blaming Clinton

[Richard Romeo]

Terrance--

I wasn't qustioning the coalition's response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait 
but to the perceived hope by some that Kuwait would become more democratic 
and open, to assume some of the rhetoric flying around (which of course, was 
mostly a screen for safe-guarding of Madame Oil)

One wonders what the administration has in mind w/r/t Indonesia, the 
Phillipines and other countries who may have terrorist cells working--and, 
what about the IRA, Hamas, and the like--areas where a direct 
confrontational US presence would be quite destabilizing--It appears the US 
is being somewhat arbitrary in its rhetoric regarding terrorism.
Israel's policy of "defensive assassinations" could legally be labelled 
terrorism in some way.

One wonders if borders truly mean anything anymore or legal declarations of 
war--as far as I know we haven't declared war of afghanistan

Rich



>From: Terrance <lycidas2 at earthlink.net>
>To: Richard Romeo <richardromeo at hotmail.com>
>CC: pynchon-l at waste.org
>Subject: Re: blaming Clinton
>Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 14:45:52 -0400
>
>
>
>>
>What if the West allowed Iraq to take Kuwait? Build a Nuke army?
>Would the USA be the only superpower?
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp