Re: Peace and the talk needed to establish it, was Re: Kikusui ORC-27A tubed oscilator mods.



flipper wrote:

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:11:49 GMT, Patrick Turner
<info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



flipper wrote:

On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:44:25 GMT, Patrick Turner
<info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

snip

Defending one's country can be worthwhile.

I'm sure it's a comfort to your fellows that, under 'some
circumstances' you think defending one's country 'can' be worthwhile.

I will never give total allegiance to any country's government including
my own. The rest of Australia might be saddened to hear of my
conditional allegiance, but we live in a democracy and I have the right
to think the way I do and to act accordingly, So when the fuctards in
power in Oz during the 1960s tried to send conscript soldiers to
Vietnam, they were never going to be able to send me. They had a ballot
selection for conscripts in those days, so that if your name was
randomly selected then you had to become a soldier. If your name wasn't
selected, and mine wasn't, then you were not conscripted. Life and death
lotteries and conscription were abolished by a later government. The
history of trying to conscript soldiers for a war has been a bitter
fight between those upholding the rights of people to refuse to enlist
and those wanting to send mainly other people's sons off to a fight for
the "empire", ie, the British fucking empire at the time.

I didn't agree with the need to take part in invading Vietnam.

And 1/2 of Oz thought exactly as I did.

I have NEVER voted for major parties in Oz. Sooner or later they trample
over hunam rights or the environment, and my favourite words to
stoinking politicians is "Goodbye *** face, just leave me alone."

In WW2, it did look like the Japs wanted to invade Oz but in fact there
was little likelyhood of them ever succeeding. Politicianse had no
trouble finding volunteers who thought Oz needed to return Japanese
forces throughout SE asia to Japan, dead or alive.

But since WW2, most big wars we have been expected to attend have been
ones the US got involved in and were inconclusive, ie, the Korean war,
or total fiascos, the Vietnam war. Don't ask me what our special forces
are doing in Afghanistan. I wonder how many civilian pools of blood they
are leaving behind under secret deployments. Anyway, the Taliban are
reacting by increasing their strength and the fight in Ghan looks like
another Vietnam. People like the fucking *** Taliban arsoles have
been ruling places like Afghanistan for centuries if not thousands of
years, and nobody can deal with them unless all the population is "dealt
with" seriously. In the process after the Russians the country has
plummeted into povety, aided by the two timing foriegn policies of the
USA.

The wars in Iraq and Ghan are wars of fortune gathering; to get control
of strategic territory and billions of barrels of underground oil.

No need for Oz people to attend IMHO.

If ya wanna barrel of oil, then pay the man for it, don't try to steal
his country and ruin the lives of millions and leave 100,000 dead people
so you can get it cheaper.

The US only had to leave the sanctions against Saddam in place, keep up
the war of words, and Iraq's leadership would have toppled or died and
the people there would have sorted things out and the US would not have
spent a trillion bucks and lost 4,000 men dead and maybe 12,000 disabled
with ruined lives.

Osama Bin Laden still roams free!


So Oz fought well.

I have nothing but admiration for all the freedom loving Allies who
stepped up to the plate.

It was percieved as being very worthwhile. Worthwhile can mean its not
only profitable in finacial terms, but also in terms of moral
correctness. The Japs tried to steal whole countries, and we had no
problems saying "no you fuckin don't".

We know when talk doesn't work, and deals cannot be struck.

We also
fought in wars that started in europe and asia where Oz was only
indirectly rather than directly threatened. The silly Japs

"Silly" hardly does it justice.

did directly
threaten Oz and they bombed the *** out of Darwin just so we'd get the
message, so thousands of Oz ppl had no qualms about joining the armed
forces. Japan bit off more than they could chew. Many Oz ppl volunteered
to go off in those foreign conflicts because the people of Oz personally
felt obliged to help Britain and America. I have no problem with people
volunteering because in a democratic others may do what I would not,
unless I though I had to.

In a democracy the 'choice' is made by vote and you have no more
'right' to 'ignore' the decision of the majority than you do to ignore
laws against murder.

In this country it is not treasonous at present to be a conscientious
objector to being carted off to a war you don't think is a just war.

Read Australian history about conscription and referendums. People of Oz
are pretty feisty and fussy about where they let themselves to put in
danger. And more so now than ever before. But they can be bought of
course; the wages the special forces boys in Ghan earn are considerable.
There is a huge row going on in the Oz Parliment right now about how the
Army over paid them and now wants the money back.
There's money in war you know. To many its **very** worthwhile; a few
years shootin and lootin the Taliban and you earn enough to pay a house
off real quick.

I won't interfere with what the Govt is doing in Ghan. I leave them
alone, they leave me alone, fair deal eh? I don't much agree with the
Govt, but that's democracy. I am not forced to agree to any damn thing.


In my lifetime of being a possible soldier
between ages 18 and 40 there was only the Vietnam fiasco to which I may
have been sent as a conscript. I would never have volunteered to take
part in such tomfoolery and downright bastardry towards a nation that
had not invaded the US or Oz.

Just exactly which 'nation' are you referring to?

Vietnam.

The US wanted to swing a local Vietnamese civil war in a way that best
suited US expansionist foreign policies that best suited right wing
business interests. The Vietcong northern Vietnamese won the war with
the US and beat the south. They got what they wanted.
A generation later, the Nam war is still taking some time to get over,
but as people I knew all thought in 1965, the Chinese did not invade and
take Vietnam, and Marxist-Leninist Communism didn't spread south to
damage SE asia, and we had nothing to fear from ther "yellow peril" we
were told at school to be afraid of. Robert Menzies went right along
with all the bull*** ideas of Washington, but me and my mates and my
father's generation who'd fought in WW2 saw right through the idiotic
and morally vaccuus plans of the USA in the 1950s and 60s.

