RE: Bush's War on Terrorism

From: Scott Chase (
Date: Mon Apr 29 2002 - 23:22:22 BST

  • Next message: Lawrence DeBivort: "RE: Saving the ethnosphere"

    Received: by id XAA15508 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 23:28:12 +0100
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Scott Chase" <>
    Subject: RE: Bush's War on Terrorism
    Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:22:22 -0400
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Apr 2002 22:22:22.0283 (UTC) FILETIME=[551411B0:01C1EFCC]
    Precedence: bulk

    >From: Vincent Campbell <>
    >To: "''" <>
    >Subject: RE: Bush's War on Terrorism
    >Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:13:13 +0100
    > <So it would be nice if they spent it on shcools and hospitals, the
    > > truth is they most often spend it on guns and building armies. As for
    > > Palestine not having an army, what do you think all those people
    > > back at the Israelis are? Just because they don't wear uniforms doesn't
    > > mean they are not organized for waging war. If not stopped by Israel,
    > > Arafat would be getting shiploads of arms from Iran and other countries.
    > > It's more a matter of their isolation than their desire that keeps them
    > > from
    > > having as big an army as Iraq.>
    > >
    > With the cynic's hat on, big nations give financial aid in order to
    >get in back in terms of arms sales, buildng contracts, drug sales etc. etc.
    >which is why it never has the official intent.
    > On the second bit you're right, that's the point of the suicide
    >bombers- what do you do when you have no organised military means of self
    >defence, you use yourself as a weapon. Suicide bombers are an indication
    >just how limited the Palestinians have been by Israel, and by the
    >international community's refusal to do anything about Israel.
    And you can make that point without condoning the actions of the suicide
    bombers. Though their actions are hard to justify they are the product of
    the situation they have been born into one of oppression and being perceived
    as lesser than human. How politically correct has it become to bash
    Palestinians? Here in the US making some ethnic slur about them might yield
    more cheers than jeers, not unlike it was for Iranians back in the early
    80's and onward.

    I'm not an expert on the biographical details of Arafat's life, but wasn't
    he a product of the refugee camps? In the way one group treats another
    there's a danger that the former will create a monster in the latter. But
    this goes both ways because it just may be the perception Israelis have of
    their Palestinian and other Arab neighbors bellicose intentions that has
    resulted in some, like Sharon, adopting a hard line mentality. Would this be
    kinda like a positive feedback loop that continuously escalates where
    animosities of Palestinian and Israeli hardliners for each other hits the
    threshold point and boils over until cooler heads prevail...

    I really think that the U.S. needs to take a serious, in-depth look at our
    relationship with Israel and their behavior towards other peoples. It might
    be time for a little "tough love" or modifying the apron strings. The
    perception of the Arab and Muslim world towards us is at stake, not to
    mention the self-detemination of the Palestinians. Israel got their state,
    now its time to allow the Palestinians to achieve some degree of respectful
    existence, maybe along the lines of pre 1967 borders.

    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

    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 : Mon Apr 29 2002 - 23:39:57 BST