[lit-ideas] Re: The Surgical Strike Option
- From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:56:21 -0500
Eric Yost wrote:
> Actually, FDR, went around the Congress, acted
like a criminal and found a way to get war
material to the Brits right after Dunkirk. Were US
internal politics as predatory then as they are
now, FDR might have been brought up on charges,
endless hearings about legality, etc.
Ursula: Just where do you see this happening now?
Eric: Weeks ago, I mentioned Clinton ordering a
missile strike on the Sudan aspirin factory.
Immediately the GOP jumped on it and claimed he
was trying to distract people from the Monica
scandal. Also when Clinton ordered a missile
strike against the Iraqi Intelligence Center in
reprisal for the attempted assassination of Bush
Sr., the same story. Trying to distract the public
from Monica Lewinsky.
Same with Bush, Jr. He did X for this purely
self-serving reason. He did Y to help Halliburton.
Etc.
Which leaves us where? Believe nothing? Or just
believe the President of one's choice is telling
the truth and the other guy is lying all the time?
Ursula: Would that it were... Besides, maybe he
should have been... Wrong is wrong, no?
Eric: I'm glad FDR broke the law to help the
Brits. But that's just me. I don't automatically
equate "illegal" with "wrong." Sometimes the
illegal thing is the right thing to do. Sometimes
the legal thing is dead wrong. _Les Miserables_
seems to make that point fairly clearly.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