Thanks to improvements in modern communications and continuation of
democratic free press, people in the West cannot be fooled so easily
over how the CIA manipulates countries and supports dictators and puppet
regimes and causes coups to suit US businesses.

They still try to fool us though; "weapons of mass destruction,"
etc.....

Can't fool me.


Nations like friends will have a falling out at times, and some will
invade others. *** happens, right.

Speak for yourself. Mass murderers are not my 'friends' so there's
little opportunity for a "falling out."

If you look at the longer term, Oz has spent much more time trading with
Japan rather than fighting her.

So has the U.S., both before and after.

The rulers of Japan did not realise
there was more to be gained by trade rather than war. This became
Japan's path after WW2.

Good thing we took the time to put a democracy in there (and Germany),
eh?

It turned out to be very worthwhile. Once the shooting and bombing
stopped, the energy of all who survived could be spent constructively
and profitably. But we cannot say thankyou to providence or fate because
Hitler or Tojo came to power.

OK, the Japs and Gerries had a huge problem with hyper "non-democracy".
A big fight ensued. But the USA also had a big fight with itself in its
civil war, and the internicine fighting that went on in Europe before
WW1 is a blood stained tale if ever there was one. Homo Sapiens is a
very flawed species, and it takes aeons before a given bunch of people
create rules ppl can agree on without millions of pools of blood.

Much talk in needed to establish the peace, and a lot of bright ideas.

Without both you have anarchy.

It appears China has no desire to invade Oz
soon. China is trying to buy large shares in multinationals digging for
minerals in Oz which are so handy when you make things to export to
foreigners to make a buck. So they figure if they owned the mines they'd
get the minerlas dirt cheap instead of paying through the nose to
western nation multinationals. Just business. No pools of blood and
blown up people.

The story's not over yet.

Agreed, and it won't be over for thousands of years, or hundreds of
thousands of years.

But I doubt what is likely within 10 years will be relevant in the year
100,000. Will anyone remember Christ? will the calendar still be based
upon his birth? I doubt it. Maybe we will be recovering from several
bouts of nuclear wars, only to rise again, fight again and kill again,
and develop again all over and over again. But each time it will be more
difficult because the oil and minerals will be deeper and less easily
got at. Meanwhile the worst nuclear waste will not even be 1/2 way
through its half life.

I could make wild predictions, but they'd be wrong.

Meanwhile the Chinese are intent on buying large share interests of
multinational mining companies operating in Oz. Why invade Oz when you
can buy it so cheap these days?


Obama would do well to have deep and meaningful discussions with the
Taliban, Iran, Hamas, and anyone else who grieves America. This does not
mean he has to roll over and give in to anyone, but jaw-jaw leaves less
carnage of innocent lives than does war-war.

That's so sweet it brings tears to my eyes and if we work really hard
at it we might get lucky like Lord Chamberlain and have "peace in our
time."

Chamberlain looked such a fool stepping off the plane with a bit of
paper flapping in the breeze. Everyone who wasn't a fool knew it. But
you do have to keep talking nevertheless.

One would have thought that Chamberlain's debacle would have put to
bed once and for all the left wing myth that absolutely anything can
be resolved with no-matter-who by simply talking it to death and all
Chamberlain's jaw-jaw accomplished was to make the ensuing war-war
much-much worse-worse than if it had been confronted earlier. That was
*supposed* to be one of the lessons learned when the world declared to
"never again let this happen."

Its not bad to keep talking. The left fights for what it wants, usually
parity with the rich whose sons find a way of not having to fight. The
left to me are an embittered lot, jealous of other's success, but
without the left there'd have been only the right, and many people's
rights would have been trampled on much worse. We have what's called a
"mixed economy" where there are government run services and private
enterprize, and the taxpayer funded government owned acticities such as
hosptals abs schools and old age pension schemes and all the huge social
security handout systems are a result of left thinking. Right thinking
leaves anyone to rot if things are not ideal for them.

Both left and right are needed it seems.

Trade unions were always seen as left wing oriented organisations, and
right wing Govt's have tried to exterminate them. Oz voted last year for
a Labour Party which tore up the previous right wing Liberal Govt
planned legislation called Work Choices, which included much restriction
of worker's basic rights.

We believe in a fair go in Oz. And not just for the bosses.

Some things don't look easy to resolve. But they did resolve the
intractable bothers with Northern Ireland.

Typical left wing babble. No, they didn't *just* 'resolve it' any more
than we resolved WWII by 'talking'. They 'resolved' it only after
decades of fighting.

Yeah, because people would not talk.

Certainly nothing resembling a World War but they didn't "we have a
problem... oh?.... well, let's talk about it.... jaw-jaw... cool,
problem solved."

So it is with the Palestinians. No matter how many times Israel bombs
and kills 100 Paloes when one of its own are killed,

I hate to burst your bubble but in a 'war' the goal is not a 1-1 kill
ratio.

That's one big problem with war. When we bomb Berlin, they bomb London.
One city for another, and it all escalates out of control when one side
plans to take out a dozen cities.

I doubt I will ever again see any country such as the US taking out
entire cities one by one in a systematic manner to ensure total
humiliation and capitulation. OK, In Japan WW2 was won this way, and it
"saved 200,000 allied soldier's lives".
Methinks a naval blockade for 5 years may have been far cheaper and
easier and burned far fewer innocents alive.
So what if Japan may have become like North Korea. Their problem for not
talking. Far less human prosperity as a result of Japan not having
prospered after WW2 would have made resources of the world last longer.

