[lit-ideas] Re: Priorities
- From: Andy Amago <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 08:55:12 -0800 (PST)
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Jan 1, 2005 7:58 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Priorities
Gad! We are not in the middle of a major war.
A.A. Before we go any further, I think you'll have to decide whether we're in
a major war or not. In previous posts you claimed that 1,300 casualties is not
a lot for a major war. I can go back and find the posts if you insist, but for
convenience I'll go with Michael Chase's quoting of your words:
Le 1 janv. 05, 03:55, Lawrence Helm a =E9crit :
>
> The war? We've removed Saddam Hussein and his army at the expense =
of a
> casualty rate lower than in any major war in history.
Then, repeating the words in this post, you wrote: Gad! We are not in the
middle of a major war.
A.A. Okay, Laurence, which one is it?
L.H. You won't read about warfare
and so believe the silly things you read in the Left-leaning media.
A.A. Thank God for that Left-leaning media or you would have nothing to
scapegoat.
L.H. The
war, such as it was is over. We are rounding up a few insurgents. 80% of
Iraq not only supports our efforts but is trying to get up to speed so they
can take care of things without us. Of the remaining 20%, i.e., the Sunnis,
only the Baathist remnant, the Saddam diehards are engaged in the
insurgency. They have some support from the Islamists, but how much is
uncertain.
A.A. If it's no big deal, why aren't the Iraqis handling it by now?
L.H. In other parts of the world, EU Leftists wonder if our war against terror
is
a real war because there "are only a few thousand" terrorists in existence
on the planet.
Also, I'm not doing any fighting. Are you? I did at one time rush off to a
war but I'm not personally fighting one at present. You complain about the
war and then imply that you too are sacrificing in some way. Insofar as
anyone listens to you, you are only interfering. The volunteer troops in
Iraq are doing whatever sacrificing is occurring.
A.A. Again I'm going to ask you to make up your mind. In other posts you said
the Leftist Media was getting in the way of supporting the war effort. What
did you mean by that?
L.H. Also, get enough what the first time?
A.A. I thought you knew what you were referrring to when you wrote:
"To paraphrase and reapply Nixon's famous exit line, you're going to have
Bush to kick around for four more years! So I understand that you need to
take your political pleasures where you can find them. In four years, after
Hillary has taken office, it will be our turn :-("
So, answering your question, get enough of kicking Hillary [and Bill] around
the first time.
L.H. A few insults and disjointed
irrelevancies?
A.A. I would say dragging the president of the U.S. through impeachment after a
$40 million investigation that wound up in a dead end is a bit more than a
number of insults and disjointed irrelevancies.
L.H. I complained at the time that you couldn't mount an argument
and you responded with a few more insults and irrelevancies. Yeah, I
suppose you are going to give me some more of those. I can hardly wait.
A.A. Maybe you can't mount an argument because you're not sure what side of
your mouth you're talking out of. First you claim it's not a major war, now it
a major war. First the media are impeding the war effort, now there is no war
effort. Which one is it? The fact remains that Bush is throwing a $40 million
party while our boys and girls are dying in Iraq. There's no point in even
mentioning the hell that we're putting the Iraqis through simply getting their
kids to school without being kidnapped or killed by a car bomb. Great time for
a $40 million party.
Andy Amago
Lawrence Helm
Sgt. USMC
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Andy Amago
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 7:10 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Priorities
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Dec 31, 2004 5:07 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Priorities
To paraphrase and reapply Nixon's famous exit line, you're going to have
Bush to kick around for four more years! So I understand that you need to
take your political pleasures where you can find them. In four years, after
Hillary has taken office, it will be our turn :-(
A.A. Just didn't get enough the first time around. BTW, why do you think
Bush is having a gigantic party while we are in the middle of a major war,
as you say. Where is the shared sacrifice?
Andy Amago
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Robert Paul
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 12:21 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Priorities
On 28 December I wrote:
"So far the United States has donated or pledged, mostly through relief
agencies,
$35 million in aid for those areas devastated by the tsunami."
I then went on to contrast this with the amount to be spent on Bush's
inauguration.
In fairness, I should note, as I'm sure everyone is aware, that today the US
has
pledged $350 million in relief funds. Whether the inauguration committee
will
feel it has to keep up is another matter.
(Sorry, Lawrence, I couldn't resist.)
Robert Paul
The Reed Institute
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
