On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:03:13 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .


Very weird response, John. I compared defending an ally that has been
attacked
vs. conducting preemptive strikes on govts. we just don't like for one
reason
or another......

and you respond with a comment about how we have a right to pick our
allies.

Of course we have a right to pick our allies.

How about the right to conduct preemptive military strikes against
governments
we believe might eventually become a potential threat?

Chuck, reread my response. I asked you the questions. I stated nothing
regarding the picking of our allies.

Well, then someone's using your name here, John. Here's what you wrote:

"Is not the 'picking of allies' part of the shaping of circumstances
which you find so abhorrent? Is not the picking of allies in our
fundamental interests? Is it our right to pick our allies? Chuck,
these are all things you find arrogant!"

Doug, read the paragraph. Are they interrogative or declarative
sentences?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John H wrote in message . ..
On 29 Dec 2003 12:51:43 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 27 Dec 2003 07:38:11 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 24 Dec 2003 08:25:50 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:


That's quite easy to to answer. You conservatives don't mind starting
a war, with no real premise, right? Well, I guess except for the
cardboard drones!! You think Bush is correct for the pre-emptive
strike of a poor nation that we had no reason to be in, right? You
righties are talking about which country we need to go blow the hell
out of next, right? It would seem to me that if you thought war was
bad, then you'd not want is in one....or more, especially when there
has been no real evidence that we needed to go there.

Again, could you please show me where a conservative said that war was
grand?

No, none of your statements above is 'right'.

John H


None of my statements are right?? Let's see, then, so you DON'T
support Bush's war with Iraq? You conservatives AREN'T talking about
which country to to go blow up next? I could cut and paste this one
all day from just this newsgroup!
Now again, if you bunch of conservatives admit that we shouldn't be in
this war, then I will take back the statement that I think
conservatives think war is grand.

Basskisser, did I ever say I was a conservative?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John, you may or may not know this, but some things can be IMPLIED
with a very high certainty.

On 31 Dec 2003 05:44:33 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 29 Dec 2003 12:51:43 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 27 Dec 2003 07:38:11 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 24 Dec 2003 08:25:50 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:


That's quite easy to to answer. You conservatives don't mind starting
a war, with no real premise, right? Well, I guess except for the
cardboard drones!! You think Bush is correct for the pre-emptive
strike of a poor nation that we had no reason to be in, right? You
righties are talking about which country we need to go blow the hell
out of next, right? It would seem to me that if you thought war was
bad, then you'd not want is in one....or more, especially when there
has been no real evidence that we needed to go there.

Again, could you please show me where a conservative said that war was
grand?

No, none of your statements above is 'right'.

John H


None of my statements are right?? Let's see, then, so you DON'T
support Bush's war with Iraq? You conservatives AREN'T talking about
which country to to go blow up next? I could cut and paste this one
all day from just this newsgroup!
Now again, if you bunch of conservatives admit that we shouldn't be in
this war, then I will take back the statement that I think
conservatives think war is grand.

Basskisser, did I ever say I was a conservative?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John, you may or may not know this, but some things can be IMPLIED
with a very high certainty.

If you meant to say "probability" instead of certainty, you may be
correct in your statement. Implication does not provide a probability
of 1, which is required for certainty.

I don't know myself if I'm a conservative or not. I agree with some of
the 'liberal' positions and with some of the 'conservative' positions.
If I must rant and rave and lie and exaggerate to be a liberal, then I
guess I'm not one of those. If I can't donate to a charity and be a
conservative, then I guess I'm not one of those.

I do find that you and some of the others who follow your thinking
make statements which are easily refutable, if not downright
ridiculous. It is fun to challenge some of the stuff you post.

It's also true that some of the 'conservatives' (tuuk, for example)
make ridiculous statements. They also are fun to challenge.

You tend to make your own made up implications of anything that's
posted. Then you argue against the implied statements you made. Can
you see the humor in that?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John H wrote:

On 31 Dec 2003 05:44:33 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 29 Dec 2003 12:51:43 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 27 Dec 2003 07:38:11 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

John H wrote in message . ..
On 24 Dec 2003 08:25:50 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:


That's quite easy to to answer. You conservatives don't mind starting
a war, with no real premise, right? Well, I guess except for the
cardboard drones!! You think Bush is correct for the pre-emptive
strike of a poor nation that we had no reason to be in, right? You
righties are talking about which country we need to go blow the hell
out of next, right? It would seem to me that if you thought war was
bad, then you'd not want is in one....or more, especially when there
has been no real evidence that we needed to go there.

Again, could you please show me where a conservative said that war was
grand?

No, none of your statements above is 'right'.