How come the US didn't successfully invade Cuba? To me the rot of modern
weakness had set in. But then Cubans had big friends in Russia, and so
it was agreed to just limit Cuba's abilities. Its worked. Rulers in the
US, Kennedy for one had a few conversations on the phone to the people
in the Kremlin and an arrangement was worked out and the russian
missiles went back to russia. Meanwhile, Russia coudldn't get the US to
remove the missiles based in Europe back to the US. Much more talking
needs to be done to reduce the nuclear weapons still pointed at each
other. People of Cuba live miserable lives materially, and Castro's
secret police are alive and well, and pity help you if you don't join
the "Party" and perform Party activities unpaid.
If the Cubans all decided enough was enough, they'd all just lay down
tools for months, and the cries of "Viva La Revolution" would soon die
away. Those people running the regime would then have to get a real job.
But its always been difficult for the south americans and cubans to get
rid of their dictators easily, and some even voted in Chavez to be able
to stay in power indefinatly. Gee, I'd never vote yes to someone wanting
extend parlimentary terms from the 3 years we have here between
elections. I'd like elections once a year, with 6 options yes or no
about specific policies.

Maybe in another 50 years people in Cuba will wake up a bit, but it
should be their business, and not the business of the US to fabricate
the future of Cuba. Cuba before Communism for the cubans wasn't a nice
place. Its why a revolution happened. The US has been sore ever since.
The US should wake up. Time to bury the hatchet, because how can today's
Cuban young generation be responsible for the actions of their grand
parents?


and no matter how
many wars its won against Arab nations in the past, the Palestinians
still won't give their land rights away. Peace will come there when
Israel gives back land it stole so that the refugees can come back home.
Its that simple.

It's "that simple" to the ignorant and simple minded.

For one, that region was part of the Ottoman Empire and the
Palestinians *never* had a 'country'. To make matters worse it's not
clear any of them ever had any 'land' because the Ottoman Empire
didn't work that way. Most, with the exception of what, in the 'West',
could be called 'nobles', were essentially serfs or tenant farmers.

Yeah, well talk to the old people in Palo refugee camps still clutching
their keys to houses on land they were pushed off.

People in the ME think there's nothing to lose by continuing the fight.
They had something, and then along came Jews and it was taken.



The Jews, however, did own their land (the original late 1800s Zionist
movement with the blessing of the Ottoman Empire).

Having set the stage, WWI saw the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and
England got (among others) the 'Palestine Mandate."

Now it gets fun as the intent and 'deal' offered was to make a country
run by the Palestinians with only one 'requirement', that a modest
number of Jews be allowed to emigrate for a limited period of time.

But, as someone once said, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity
to miss an opportunity so they refused and the perennial 'two state
solution' was born never to be resolved to this day.

Not enough talking.

And most certainly not enough listening.



The League of Nations could never solve it, not that they ever solved
anything (because all they could do is TALK), and England was tired of
decades of conflict with WWII being the final straw. England had had
enough and declared they were 'leaving', good riddance, and the newly
formed U.N. offered another 'two state solution' that the Palestinians
promptly rejected, as they had every solution.

Wars in the ME have been going on since Adam and Eve in the Garden,
somewhere in Iraq well before it has become the most wasted agriculural
place in the world from over use and war after war after war and usually
over land.

The Jews, however, had also had enough, Hitler and all, and decided to
take the deal figuring that waiting for the Palestinians to ever
decide on anything would be another thousand years.

Now, the newly formed Jewish State asked the Arab population to stay.
It was the 'Arab League' armies that told them to leave, which they
gladly did, because the 'plan' was for the Arab Armies to roll over
the region 'exterminating' the Jewish infestation. Would be easier,
you see, if they could just kill everything in sight.

Needless to say, things did not go as the Arab armies had planned.

That's the other problem with war; it rarely goes to plan. Iraq just
cost the US about a trillion or two, and was supposed to cost 5 billion
max, have democracy installed within 6 mths, and McDonalds in every new
Iraqi shopping mall and there should now have been 5 billion spent by US
owned oil companies building oil extraction infrastructure and oil
prices should have become **real low** and everyone should have been so
happy. Nothing like this dream has occurred. Not enough talk, not enough
listening, and certainly not enough understanding of local conditions
and peoples has occurred in stupid neo-con minds in the US.

In the fullness of time Jewish presence in Israel may well be squashed.
The fight over ME land has been going on for many centuries. Look at the
effects of the Crusades and the Arab response over time. Many many pools
of blood across the landscape. Iran might be silly enough to nuke
Israel, should be easy because its so compact, and then what? Maybe Iran
loses a few cities by means of jewish retaliation but the jews are all
fried. I don't like to think about the consequences after that. Its a
New Time for the ME when Arab states get their Bomb, and develop rockets
to deliver them accurately. The Paloes will continue to suffer and be a
general pest whatever happens. I don't like how Hamas operates but I
sure can see why there are so many angry young men in the ME. They see a
jew roll by in a fancy car, and they have no job and all they can think
about is hate and picking up a rock and throwing at the jew. The jews
built a huge 10Metre high wall to stop the suicide bombers. OK, so the
bombs just come by air these days. When they begin to come via space,
and are much bigger and better guided, watch out, because there's a real
problem. If the jews bomb the Iranian nuke making plants then it will
only delay the response of arabs and the iranians. Iran has so many
people, and making bombs is easy now and the plants are probably now so
widely dispersed that it may be difficult to stop Iranian plans. It sure
will be next time if they are stopped soon. But the Iranians are not
likely to give up if the jews tried anything.



