[lit-ideas] Re: Willie Pete's Role Reversal
- From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:37:46 -0500
> [Original Message]
> From: Phil Enns <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 11/10/2005 9:16:55 AM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Willie Pete's Role Reversal
>
> Andy Amago wrote:
>
> "Okay, so now we know what his intention wasn't. But what was his
> intention?"
>
> For the sake of this thread, it is immaterial.
As a general question, however, it is relevant and I'll ask it again. What
were his intentions in invading Iraq?
M. Chase was unable to
> distinguish the moral difference between Iraqi terrorists trying to blow
> up as many civilian Iraqis as possible and U.S. soldiers trying to stop
> them. I am glad that Andy is able to recognize the difference but I
> despair of M. Chase.
>
I think ultimately the terrorists are killing civilians for their purposes,
and Bush is killing soldiers for his. Underneath that uniform there's a
human that Bush is sending out to have blown up. He never gave it a second
thought when he went willy nilly into war. The real difference between the
two is that we know the intentions of the insurgency, but not the
intentions of Bush.
Andy Amago
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Phil Enns
> Toronto, ON
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
