[lit-ideas] Re: Arrivederci, Mr. Bush...

  • From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:45:14 -0500

What happened to the United States I grew up in?  I don't recognize this
country anymore.  Has it always been this way and I just never noticed? 
Like Enron, the collapse didn't happen overnight.  The seeds were sown much
earlier, but when?




> [Original Message]
> From: <JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 3/16/2005 10:16:39 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Arrivederci, Mr. Bush...
>
> Not only that, but in Evangelical interpretation of the book of 
Revelations, 
> a war in the Middle East is absolutely necessary for the Second  Coming
of 
> the Messiah which is precluded or accompanies (I forget) the  reclaiming
of the 
> Promised land (Israel) by the Israelites.  A massive war  in the ME MUST 
> happen for the Second Coming to happen.  They are seeing  signs of
prophecies being 
> fulfilled everywhere.  If you do a search in the  text of Revelations and 
> look for the word "bear" and know that during the fall  of the Soviet
Bloc, 
> Russia was determined by the Evangelicals to be that which  Revelations
refers to 
> as "the bear" (yes, I'm serious), you get a sense of what  I'm talking
about... 
>  very, very scary.  Everyone has a right to their  beliefs, sure.  And I
have 
> no less respect for their integrity in their  belief life than anyone
else's. 
>  But it does say something about why the  separation of Church and State
is 
> so crucial.  And that separation has been  seriously eroded.
>  
> Julie Krueger
>  
> ========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Arrivederci,
Mr. 
> Bush...  Date: 3/16/05 8:12:54 P.M. Central Standard Time  From: 
> _aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   To:
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) , _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    
> I got around to reading Bill Moyers' article in  the NYRB and it leads me
to
> think that literally half the people in this  country (the evangelicals)
> wouldn't care if there was a nuclear attack.   They would think the
> long-awaited Apocalypse is here and they will finally be  raptured,
sitting
> at the right hand of God.  It's why the environmental  regulations are
> loosening up, for a last fling before the end, predicted to  happen in the
> next 40 years.  In fact, the war in Iraq is in the natural  order of
things
> in preparation for the end of the world.  They are  absolutely, deadly
> serious.
>
> Andy Amago
>
>
>
> > [Original  Message]
> > From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To:  <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: 3/16/2005 2:54:56 PM
> >  Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Arrivederci, Mr. Bush...
> >
> > Paul  wrote:
> >
> > >One of the things that make it SOOO important to keep  nukes out of
these 
> > >maniac's hands is that, as we have seen in the  past 3 1/2 years since
> 9/11, 
> > >there's NO one THING to strike back  at. So... if AQ somehow managed to
> nuke 
> > >a city in the US, what  would they do? I mean what would they REALLY
do? 
> > >Short of nuking  the ENTIRE Middle East and large parts of many other 
> > >countries [you  know, to make sure they get ALL OF THEM], what is
their 
> > >plan? Do  they have one? What IS the strategic position taken in that 
> >  >particular scenario. [my attempt at the political parlance].
> >  >  
> > >
> >
> > I suspect that's part of the reason  behind the idea of making nations 
> > responsible for the terorist groups  that operate with impunity inside 
> > their borders. But I can't see it as  being very effective either.
> >
> > First, if it were a coordinated  nuclear attack and several US targets 
> > were struck, there woudl be  horror and chaos as lack of information.
Who 
> > was behind the attack? It  could take weeks to determine or maybe never 
> > be known.  If  Washington DC were hit, some relatively low-level 
> > functionary could be  left in charge of our retaliation.
> >
> > Plus we might suspect that a  nation DID strike us, using the terror 
> > group as a cover. So we nuke  North  Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran.  Then 
> > what wouudl China do?  What would Russia do?
> >
> > This could spiral into a general nuclear  conflagration so easily. As 
> > soon as we were hit, other countries might  decide this was their last 
> > chance to strike us before we retaliated  against them, whether or not 
> > they were responsible. Then when it was  over, our nuclear submarines 
> > woudl surface, notice the backhground  radiation, and deliver the
nuclear 
> > knockout to everyone who was  left.
> >
> > It rockets the imagination to think how one terror attack  could
snowball 
> > into planet-busting. Precisely why nations with nukes  should decrease, 
> > not increase. Five monkeys with nukes are bad enough,  let alone fifty.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 03-2005