John H


None of my statements are right?? Let's see, then, so you DON'T
support Bush's war with Iraq? You conservatives AREN'T talking about
which country to to go blow up next? I could cut and paste this one
all day from just this newsgroup!
Now again, if you bunch of conservatives admit that we shouldn't be in
this war, then I will take back the statement that I think
conservatives think war is grand.

Basskisser, did I ever say I was a conservative?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John, you may or may not know this, but some things can be IMPLIED
with a very high certainty.

If you meant to say "probability" instead of certainty, you may be
correct in your statement. Implication does not provide a probability
of 1, which is required for certainty.

I don't know myself if I'm a conservative or not. I agree with some of
the 'liberal' positions and with some of the 'conservative' positions.
If I must rant and rave and lie and exaggerate to be a liberal, then I
guess I'm not one of those. If I can't donate to a charity and be a
conservative, then I guess I'm not one of those.

You're a right-wing neoCon.



I do find that you and some of the others who follow your thinking
make statements which are easily refutable, if not downright
ridiculous. It is fun to challenge some of the stuff you post.

It is fun to challenge; too bad you aren't equipped to do it with any
wit or panache.


It's also true that some of the 'conservatives' (tuuk, for example)
make ridiculous statements. They also are fun to challenge.

They're too easy.




--
Email sent to is never read.

"John H" wrote in message
...


Chuck, reread my response. I asked you the questions. I stated nothing
regarding the picking of our allies.

Well, then someone's using your name here, John. Here's what you wrote:

"Is not the 'picking of allies' part of the shaping of circumstances
which you find so abhorrent? Is not the picking of allies in our
fundamental interests? Is it our right to pick our allies? Chuck,
these are all things you find arrogant!"

Doug, read the paragraph. Are they interrogative or declarative
sentences?

They're obviously acrylic.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:02:48 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .


Chuck, reread my response. I asked you the questions. I stated nothing
regarding the picking of our allies.

Well, then someone's using your name here, John. Here's what you wrote:

"Is not the 'picking of allies' part of the shaping of circumstances
which you find so abhorrent? Is not the picking of allies in our
fundamental interests? Is it our right to pick our allies? Chuck,
these are all things you find arrogant!"

Doug, read the paragraph. Are they interrogative or declarative
sentences?

They're obviously acrylic.

They're obviously written in response to this writing from Chuck:
********************************************
We need to "shape circumstances" in the rest of the world so they are
most
favorable to our "fundamental interests"? We assume that it is our
right, or
mandate, to do so. How arrogant.
************************************************** *


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"John H" wrote in message
...


Doug, read the paragraph. Are they interrogative or declarative
sentences?

They're obviously acrylic.

They're obviously written in response to this writing from Chuck:
********************************************
We need to "shape circumstances" in the rest of the world so they are
most
favorable to our "fundamental interests"? We assume that it is our
right, or
mandate, to do so. How arrogant.
************************************************** *


John H


Like I said, John, technique is everything. There are hints that our style
is becoming macabre.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:15:10 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .


Doug, read the paragraph. Are they interrogative or declarative
sentences?

They're obviously acrylic.

They're obviously written in response to this writing from Chuck:
********************************************
We need to "shape circumstances" in the rest of the world so they are
most
favorable to our "fundamental interests"? We assume that it is our
right, or
mandate, to do so. How arrogant.
************************************************** *


John H


Like I said, John, technique is everything. There are hints that our style
is becoming macabre.

But you still haven't answered the questions. I think that you and
Chuck are both pretty astute individuals, and you know where those
questions were leading. So I won't press for an answer any more.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On 29 Dec 2003 15:54:02 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

This idea you, Chuck, seem to have, that we should just sit at home
taking care of our poor and sickly, paying no heed whatsoever to the
rest of the globe (because it's arrogant) just isn't workable.

You have the wrong impression.

We do have strategic interests and treaty obligations around the world.

We should not appoint ourselves the "leaders" of the entire world and use our
superior military ability to impose that leadership where it is not wanted.

The purpose of the military is to protect the homeland and our strategic
allies, not to expand the commercial or moral "empire".

Read the site. I suspect you've never delved deeper than the "Statement of
Priniciples". When you have made a study of the entire PNAC program, we'll be
on the same playing field in this discussion.

Before we start arguing the merits of each individual article on the
site, I think it's fair to discuss the principles of the organization.
We started with your comments shaping circumstances for favorable
outcomes, which you found arrogant. However, from later posts it seems
you agree with that statement.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Before we start arguing the merits of each individual article on the
site, I think it's fair to discuss the principles of the organization.
We started with your comments shaping circumstances for favorable
outcomes, which you found arrogant. However, from later posts it seems
you agree with that statement.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


Good grief, John. Is that a Belgian Waffle?