and left the innocent citizens at the mercy
(or lack thereof) of the Taliban, a Muslim fundamentalist faction that
places the rights of women alongside those of insects and dogs. We are
staying in Afghanistan, and we'll stay in Iraq. It's the right thing to
do
now, regardless of the propriety of going into either country in the first
place. To cut and run from Iraq or Afghanistan now would leave the
innocents prey to Muslim extremists and plunge both countries into ruling
religious oligarchies. Read: worse than Saddam's Iraq, if that's
possible.

Fifth, I grieve for those who lost their lives in the attacks on this
country on 9/11. I also grieve for those who've lost service men in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and anywhere else soldiers from ANYcountry happen to be in
harm's way.

Sixth, I choose to believe (perhaps hope is a better term) that al qaeda
has
been redirected from its prime target, and subsequently made less
effective
(weakened), by our movement against Iraq, our improvements in homeland
security, and our resolve to never let them attack us again, ala 9/11.

Now, do you honestly believe I discount the deaths of Iraqi humans? Or
any
humans?

No, I don't.

I agree with most of what you have written. However, I still feel that you
think that an Iraqi life is insignificant when compared to an American life.

How many Iraqi civilians have died since the invasion? How many do you
think have been killed by US forces??


When you compare your answers with the toll of 9/11, you should understand
my point of view. In fact, I am even more dispassionate than my posts
would suggest. My real concern is for the future of my children. I feel
that the West is playing into the hands of Bin Laden. He wants a global
conflict.


Regards


Donal
--

"Donal" wrote in message

"Maxprop" wrote in message

Now, do you honestly believe I discount the deaths of Iraqi humans? Or
any
humans?

No, I don't.

I agree with most of what you have written. However, I still feel that
you
think that an Iraqi life is insignificant when compared to an American
life.

I disagree. I think "insignificant" is inappropriate. I believe it is
natural for any citizen to experience a stronger visceral reaction over the
deaths of countrymen than those of people living somewhere on the other side
of the globe. That is probably human nature. Something tells me that 3000
people murdered in Belfast (or wherever you reside) would have a greater
impact upon you than that same number in Iraq. But I don't consider any
life "insignificant."


How many Iraqi civilians have died since the invasion? How many do you
think have been killed by US forces??

The reports vary so widely that I'd rather not quote inaccurate numbers. I
know a lot of Iraqis have been killed by US forces, bombs, etc. A lot have
been killed by other coalition forces, and a lot have been murdered by
insurgents, not all of whom are al qaeda. As I mentioned before, wars
result in the deaths of innocent people. The USA lost nearly 58,000 service
people during the Vietnam War. I've never seen figures, but I'm guessing
that both N. and S. Vietnam lost ten times that many innocent civilians.
There is a parallel between this conflict and Vietnam: in both cases the
combatants were indistinguishable from the innocents. That always results
in greater casualties among the innocent.


When you compare your answers with the toll of 9/11, you should understand
my point of view. In fact, I am even more dispassionate than my posts
would suggest. My real concern is for the future of my children. I feel
that the West is playing into the hands of Bin Laden. He wants a global
conflict.

You and I are in agreement on this last point. Your kids and my
grandchildren will pay the price for bad decisions made by our two
generations.

Max