"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

Clinton officials spent 7 years in office trying to make it appear as
if
terrorist attacks within our borders were not state-sponsored.

If this is the case, why has it taken so long to figure it out, and
release
the information?


Because Goss just took the reigns a couple of months ago.

And who has been the President up until, as well as beyond that time?

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...


I don't know what drugs you offer in your office, but you are taking too
many of them.

WHERE are the WMDs?

Wait for the intel.



While we wait, will we be counting in days, months, years, or just dead
soldiers?

I never implied that Harry said anything about Chavez. Harry does seem
to be an apologist for Castro. Basically, his argument is that Castro
is better than Batista. Is that it Harry, pretty lame. My dog could
rule Cuba better than Batista. Of course this is a false argument
presented as if it was a choice between Batista and Castro. Why not
have a Cuba with a modern economy and freedom? Castro is nothing more
than a Stalinist dinosaur. He's a Caribbean Kim Jong Il.
My dog could also run the Venezulean economy better than it was run
before Chavez but htis does not mean Chavez is good. I'll withhold
judgement on Chavez for a year or two since any reasonable person
should have a healthy skepticism about lefty regimes considering the
number of deaths they have caused.
Chavez might accomplish a few positive things but will not produce
fundamental change. From what I saw there, the problems lie in the
culture where there is no cultural room for a middle class. The upper
class looks down on the lower class as if they were less than dirt and
social mobility is assumed to be impossible. The only way a lower
class person can do well there is to leave and then come back
successful.
Unfortunately, Chavez does not seem to be wise enough to really do
well. A wise man would sweet talk the 800 lb gorilla next door while
selling him bananas, not making the gorilla wish he could squash
him....Chavez's heart might be in the right place, but hes an idiot.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...


I don't know what drugs you offer in your office, but you are taking too
many of them.

WHERE are the WMDs?

Wait for the intel.



While we wait, will we be counting in days, months, years, or just dead
soldiers?

You can count by number of countries with tyrannical leaders overthrown.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...


I don't know what drugs you offer in your office, but you are taking
too many of them.

WHERE are the WMDs?

Wait for the intel.



While we wait, will we be counting in days, months, years, or just dead
soldiers?

You can count by number of countries with tyrannical leaders overthrown.


Ding ding ding! Wrong answer! The contestant from Florida goes home with a
case of Mrs Paul's fish sticks.....sorry, contestant.

Not our job to overthrow dictators. Other countries can do exactly what we
did 229 years ago. If you want something done right, do it yourself.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
I never implied that Harry said anything about Chavez. Harry does seem
to be an apologist for Castro. Basically, his argument is that Castro
is better than Batista. Is that it Harry, pretty lame. My dog could
rule Cuba better than Batista. Of course this is a false argument
presented as if it was a choice between Batista and Castro. Why not
have a Cuba with a modern economy and freedom? Castro is nothing more
than a Stalinist dinosaur. He's a Caribbean Kim Jong Il.
My dog could also run the Venezulean economy better than it was run
before Chavez but htis does not mean Chavez is good.


Castro has done more to improve the lives of ordinary people in Cuba than
Batista, the dictator the US supported, ever did or would do.

Then why the huge efflux of Cuban refuges under Castro?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
I never implied that Harry said anything about Chavez. Harry does seem
to be an apologist for Castro. Basically, his argument is that Castro
is better than Batista. Is that it Harry, pretty lame. My dog could
rule Cuba better than Batista. Of course this is a false argument
presented as if it was a choice between Batista and Castro. Why not
have a Cuba with a modern economy and freedom? Castro is nothing more
than a Stalinist dinosaur. He's a Caribbean Kim Jong Il.
My dog could also run the Venezulean economy better than it was run
before Chavez but htis does not mean Chavez is good.

Castro has done more to improve the lives of ordinary people in Cuba
than Batista, the dictator the US supported, ever did or would do.

Then why the huge efflux of Cuban refuges under Castro?




In recent years, because of the lack of economic opportunity in Cuba, the
same reason why we get so many immigrants from Mexico, Salvador, et
cetera.

Cuba has never been a wealthy country. Prior to Castro, Cuba did make
significant amounts of money for its leaders, and for US gangsters and
corporations, but that is because they were sucking up the profits and
doing next to nothing for the workers.

Then why didn't the workers hop on a boat and flee the country under
Batista?

I suspect that growing up in New Jersey (my mom was from Hudson County), and
living so close now to Little Havana, that I have a lot more Cuban friends
than you. None of them share your view of Castro vs. Batista.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:55:39 +0000, Doug Kanter wrote:


Not our job to overthrow dictators. Other countries can do exactly what we
did 229 years ago. If you want something done right, do it yourself.

Interesting to note, we have shed more American blood (casualties, not
deaths), overthrowing Saddam than we shed ridding ourselves of King George.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
I never implied that Harry said anything about Chavez. Harry does
seem
to be an apologist for Castro. Basically, his argument is that
Castro
is better than Batista. Is that it Harry, pretty lame. My dog could
rule Cuba better than Batista. Of course this is a false argument
presented as if it was a choice between Batista and Castro. Why not
have a Cuba with a modern economy and freedom? Castro is nothing
more
than a Stalinist dinosaur. He's a Caribbean Kim Jong Il.
My dog could also run the Venezulean economy better than it was run
before Chavez but htis does not mean Chavez is good.
Castro has done more to improve the lives of ordinary people in Cuba
than Batista, the dictator the US supported, ever did or would do.
Then why the huge efflux of Cuban refuges under Castro?



In recent years, because of the lack of economic opportunity in Cuba,
the same reason why we get so many immigrants from Mexico, Salvador, et
cetera.

Cuba has never been a wealthy country. Prior to Castro, Cuba did make
significant amounts of money for its leaders, and for US gangsters and
corporations, but that is because they were sucking up the profits and
doing next to nothing for the workers.

Then why didn't the workers hop on a boat and flee the country under
Batista?

I suspect that growing up in New Jersey (my mom was from Hudson County),
and living so close now to Little Havana, that I have a lot more Cuban
friends than you. None of them share your view of Castro vs. Batista.





Your knowledge of history is defective, as is your understanding of the
motivation of many of the Cubans who came here in years past.

The motivation of many of the folks who I know that moved here is that
Castro came in and took their homes, took their businesses, and put their
family members in jail.

There's nothing "defective" about those first-hand accounts.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:55:39 +0000, Doug Kanter wrote:


Not our job to overthrow dictators. Other countries can do exactly what
we
did 229 years ago. If you want something done right, do it yourself.

Interesting to note, we have shed more American blood (casualties, not
deaths), overthrowing Saddam than we shed ridding ourselves of King
George.

Other "interesting" notes:

On average, more Americans died in a 2 week period of WWII than the entire
time period of both Gulf Wars combined.

On average, 526 Americans died each month in Vietnam vs. just under 65/mo in
the second Gulf War.

More Americans died on 9/11 than in both Gulf Wars combined.