Letters to the Editor
Fraud Guy
Published Letters: 337
-
Revising history again
[Read the article: "Fringe liberal bloggers"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Healthy skeptic,
You clearly stated Lincoln didn't attempt to completely integrate society after the civil war. You didn't stated during the Civil War, or in the states retaken during the war, but after. If you can't parse your own lines, that's your problem, not mine. You may choose to ignore facts when creating your personal history, and America's, but please don't ask me to believe it, then, especially when you mischaracterize my argument by ignoring what you wrote.
Now regarding Lincoln and the fringe. Lincoln won reelection on a pro-war/pro-Union platform. His second inaugural address, given "with malice towards none", confirmed his anti-reprisal stance. His party repudiated it when it was carried out by Johnson, and won large majorities when the next election came around, which gave them the wherewithal to implement their version of Reconstruction and almost succeed in impeaching Johnson. This indicates to me that, at the time, Lincoln's desire was on the fringe. Our modern take is that his stances were correct and noble, but at the time his policy was repudiated by about a 2/3 majority.
Regarding equating equality with your statement on integration. That is my modern non-sequitor, based upon the fact that "separate but equal" programs worked out so well in the past.
And you really didn't need to start the namecalling with me. If you get so caught up that you use the invective and can't see how deep it's digging you, you really need to learn the difference between yours and your hole in the ground.
-
Shorter Podhoretz
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Diplomacy is useless. Kill them.
They could be more dangerous than us. Kill them.
Hitler was bad. Kill them.
Reagan was good. Kill them.
I pray we kill them soon, before I die and can't see it happen.
Just jaw-droppingly scary.
-
@ Anonymous
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Good analogy. You forgot the part where the people whose house you busted into had firebombed your house the day before, killing 3000 or so people.
Otherwise, good job. Noone from the ReligionOfPeace means you any harm.
Especially since the firebombers actually lived in your buddy's house, and when you decided you couldn't find them after knocking on the door to their room, that you should just go kill the neighbor instead.
How stupid are you people?
Obviously we have far to go to beat your record.
-
Beslan
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Anonymous (if that's your real name)--
We've had internal atrocities already, or don't you recall:
Oklahoma City (1995)--168 dead
Virginia Tech (2007)--32 dead
Rosewood, FL (1923)--8 confirmed dead
Tulsa, OK (1921)--300 estimated dead
Austin, TX (1966)--13 dead
Oh, wait, those weren't Muslim extremists, so the dead don't count.
-
Arabs vs. Persians
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]IIRC, these are ethnic groups in the Middle East. Part of the confusion comes from the fact that Arabic is often used as the language and writing, and Islam came from Arabic sources, which spread over the Middle East/North Africa.
-
Dates suspect
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shooter,
Thank you for the research, but since the heritage data covers 1981-2001, including the period during and after GWI (unless George I was selling as he was attacking), the amount of American sales to Iraq will likely be skewed heavily downward. (I hope that heritage is not using such flawed dat to support their claims.) You would have to find a data source that only includes 1981-1990 or so to have an accurate representation of our arms sales to the Iraqi regime.
In addition, does the data just include regular munitions, or does it include chemical munitions/precursors, the latter of which may easily be hidden in non-munition purchases?
Thank you,
Fraud Guy
-
As I thought
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shooter1.54567,987,098,650
Your first link from fas states some confliciting dates, which includes the fact that Iraq rethought its nuclear program after the Israeli attack, including how to hide it, and although it is unclear from the report, it appears that Iraq began enrichment activities shortly after that, although their effective methods didn't start until 1987 or so.
On the link from Heritage, the actual sipri database at:
http://armstrade.sipri.org/arms_trade/values.php
only covers conventional weapons. For the period 1981-1990, the US appears to be a distant 4th to China, Russia, and France. Do you have a source on our WMD supplies to Iraq, since that is what we are talking about here.
The net is your friend, but as my Murphy's Law calendar states for today:
Farlow's Law: Those who do not read are not better off than those who cannot read.
-
"The Best Defense is a Good Offense...
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You know who said that? Mel, the cook on Alice
--The Frantics, "Tae Kwon Leep"
Thanks, L.W.M. for making me recall that skit from the Dr. Demento CD.
I am also reminded of 49ers games in the 70's. They could score 40 points nearly every game, but since they gave up 42, they didn't win so many. To conflate conflict with football, offense may win battles, but defense wins wars.
-
Nuclear regime change?
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Qua Elvis,
Actually, it is very likely that Japan would have surrendered even if the bombs had not dropped. They were suffering greatly from conventional bombing, as well as threatened by a probable Russian invasion via their northern islands. The bombs may have accelerated the change, but losing the war is what caused it.
However, that doesn't mean that it isn't likely that the neocons see it the other way.
-
Shooter
[Read the article: Face of a psychopath]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So, Jedimaster needs to provide links showing that we were providing nuclear materials, but you were wrong in stating the start date of the Iraqi nuclear program, and were misusing your sources to indicate that the US wasn't providing weapons to the Iraqis. I conflated WMD (biochem) with nuclear in contradicting you, but your most recent link isn't very favorable to your point, in that we were feeding the monster almost up until our first invasion.
Does that sum it up?
(NB: Since the US has declared that any of the WMD categories (NBorC) are equivalent, I feel that we can logically conflate the weapons so far as "badness" for regimes to have.