Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal JDWTopGuy's Journal: On terrorists, continued... 9

Journal by JDWTopGuy

I have been reading your replies to "On terrorists", but I have been busy lately, and not in the mood to argue about it.

First, a final note on Maher Arar: if he was offered first to Canada, and they turned him down, the canadians should be to blame. We tried.

Shakrai gave a perfect example of why I don't give much weight to the arguments of flaming anti-Bushies. He ended one of his comments with, "God I fucking hate neo-cons and all that they stand for." I resent being called a "neo-con". Frankly, I think the term was invented to sound like "neo-nazi". I'm just a plain conservative. You could at least avoid saying you hate people because of what they think, if you want to appear to be a reasonable human being.

I reject the premise that the US is "occupying" Iraq. We already have a date (a close date!) for moving control to an Iraqi government. I also reject the premise that the majority of Iraqis want us out "now, now, do it now!".

I suggest you read the book "Legacy", which is about Bill Clinton's eight years in office. Part of this will address the issue that Shakrai raised, about getting terrorists with law enforcement. To very briefly summarize, anything baring any resemblence to "racial profiling" would not have been permitted.

Part of the reason liberals and moderates hate or are afraid of Bush is that after eight years of a guy who was afraid to do any military action of any consequence, we now have a president who is not afraid to defend us and attack our enemies. Furthermore, GWB is not afraid to do what he thinks is right, even if it is not good for him politically.

My opinion remains the same: there were a lot of bad things which shouldn't have happened, but I think it will be dealt with.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

On terrorists, continued... More

On terrorists, continued...

Comments Filter:

  • A final note on Maher Arar: if he was offered first to Canada, and they turned him down, the canadians should be to blame. We tried.

    You guys have a name for the process of sending a prisoner to a foreign country that routinely tortures prisoners, for them to conduct the interrogations for you. You call it " rendering ". And the prisoners are called " renditions ". This procedure is, arguably, a violation of your own laws. And it is also, clearly, routine .

    Routine? Your government does this so of

  • Short version: I am inviting you to get classified by an online quiz. [lewrockwell.com]

    We have been discussing this whole Iraqi mess on a local mailing list I am on. A few of my compatriots have defended some of the US actions. One guy has defended most of them.

    Tempers have gotten heated. He has been called a "neo-con". Which he resents.

    I don't agree with him. But I have stood up for him. There have been a number of points he advanced, which sounded wrong to me, but when I followed the links he provided, he a

  • So, is it a mistake to call someone a "neo-con", unless they feel that label applies to them? I think it is, in almost every circumstance.

    But, I have to tell you, I think you are making a big mistake -- blinding yourself -- by labelling people "anti-Bushites".

    We are all trying to be adults here, right? I may criticize an idea or interpretation advanced to defend an action by Bush. But I am going to try to assume that their loyalty is to a principle, not to a man. Whether it is Bush, Perle, Gore, Chu

    • Perhaps I should have used another term. But these people are "anybody but Bush". That's who I'm talking about. People so consumed by their hatred of George W. Bush that they will vote for anybody, no matter how wishy-washy, how radical, etc. that anybody is.

  • I reject the premise that the US is "occupying" Iraq. We already have a date (a close date!) for moving control to an Iraqi government.

    June 30th. Can we agree that the description of how much Sovereignty Iraq would have, come June 30th, was more truly sovereign than we are apt to see five weeks from now?

    How sovereign will Iraq be on June 30th?
    [1] Will there be a constitution?
    [2] Elections?
    [3] How will the leaders be chosen?
    [4] What powers will they have?
    [5] Will there be some kind of

  • The New York Times has an article entitled Q&A: Full Sovereignty for Iraq? [nytimes.com].

    I was incorrect, in my other note, when I said the transitional guv'mint would not have a constitution. There is one here [cpa-iraq.org]. It guarantees religious freedom, and a lack of discrimination for all, without regard to gender or ethnic background.

    It has an article saying that all Islamic laws are automatically the laws of Iraq.

    It has an article declaring that no Iraqi will be exempt from the authority of the law because of their

  • I feel sorry for John Walker Lindh. He was captured not long after the 9-11 attacks. 3,000 Americans died in those attacks. When Lindh was captured many Americans felt that when he learned of the attacks, learned that Al Queda was killing Americans, he should have immediately left Afghanistan.

    Well, I thought about this, and I wondered, how, precisely, would he have done this. You go AWOL from most Armies, the go looking for you, catch you, and punish you. As an American I imagine he was under scrutin

Slashdot Top Deals

New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman

Close