[lit-ideas] Re: Hersh's New Yorker article on. Iran
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 23:34:52 -0700
From: "Eric Yost" <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Oh, I see. When Hersh writes about it, it's okay. When I start a thread about it a week
ago, before this article was posted, everybody has to jump down my throat and attack?
Jeez...you guys.
Because, Eric, you try to play it from both sides. One day, it's "omigod! the darkies are
coming! we gotta nuke'em!" and the next day, it's "me? for war? how could you think that? no
way!"
When Hersh writes about it, he's warning us that the Bush administration is about to start
another insane and irresponsible war. As Julie says, will Congress ask this time for a
post-war plan? Or is it flowers and candies again? The Bushies really think they're going to
come out heros and everyone will come around to their side, incl the pansy liberals and the
weakling Euros. The Russians and Chinese will learn to respect American power. They even
think the Muslims will quietly thank Bush for nuking Iran.
When you write about it, you're telling us that we're chicken if we don't support your wars.
Just two days ago, you thought that I don't believe the USA is at war. Eric, it's just
propaganda from the Bushies to terrorize the evangelicals so the White House can fork
another $100 billion to Halliburton and pals.
Eric, pick a side. Either the Bushies are idiots and want to start another stupid war, or
you support their wars. I don't want to hear your passive agressive "we've gotta nuke'em,
omigod, we're gonna nuke'em". You use that so you can stand on both sides.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
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: