RE: Bush's War on Terrorism

From: Lawrence DeBivort (debivort@umd5.umd.edu)
Date: Thu Apr 18 2002 - 13:57:08 BST

  • Next message: Lawrence DeBivort: "RE: Bush's War on Terrorism" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA23112 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 18 Apr 2002 14:02:31 +0100
From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Bush's War on Terrorism
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 08:57:08 -0400
Message-ID: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAGEKDCOAA.debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
In-Reply-To: <F2079SLkn2yJs15S3rw00008265@hotmail.com>
Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    Thanks for the URL and further thoughts, Scott.

    Good summary article by Frontline. All they need to do is add a couple of
    paragraphs for Bush, and his doctrinal turn a couple of weeks ago.

    OK, not the US -- the UN you say. Have you had a chance to think about what
    a would UN peace-keeping force might like in the I.-P. conflict? (Keeping
    in mind the past UN peace-keeping efforts there, and the significant
    frustrations that they ran into. I can give you citations on these, if you
    want them.)

    best regards,
    Lawrence

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
    > Of Scott Chase
    > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 9:55 PM
    > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Subject: RE: Bush's War on Terrorism
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
    > >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > >To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    > >Subject: RE: Bush's War on Terrorism
    > >Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:04:53 -0400
    > >
    > >Thanks for the thoughtful post, Scott. What is the Weinberger doctrine?
    > >
    > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/military/force/
    >
    > Scan down on this URL and you'll see the basics pretty much as I recall
    > them. The W.D. might be an unattainable ideal for many cases
    > where military
    > force is contemplated, but it's a good starting guideline to use before
    > getting involved in something serious.
    >
    > Overall I'd exclude solely humanitarian and peacekeeping missions
    > from the
    > scope of U.S. military involvement. That should be the job of the
    > U.N. IMO.
    >
    > The Gulf War pretty much passed the litmus test where Somalia failed. I
    > remember when troops were being sent there during the last part
    > of Bush the
    > Elder's term and I thought the move was a mistake (with the W.D.
    > in mind at
    > the time). Part of me thought Bush was trying to leave Clinton with an
    > instant headache to deal with, but I'm probably wrong.
    >
    > Sending U.S. troops to be "peacekeepers" between Israelis and
    > Palestinians
    > would be a serious mistake. The military is, to be blunt, for breaking
    > things and killing people, and I can see no clear reason for
    > doing either in
    > that insoluble conflict.
    >
    >
    > >
    > > > I watched "Politically Incorrect" with Bill Maher last night and
    > > > have come
    > > > to the concusion that we in the US do have a deep set tendency to
    > > > view that
    > > > conflict through the lenses of pro-Israeli sentiment. It's
    > hard for us
    > >to
    > > > see the Palestinian POV. It seemed from some of Dubya's rhetoric and
    > > > Powell's stances that the US would have a more neutral or even-handed
    > > > approach. If we can't be neutral, this matter needs to rest
    > > > solely with the
    > > > U.N. The US does NOT need to commit our forces to that region as
    > > > peacekeepers. I don't think we've got the necessary objectivity, plus
    > >I'm
    > > > for commitments more in line with the Weinberger doctrine.
    > >t
    > >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
    > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 18 2002 - 14:18:34 BST