There should be discussions about it.

You tell me what the 'discussion' is about when the other side starts
with the 'non negotiable' condition that your country and people must
cease to exist.

Well, you ask them into dinner, and be polite. Sooner or later those
present think its better to lay down the sword and shield and relax and
eat.

What do I do in the presence of a vast number of people who think
building amps with vaccum tubes is a waste of energy and a toxic
activity in greehouse terms.

I ask them to listen to music. OK, then they sometimes stop their silly
nonsense, and allow me to persue a craft that is 0.01% of mainstream
activity which is all worse than what I do.

However, that problem has been 'jaw-jawed' to death and it's still
there.

The typical 'negotiation' is Hammas is happy to talk you to death
while they simultaneously blow you up and "cease fire" is Hammas
terminology for "a pause while we import more weapons."

OK, so the jews should by now have closed **all** the tunnels feeding
the Gaza, but we are told only 30% got hit in the last shootout which
gained Israel a terrible retutation for being a prime bully.

Israel lost IMHO because Hamas and all the other angry young men are
still there and all ever more so determined to fight on.

Israel's behaviour is not pure as the driven snow.


People in the ME will fight for centuries to get back what they think is
theirs.

So much for your 'jaw-jaw' theory, then.

Wars ebb and flow, and there has to be jaw-jaw eventually....

I can't help but mention Iraq.

You can't help but mention whatever pops into your head whether it's
relevant or not.

But Iraq didn't threaten the US now did
it?

Yes, it did, as well as the region and the world.

I think those ideas are all bull***. Neo-con bull***. Used to justify
anything imaginable, like stealing Iraq and its oil. In 2003, Iraq was
creaking along slowly and rather painfully after having its wings
clipped severely in 1991, after Kuwait. The sanctions imposed by the
West meant Saddam battled to stay in power, and that 500,000 unnecessary
deaths of children in Iraqi hospitals occurred because they could not
get western medical aid. The Iraq ally of the US in the 1980s had become
too big for its boots, and instead of receiving US support, it now had
to be controlled. Bush Senior sensibly stopped short of invading Iraq in
'91 because he knew the difficulties, but his stupid son thought it'd be
a doddle.



So what right did the US have in invading it and causing hundreds of
thousands of casulaties and forcing millions to pack up and leave the
country?

The right of self defense, and the fact that Iraq violated the 'cease
fire' from day 1, and for over 10 years, including over a dozen
*mandatory* Security Council resolutions.

Total Bull***. Had the US been in a similar position as Iraq from some
foreign power, it would have misbehaved the same way.

Lemme tellya, it was the US with all the weapons of mass destruction.
Not Iraq.

Iraq in 2003 couldn't hurt a fly, let alone any of its neighbouring
countries.

But Iraq just had a shirt and trouser load of oil under its dirt, and
the US wanted it. So the US invents a whole stack of lies to justify a
small effort to go and get the oil. Not so easy though.



And that's ignoring the fact he was a mass murdering dictator who'd
already started 2 wars.

Pales into insignificance at what has happened since 2003.

Saddam was Iraq's terrible dictator, sure, and propped up by the US in
the 80s. And history shows there has always been a "Bull in Bagdad" ie,
some *** who deals out death to many around him. Its been going on for
at least 8,000 years.

If the Iraqui people really wanted something different then they could
have arranged it for themselves.

Did you notice what Ghandi achieved in India? And how did he do it?

Not everyone works out a future for themselves peacefully; maybe the ME
people will spend another 10,000 years trying. How about we leave them
to it?

Influential countries like the USA will come and go many times in a
10,000 year period. But what looks certain is that by 10,000 years the
ME will be entirely devoid of any oil, and within maybe a hundred years.
Expect many depressed ex oil shieks driving potholed roads in rusty
mercedes benz pulled along with a camel or two.



One might think Iran would actually be a bit pleased we eliminated the
*** but, then, they didn't get to conquer the place this way.

Talking wasn't going to work very well with Saddam,

No ***, Sherlock. What gave it away? 10 years of 'talk'?

but you have to keep
at it when dealing with a rotter who's up against the wall,

So said Lord Chamberlain.

Rhetorical question: How many times does a dictator have to shove a
rod up your ass before you notice it's there?

I never said we should stop shooting to defend ourselves **while** we
continue to talk. Sometimes there **is no** other alternative.

Much has been achieved with talk, and listening, and exchange of ideas.
Usually its the elders of the tribe who do this because their arthritis
prevents then running around with spears and bows and arrows screaming
abuse at each other and raping each others wives and burning each
other's children.

As Elders its Our Duty to bring law and peace. We must keep at it.

and after
1991 they had Saddam "contained"

You're good at regurgitating canned talking points.

"Contained" how? And 'what' was "contained?"

Well, since he copped a bashing from Coalition forces in '91, he didn't
menace too many other nations. The exception was the Kurds, upon whom
Saddam used poison gas. Anything to gain an edge. The stupid ***
Saddam should have asked the kurds to dinner and won them around, but
the kurds are a people who'd like to have their own nation and everyone
hates them. Turkey sure hates them. There is a price for perpetual hate.
Saddam fitted the Bagdad mould of Big Chief Bull of Bagdad. The whole
region is a mass of seething uneducated angry poor tribes who disagree
about nearly everything, and to get to be in power in Bagdad means you
have to be an utter ***, and keep your revolver barrel hot, and the
torture chambers well sound proofed.

