Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA07104 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:09:50 +0100 X-Originating-IP: [220.127.116.11] From: "Edward Turner" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: RE: Bush's War on Terrorism Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 13:03:55 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F123KleTT6dE50HmSd700006507@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Apr 2002 13:03:55.0433 (UTC) FILETIME=[A7C98190:01C1EC59] Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
thanks for your response,
>>The fight is not on equal
>>>>terms. No matter what we do, one side or the other will claim we favored
>>>>side. The only solution I can see is to go in and occupy both Israel
>>>>Palestine and confiscate their weapons.
>>another solution would be for America to stop sending 'em in the first
>The time for the other solution has come and gone.
Okay... when was this other solution appropriate (i.e. to suspend, or
threaten to suspend, American arms deliveries to Israelis), why wasn't it
then enacted while it was appropriate, and why now is this solution not
suitable? IMO, following the recent invasions achieved using American paid
for equipment, now would be the time when the Israelis would be most
receptive to US diplomatic / military pressure.
>>In addition, the
>Israelis are perfectly capable of making their own weapons. They built
>atomic bombs without our help.
>>They even help other countries, such
>China and Pakistan, build weapons.
Do you expect Israel to produce their own F-16s, Apaches, Patriots and all
those spare parts required for American equipment they already possess? Plus
they get to spend American tax-dollars when they ship in US made weapons.
(US is currently providing $2billion in foreign military finance this year
>>And of course, the Muslim
>also have to stop sending weapons to Palestine.
That`s what Israel does, or tries to do, right now. I don't see how an
international force would be more effective. It is not as though they are
receiving tanks and fighter planes from their friends across the desert.
Automatic weapons etc. are required for PA and Israeli security, so I don't
see how those can be 'consficated'.
>>What you have,
>really, is a
>first world nation at war with a third world nation plus the whole of
> As they proved in 1967, you'd be smart to bet on the first world nation.
I don't see your proof for this, not on the muslim side at least. Israel has
nuclear warheads trained on all the major arab capitals and a history of
supreme dominance on the battlefield. You'd be smart to bet this "third
world nation plus the whole of Islam" - and I'm hereby assuming this is a
meaningful statement, which it isn't - would do everything to avoid a
military confrontation with Israel. The Arab summit recently (re-)outline a
route to peace in Israel / Palestine. This is hardly evidence of bellicose
intention on behalf of muslim nations.
>The Muslims are little better armed now than they were then. Just buying
>weapons doesn't make them well armed any more than buying boxing gloves
>makes someone a boxer. It's the years of training and the ability to think
>in modern terms that gives the Israelis the edge and like I've said before,
>the Muslims want to take us back a few centuries. It's the changes the
>Western nations are making to the world they're really fighting against.
>Our whole way of life is blasphemous to what they are preaching. IMHO.
I bet you're having fun writing this stuff :)
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 25 2002 - 14:21:19 BST