Re: [microsound] OT - Draft by 2005

[Bill Ashline <ashline@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 22 May 2004 21:58:14 -0700, Rudolph A. Carrera
<fgrecs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  Amazing how the liberals
> of the past are now crowing against the "hawks" of today for doing what they
> desperately wanted to do themselves (again, not directed to you, just a
> general comment).

It's more amazing for me how people who call for war aren't the first
to the front lines holding machine gun.  I'm no hawk, for certain, but
at least I'm not a "chickenhawk."

>         It's not, but your words reek of slander, man.  There is little to
> no proof of your negative comments against the country.  Just going on with
> the tired arguments used by anti-American rabble-rousers.  

I'm anti-US government, Rudy, not anti-American.  Besides, when you're
the biggest superpower in the world and have one of the biggest
arsenals of nuclear weapons at your disposal, it's pretty disingenuous
to whine about being a "victim" of other people's dislike.  Pretty
pathetic actually.  If you want to engage in unilateral aggression,
deal with the multilateral consequences or shut up.  That's my take,
anyway.

> 
>         Look, you have a right, obviously, to say as you feel.  Just respect
> the fact that not everyone is eating the borscht your serving out.

To be frank, Rudy, I could care less.

>  HRW and
> Amnesty International crow about their favorites in jail, and never do much
> to say anything about American victims of terror.  

I can see, Rudy, that you don't bother reading any of their reports. 
Since "states" have the capacity to be pressured into changing, they
focus on the actions of governments rather than extra-statist
organizations to whom they cannot readily appeal.  Spend two minutes
on the websites of either organization, you can see they vigorously
criticize everybody on human rights, and they didn't take positions on
the war in Iraq, by the way, though they do have a strong interest in
international law, contrary to this US administration.

To the best that I can see, having an "accurate" position on the US
for you means having a "favorable" one.  that just means you are as
biased as everyone else you claim to be.  The US is burning up far too
much of its virtuous capital in the world to be whining about such
things--which is why it delayed releasing its very biased and partial
human rights report this year.  At least Amnesty and HRW don't cheer
for the interests of the home team.  At least they try to apply
principles of human rights across the board and not just to enemies
(while ignoring the violations of friends).

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org