Rhetorical, again, actually, because the reason Iraq came to a head
when it did is because the sanction regime was falling apart. Both
France and Russia were 100% for ending them entirely, along with all
U.N. 'mandates', as they had oil contracts signed, in hand, that could
only be executed on their lifting. And the U.N. Secretary General had
announced that there was no chance the inspection regime would ever be
reconstituted so the U.N. was formally declaring they would no longer
even try.

There wasn't anything the weapons inspectors could find.

The US was merely nervous that Iraq would slip into euro or russian
hands. All that oil going to the wrong people.

Hence the invasion. Better get it before the others do.

and he did NOT have any weapons of mass
destruction;

Irrelevant as having 'stockpiles' was never 'the reason' nor was
simply not having 'stockpiles' the condition of cease fire.

Bull***.

He retained the expertise, programs, and capability to replenish WMD
within months of removing sanctions, which was imminent, and had
already demonstrated, more than once, what he enjoyed doing with them,
both at home and abroad.

More Bull***.

Nearly every country has expertise, and programs for self defense that
could be used for aggression.


The above is quite enough but, at the same time, Al Qaeda was then
'homeless' and both (and both Sunni) had declared they were "at war"
with the United States. It was simply unacceptable that the two "at
war" belligerents might link up, with one already having WMD
capability.

The Sheite rose against Saddam with US backing. The US abandoned them
and Saddam liquidated a whole bunch more.

This crap about Al Qaeda was bull*** because Saddam had nothing to gain
with their presence in Iraq.

But look, Bush saw 'Q' in Qaeda and 'Q' in Iraq, so he reckoned there
was a connection, so shooting it out with Saddam's feeble army seemed
justified for revenge against Arab towelheads who'd dared to bomb the US
soft underbelly of the twin towers. The connection was just yet another
reason to go in for the oil.

If Iraq had vast crops of say brocoli instead of hidden oceans of oil
under its sand then there was no way the US would have bothered with a
hot sweaty dirty smelly dictator of a minor ME country.



The world is better off without him and the only hope for the Middle
East is the same hope that saved western Europe from war after war:
democracies instead of ego maniacal dictators with delusions of
grandeur.

I fear a very fragile democracy in the ME once US troops leave by August
next year. The disgruntled Sunnis are sore losers, and may take up arms
again to regain power over the majority of Shiites yet again. Maybe they
are biding their time, now they see that the US is finally having to
pull out.



the yanks were the ones with all those.

Damn right, and it's what kept you from having to learn Japanese,
Russian, or Arabic... so far.

But we are entering a new world order, and the old imaginings you state
are no longer likely to occur. Australia has a Prime Minister who speaks
fluent mandarin so he can face the Chinese Giant and look them in the
eyes and talk with them.

I doubt the Chinese would ever want us all to talk Chinese. No need to
force that on us. Meanwhile if the deals and take overs of western owned
companies by Chinese continues, what people's lives will be like will be
determined in board rooms in Bejing instead of New York. The rulers of
China will be happy to let Australians think they have a country but be
happy to have indirect control over it. Australians are a soft fat
population now like the US and will probably allow the Chinese take
overs. It used to be "what's good for General Motors is good for you"
but that will change to "what's good for China is good for you". Its all
being done with peacefull talk and listenings. Vast numbers of Chinese
students pay to study at universities in Australia, and to kick them out
would be seen as terribly racist and plain wrong. We are determined to
educate them in western techniques of running businesses with skills.
During the process and despite the students fervent Chines nationalist
stance and their cocky pride in their country, they will notice our
reservedness and the brightest of them will see how rampant
nationalistic fever can lead to Nationalism, like it was in Germany in
1933 when the idea that Germans were a superior race etc, and that
everyone needs to be aware that Nationalism is a danger to any nation if
its out of control. In Canberra when the Olympic torch was briefly run
through our city, the Tibetans used the opportunity to wage a rally to
their cause and the Chinese students came from larger cities of
Melbourne and Sydney in hundreds all bussed in to counter the Tibetans.
Those Chines earned the label "fucking red coat bullies" for sure during
that time. Not all Chinese are bullies. And just who would get to study
in Oz from China? Probably unless you had Party connections in China,
you'd never be allowed out of China. The CCP will eventually crumble
under its own weight but just what replaces it remains to be seen. We
hope Chinese graduates from our universities where mainly western
professors teach then with words so fervantly might be helping China to
better democracy in the longer term.

The education we give the Chinese students of impressionable age is the
talk needed to establish peace, IMHO.

Its very worthwhile too because those students pay well to attend our
unies.



Meanwhile the death
toll from US traffic accidents and gun shootings is far higher than that
caused by terrorists.

Which is utterly irrelevant because cars don't declare war.

Oh yes they do, when brakes decide not to work, or an engine seizes.

And look at the vanity the motor car inspires. I cannot think of
anything that causes so much money to be wasted as the motot car, apart
from the national defense budget to avoid having to talk to wayward
nations.

The motor car attacks our purse severely, and when a relative dies in
one we are greatly thankful it wasn't us, and if it was our dad we mourn
him as if he'd been killed at a war. Industrial accidents are an attack
as well.

Attacks by cars and industry and chemical pollution in these wars
continue. It is within our power to prevent such colateral, but it seems
the majority of people realise the cost of changes to minimize troop
losses on the nation's roads and in the nation's factories isn't
worthwhile because to get a ten fold cut in losses you'd increase travel
time and costs and reduce productivity by far too much for people to
tolerate.




