"But the world isn't like that"

[jbor]

The stupidity of the notion that Saddam = Bush speaks for itself.

Unless the anti-Bush lobby can come up with some better arguments then
international pressure will continue to be applied on Saddam to stop
manufacturing weapons of mass destruction. I think that's the best course of
action at present.

Talk of "America in decline", patently absurd, exemplifies the deep-seated
conservatism which lies at the heart of much of the caterwauling against the
international alliance against terrorism, and against the increasing trend
towards international mediation of world justice and equity issues. US
politics is irrelevant. The American economy and standard of living still
exceed those of anywhere else on the planet by truckloads, no matter how
badly that wealth is distributed domestically. Bin Laden made a grave error
in targeting the US on September 11 2001, because that attack served to
mobilise an almighty global police force against him and his allies. Instead
of the UN having to bow down and make concessions to the US to get military
support for the fight against terrorism, the US willingly became the driving
force behind the current initiative, and it has been forced to become more
accountable to the UN as a result. Another bonus.

Why doesn't somebody organise a protest march against terrorism. I'd bet
you'd get a whole lot more of us poor dumb sheep, from every nation in the
world, out and doing.

best




on 14/10/02 3:03 PM, barbara100 at jps.net at barbara100 at jps.net wrote:

> Perhaps Jbor could shed light on the difference. He seems to have a grasp of
> the American stance.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Arne Herløv Petersen" <herlahp at inet.uni2.dk>
> To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 2:15 PM
> Subject: Re: "But the world isn't like that"
> 
> 
>> It's not so easy for us poor Europeans, so could someone please explain
>> me the difference between evil weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam
>> Hussein may acquire before 2010, and good and uplifting weapons of mass
>> destruction, which George Bush as commander in chief can choose to
>> employ anywehere?
>