Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Opinions of an Egyptian American

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Keith De Lapp <keith(--nospam--at)kdlengineering.com> wrote:
 
never do.  Do they?  $300M/yr to Egypt, $100M/yr to the Palestinians, yes and of course the almost $1B/yr to Israel, and Saudi Arabia and Oman and Kuwait and ...  The notion that our policies, in the eyes of Fundamentalist Islam, not
 
These aid packages are attached to strings. These are given selectively based on what is expected in return. In other words these are bribes which benefits a few in the receiving nations. Common people don't see any benefits. When discontent is heard from the people of those nations, why doesn't USA stop the aid and cease from influencing their policies?
 
However, the doctrine of pre-emption clearly states that we will go after nations who assist in harboring or financing terrorism. 
That is sheer arrogance of power. India believes that the terrorist activities on its northern border as well as within that country are sponsored, in large part, by Pakistan. If India chose to apply the doctrine of pre-emption, will USA keep quiet? Why isn't USA applying the same doctrine on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia (Most of the 9/11 terrorists were from here. The ruling dynasty in SA is no more kind to its people than Saddam is alleged to be) which have been connected to terrorism?
 
Incidentally, Hitler also had a doctrine of pre-emption.  A bulk of his own people supported his doctrine.  That did not help him being condemned, and rightly so, by the world.

Saddam and his sovereign nation killed at the very least 1 million Muslims, paid money to encourage the homicide bombing of innocent Israeli citizens,
 
On this issue there are two different positions. I belong to the company who believes that what Saddam did to his people does not give us the unilateral right to get rid of him and declare war on Iraq. More importantly, these reported activities did not constitute the premise to declare war. these are being propogandized to justify our action post-facto.
 
 invaded Kuwait in an attempt to take control of the worlds oil supply. 
 
Whether Iraq invaded Kuwait for oil supply or for some other reason, I don't know. The true reasons, which are classified secret,  will never be known. In any case USA stepped in at that time at the request of Kuwait and Saudi. That mission was undertaken to the letter and spirit by the senior Bush. He showed classic judgment in getting out after Iraqis were driven back.  
 
as the character Colonel Nathan R. Jessup says "I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I prefer you said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand to post."
 
Are you supporting Col. Jessop's philosophy? If you are, I am appaled. He orders the killing of the private (don't remember his name) only because the private was a weakling. That reflects on Jessop's mentality, which is no different from Hitler's - an ethnic cleansing of different kind. I hope you are not supporting Jessop.
 
 
Rajendran


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.