So when much of the world views the the US with
telescopes, they shudder over what they see with many inconsistencies
and contradictions; the US looks like a crazy place they **don't** want
to emulate.

We can only hope the rest of the world isn't as moronic as that babble
and can tell the difference between an automobile and a mass murdering
dictator who likes to lob chemical weapons on his own people.

The US tolerates an enormous unnecessary death toll within its own
boders.
Everyone gets away with being a little dictator in the US if they want.

You seem to me to be brainswashed by neo cons and all those American
Supremicists who see the US as the only country in the world with any
sense of national right and wrong, and that the US might is always
right.

Where is your humility we could respect?

Or the
difference between automobiles and 'islamo-fascists' who think
'political expression', or simply because they're wearing the wrong
color shoes, is blowing up your mamma and baby sister in a grocery
store. Which would be bad enough without them also thinking it's
'Allah's will' they rule the world so they can kill all the rest who
wear the wrong color shoes.

I didn't say the towel head fanaticist suicide bombers were good people.
To me those who live by the sword can die by the sword without us
mourning them. We should remember them, because fanatics tend to spring
up like mushrooms. Usually fnatics become a pest where they have had a
lousy rotten childhood and no prospects of gainful and cherful
employment.

The more they get educated, the more likely they won't become zombies
with bombs.

Education is talk and more talk.


So I won't be volunteering to go to fight for the US cause in
Afghanistan. Meanwhile the Taliban are strengthening in Pakistan and the
*** fight will extend further.

Be my guest and go try some 'jaw-jaw' with them. Just be sure to have
your dead on a zipper so you can reattach it later.

And when they fight a war these days they declare is a war against
"terrorism", ie, anyone who thinks differently to the US.

Are you really that stupid, or just pretending?

But yes, flying airliners loaded with innocent civilians into
skyscrapers full of thousands more innocent civilians is by people who
"thinks differently to the US," as well as ANY civilized people

And while we're at it, the idea that "one man's terrorist is another
man's freedom fighter" is left wing false equivalency BULL ***.

Well, once those who fought the British to establish the USA were
terrorists from the British point of view.



They don't
make a formal declaration of war and demand the nominated enemy swear
unconditional surrender.

A "formal declaration of war" is between countries and if you'll
simply point me to the 'country of Al Qaeda' I'll gladly have them
stick it on the document, just to make you happy.

But "ha, ha, I'm not a country so you can't shoot at me while I murder
your people wherever and whenever I can" ain't gonna fly. pal, and
it's just too bad if that 'confuses' you.

Just what is the mission plan of the US?

To eliminate their ability to wage war on our people and allies.

It'll be a permanent activity then.

But much injustice is done in this war's aims.

The fate of about 30,000 locked up and dealt with without trials in
secret locations around the world just breeds more discontent and more
enemies of the US.

That Guantamano Bay jail is just the tip of the ice burg. The US people
should know just who is being held and why.



nobody
really knows

Speak for yourself.

but seems to me its all about oil and how to get it cheap.

Ignorance leads to ridiculous myths but it takes left wing lunacy to
get the really stupid ones like that.

Sure, oil had nothing to do with the war in Iraq. This is bull***.
Without ther oil there would have been no war.

At least the Japs knew what to say when they finally saw the light of
two atomic bombs.

They damn near didn't. Fortunately, the military coup failed.

"Ah so, we surrender completely". People move on after
the right words are spoken for the occasion.

The islamo-fascist leaders could do the same thing.

They don't do this much in the ME. They just choose to fight another
day. Have a few sons, brainwash them up a bit, and let 'em rip.
They keep wanting what they want.

People have lotsa troubles with what they want.

People need to realise, be afraid if you get what you want.

I happen to think there are more naturally unhappy people in the ME.

Wouldn't you be too if each day it was 50C outside and you were dirt
poor without any uplifiting prospects to look forward to?



Oz has a special forces contingent in Ghan and lord only knows how many
inocent ppl are dying in pools of blood from their secret activities to
thwart the Taliban.

It's the Taliban who blows up innocent civilians, dufuss.

Yeah, then we go in and blow up Taliban, and goodness how many people
get caught in cross fire.



The Russians lost 15,000 men in Ghan.

They were trying to conquer it.

Methinks the US will have to as well or they will fail. Conquering takes
blood. Maybe more than Iraq.

And maybe the whole place slides back into backwardness when troops
leave after being forced out after the cost goes skyward and people in
the US realise its yet another hopeless cause.

OK, so the US prevails in Ghan. Then what. Where is the prize? a passage
for an oil pipe across Ghan to get oil out? that was one mission plan
the US had. Methinks there isn't much in Ghan worth anything really,
except some wonderful potential of some wonderful people there and
unfortuantely there seems to be a difficult large minority of not so
wonderfuls that spoil it for their betters. The US will have to shoot a
shirt and trouserload of people in Ghan. They shoot back. If that isn't
conquering, what is it?
Conquering didn't work out in Korea real well or in Vietnam.

I hope I ain't wrong, but why don't you write out a list of wars and
skirmishes the US has found itself in and beside each fight give a tick
for a clear win and a cross for a clear loss and a nought for a
stalemate. Its an interesting exercize.

Lotsa crosses and noughts on that list I reckon.



The US then
supported the Taliban who finally prevailed.

No, we did not support "the Taliban." We supported Afghanistan.

