TnT says:
=========
Are you really concerned, or is this all just talk? Should I be
watching the news to see Saudis set free by Dutch fighting forces? No
probably not,
==========

TnT, you're completely missing his point (and mine). We are simply
pointing out the hypocrisy of the American position in Iraq. The latest
reason (of a very long and ever-changing list of reasons) for invading
Iraq was to relieve them of a dictator and to bring democracy.

We are not saying that that was right (especially when the "real"
reason is fairly transparent). But the USA is. So, we're simply
pointing out the logical inconsistencies in that position if you don't
also consider Saudi Arabia for invasion. Not to do so is hypocritical.

frtzw906

BCITORGB wrote:
TnT says:
=========
Are you really concerned, or is this all just talk? Should I be
watching the news to see Saudis set free by Dutch fighting forces? No
probably not,
==========

TnT, you're completely missing his point (and mine). We are simply
pointing out the hypocrisy of the American position in Iraq. The
latest
reason (of a very long and ever-changing list of reasons) for
invading
Iraq was to relieve them of a dictator and to bring democracy.

We are not saying that that was right (especially when the "real"
reason is fairly transparent). But the USA is. So, we're simply
pointing out the logical inconsistencies in that position if you
don't
also consider Saudi Arabia for invasion. Not to do so is
hypocritical.

frtzw906

And you miss mine. I was giving Wilko a bad time. If he is so
concerned about Iraq, and USA invasion, does he offer an alternative,
no matter what the original, or primary reason the USA offered? Ok he
does not think that we should have gone in there after oil, does he
think we should have gone in there for the "liberation and Democracy of
the Iraq people?"

Secondly, I was watching a documetary about Saudi Arabia on PBS. Forget
the Saks and other Glitz stores, the women were grocery shopping at a
Safeway! Seems the invasion is underway, and isn't that Osama's main
contention? TnT

TnT says:
================
the women were grocery shopping at a
Safeway!
==================

Now I have to think you're giving ME a bad time. Women shopping in a
Safeway is a pretty superficial way of measuring liberty, freedom and
democracy.

Back to the history books. Why were American revolutionaries so ****ed
off at King George and the Brits? Weren't they shopping in fashionable
shops in New York, Boston, etc that were every it as nice as all but
the best London could offer? Why ever were they upset?

Does the notion of a monarchy in 2005 not strike you as archaic? I
suspect it struck many "Americans" as archaic way babk in the 1770's.

frtzw906

BCITORGB wrote:
TnT says:
================
the women were grocery shopping at a
Safeway!
==================

Now I have to think you're giving ME a bad time. Women shopping in a
Safeway is a pretty superficial way of measuring liberty, freedom and
democracy.

Back to the history books. Why were American revolutionaries so
****ed
off at King George and the Brits? Weren't they shopping in
fashionable
shops in New York, Boston, etc that were every it as nice as all but
the best London could offer? Why ever were they upset?

Does the notion of a monarchy in 2005 not strike you as archaic? I
suspect it struck many "Americans" as archaic way babk in the 1770's.

frtzw906

I did not mean to imply that a Safeway in Saudia Arabia, marks the
measure of liberty, freedom, and Democracy, but it is a mark that the
invasion has started. It is when the people get enough of these
markers, that they understand that the notion of a monarchy in 2005 is
archaic, obsolete, and are willing to throw off the yoke, all by
themselves. Saves US from feeling like we have to militarily engage
every tin-star dictator or monarch. TnT