The US supplied arms to mujuhaddeeen to fight russians. Those helped by
the US were often the same folks now called Taliban. They got rid of the
ruskies and went on to take over the whole Ghan, then Osama got with
them and because the whole country was so utterly ravaged by wars only
hardened Taliban could become a real power, and anyway, Americas friends
became its enemies; oh how circumstances change. Repressive
fundementalist muslims have lorded over Ghan for centuries. Its only now
the US picks the fight.

Nor did we 'pick' who was in the fight.

Well, you have a fight now.

The 'mistake' we made belies your left wing lunacy in that we 'left
them alone to their own country' after the invader withdrew. 'Self
determination' and all that 'nobility.

Bastardry. Then the Taliban
got a bit naughty and became a menace what with 911 and Osama BL, ( who
still roams free ), and then the US has been taking revenge ever since
and trying to have a "new world order" that favours the US and few
others.

Oh sure, you'd be 'favored' with a severed head.

What's really pathetic is you're just the kind of person the
islamo-fascists consider an unredeemable pestilence.

You have me so wrong. Should local fundo muslims become a problem here I
won't cry a tear if people see fit to burn mosques to the ground but its
never happened. We simply persue them in the courts and jail planners of
terror and thus we do not stoop to being on the same level as they are.
Such fairly tried and jailed people remain alive as a reminder to others
about what happens if your'e a naughty muslim.

We could be attacked at any minute. We sure were in Bali.

Sharks attack more Oz folks each year at beaches than do terrorists.

I went to Bali in '81 for a 1 month holiday and was impressed by seeing
many poor but happy people.
Bali has a blood drenched history. In witnessing the Balinese way of
life I saw how vain my own was. But I never want to return there.

People attack other people here as they do in the US. There's more
people living in terror of their ordinary neighbours than in terror of
the few moslem die hards.




Not all the folks who Rome conquered liked being attached to Rome and
having to pay taxes to Rome.

Irrelevant babble.

That's what the Romans said. By 400AD, they became a spent force, and
Rome was sacked, and thus began the "Dark Ages".

Some folks enjoyed being part of Rome, and
lived on to develop nations that out did Rome.

After a thousand years of dark ages misery, not that it has a damn
thing to so with current events.

History is relevant because it teaches us what is likely now.

Americans should study history much more deeply than they do.

Things got complicated.
But not many in the ME want to see the US have a control that they see
is unfair.

Those poor Iraqis, left with a constitutional democracy instead of
being gassed by their own dictator.

The war brought to them by the US has displaced 2 million+ as refugees
living outside Iraq and caused maybe 100,000 deaths and it makes Saddam
look saintly by comparison of numbers. I know, you have God on your
side, and you meant well, you tried, and they wouldn't listen, and they
shot and bombed you back with 6 years of guerila war, you were never
appreciated for all the good you meant to bring. Algeria freed itself of
France and French soldiers, the Egyptians and Indians got rid of
British, so too the US will have to leave the ME. I do recall the Japs
didn't like the presence of the pushy US before 1900, and the Chinese
eventually forced the British into accepting a 99 year lease on Hong
Kong. 99 years later when the lease was up fro renewal, guess what
happened, no renewal.

But then a funny change due to lotsa jaw-jaw about all contentious
matters in China was underway after some old red communist bugger said
"To Become Rich Is Glorious", and then thousands proceeded to do so now
that it was allowable. Then after much jaw jaw they worked out how to
avoid huge pools of blood and allowed the operation of HK much the same
after the lease the Poms had run out.

There was only one hiccup when tank drivers were commanded to run right
over students demonstrating for democracy in Tianmin Square.
Some old fuddy duddy guys in central control of the Party made a silly
mistake as is the case of sour old buggers. But in China family is
everything, and for children to rebel it is scandalous, and very wrong,
and these naughty children need to be taught a lesson, so tanks drove
over them. before morning most bodies were cleaned away, and it looked
like nothing shameful had happened. Well, big deal. Big country, 1
billion + people, and *** is always going on somewhere. Look at the
riots in the US in the 60s, and how they shot Martin Luther King, and
Kennedy. Every country has its dirty washing.

So don't try to convince me otherwise.


Iran is determined to ensure what happened in Iraq cannot happen to
itself

Well, you're right about one thing. The islamo-fascists in Iran sure
don't want a democracy there.

Democracy tends to evolve spontaneously when the time is right. And it
can happen after years of local wars. It depends largely on educational
standards and prosperity, or a large prospect of prosperity as was the
case of East Germany.

hence their need to build obscene atomic weapons and the means of
delivery with accuracy.

Hitler couldn't have said it better.

Its put up or shut up time for the US and Israel. Either they bomb ***
out of Iran now or let it become a nuclear power.

Or they try to make peace deals.

The US doesn't have the controls it would like to stop the Hitlers of
the world springing up like mushrooms.

The world has never been free of rogues.

We jaw-jaw, maybe war-war, and muddle on. Let's hope it doesn't become
too radioactive while we proceed. If we suffer nuclear war in our
lifetimes, our lives may be shortened. If greenhouse becomes far worse
faster than thought, ditto, and expect more wars over food.
Under such prospects then expect people of child bearing years to become
mightily peeved, and depressed, and not want to breed. And maybe such
pissed off people withdraw dangerously within themselves and maybe cause
a good decent nuclear war world wide. Look that the way 1/3 the
bushfires in Oz were lit deliberately. How could anyone do that? Because
there is evil in many people right around us.

This is reality.



Of course, it wouldn't have been a problem, either way, if Hitler
hadn't wanted to conquer Europe, and then the rest, and there wouldn't
be a problem with Iran either if they weren't ruled by islamo-fascist
nut cases funding and sending terrorists all over the world .

Why is it that the US insists it has the right
to be a super power and have weapons and armies

Hitler, Tojo, Stalin, to name a few.

and object to Iran who
merely wants to defend itself?

You are a fool.

Hell, you don't even have the right propaganda. Iran says they aren't
building one. Hardy har har.

With A-bombs and good rockets Iran will
at least deter the US from attacking it, just like the US couldn't
attack Russia or China or India and expect to get away with it like they
are doing with Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's very easy to get along with the U.S.. Just don't MURDER people or
try to take over the world. Hell, you can even get away with a fair
number of murders, as long as you keep it in your own country.

Well, that's exactly what most people think in the US as they shoot each
other. Nobody likes having to shoot ppl but they do like to solve
problems that way in the US.

And of course one mustn't try to take over the world, but that's what US
big business has been trying to do for years and years. Its only
business. Peacefull mostly, just gimme this and that and here's some
doolars. Why hassle with bullets when you can buy your way to world
domination? Seen those big joint ventures in asia where teeming hordes
of slaves make clothes and things they can't afford themselves?
No need to shoot a single soul. The US gets things done in asia at $2
per day. It costs $25 per hour to have the same thing done in the US.
Where is the social justice in this? Who sponsors such happy pleasant
slavery? The US and the rest of the West.


I see rather a big need of talk around the world. I suggest the
thoughtful people in the US won't be choosing you to negotiate with
those the US hates, but who the US should be talking to.

Another moronic left wing myth, that the U.S. wasn't 'talking' to
Iran, Hammas, or anyone else in your fantasy list. It's been nothing
BUT talk talk talk talk with Iran.

Yeah, but the US always talks the US talk and you get spotted. Despite
all the talk in the world, that fool in Iran, Mr Afterdinnerjab says
he'd like to see Israel back in Arab hands, and its naughty talk. Under
the Shah a vast number of Iranians were very unhappy, and the Shah kind
of set a bad example, so liberalization and democracy stalled and power
fell into theocratic rule by Ayotolla Kohmeni. People of Iran went right
along with that idea. Maybe a million men died fighting Iraq under the
mullahs. Not very nice, but it was the Iranian way at that time. ( No
worse than a million americans dying in a civil war. Bad, sure. ) Not
much anyone could have done in the Iran-Iraq war except that the US gave
assistance to both sides in that war to make sure both countries were
weakened. The ideal outcome for the US woud have been if all angry
young men in the ME had shot and killed each other at the same time.
The US forgot the fervant nature of the women who did no fighting. They
continued to breed like rabbits and a whole new lot of potential
soldiers now replace all those who fell or were maimed. They are not a
happy lot and want things. People are such a damn bother; they sn sooner
grow up and they start wanting things, and the Iranians don't want much
of what the US has to offer. Some would of course, and I'd be rich if I
had a dollar for every Iranian who watches a clandestine porno movie
made in Hollywood. I believe while they may well have a taste for US
decadence, they'd be appaled to have US people live next door.

I hope the new US president presides over new dialogue with Iran.

But Mrs Clinton is such an old windbag doncha think?

I could mention Cuba. Isn't it time to bury the hatchet?

Give our blessing to a dictator who puts people like you in jail?

My sister went their for a holiday.

Not as bad as many other places.


Typical. Left wing loons love to criticize the U.S. for, in the past,
'dealing with dictators' and then the next word out of their mouth is
"why don't you deal with this dictator?"

Well there isn't consistency in US foreign policy and its
implementation.

Its an impossible situation while many US ppl want to prop up a rotten
regime usually for their financial gain while right minded people want
the regime terminated. Then with regimes change in the US or in
countries concerned the talk and dealing rules all change. Nobody knows
where they are.

Occasionally people get shot.

Here's the real world fact of it. Sometimes it is necessary to 'deal
with a dictator', like Stalin in WWII, but there's no compelling
reason to sprinkle love dust over Castro.

Cubans chose Castro. They didn't resist the change from the rulers
before Castro. Of course many dictators get all too cosy with the power
they bring to themselves while denying anyone else to have power. Just
look where Zimbabwe is right now. A complete fuckin mess, and why
someone hasn't managed a well aimed shot at Mugabe is a mystery. Now
there's an old man who won't listen when spoken to.

Mugabe makes Castro look like a saint.

I'd never holiday in Cuba.

I'm not left wing enough to be fooled by the left.

The Communist Party of Australia never ever quite had a very successful
following in Oz. During my apprenticeship as a carpenter I met an old
carpenter who thought Mao was doing a real fine job in China. We now
know different, but I doubted the old guy's bull*** back then.
Firm believing commos in Oz before WW2 imagined Oz as a kind of future
worker's utopia, and some visted Russia to see how things were working
out after 20 years post the October revolution. Some were plainly not
impressed at all by what they saw, or were allowed to see.
Long haired student Commos at the Sydney uni tried to send funds to help
the Vietcong win. These were big fuckin educated idiots.
They were helping to get Oz soldiers shot sooner. Some commos were real
good, and shared and cared well for other folks.
I got educated by a mob of communists known otherwise as the Christian
Brothers. They taught me a lot of natural right and wrong.

I disagreed with the Vietnam war and wouldn't have gone if I'd been
conscripted. I remain a non left person, but also a non right person.

Nobody can convince me to go along with them in some crazy scheme that
leads to uneccessary pools of blood.

I don't fill in social surveys, and I like to let them keep guessing.

Patrick Turner.
.

Loading