[net.women] To Hell With Diplomacy

mark@nvuxb.UUCP (Scum of Earth) (06/18/85)

I pissed as hell.  I`m pissed because the U.S. is being held hostage
by a few Shiite Lebonanesse,<sp>.  Reagan should have wnt in right 
away and freed the hostages.  Now it is to fuckin late, the hostages 
are all hidden away in the slums of Beruit.  I think its time America 
puts it foot down and stops being the big brother to the rest of the
world.  
I know its hard to be a democratic society and refrain from military
intervention.  But that time has come !!!  The US has been held hostage
by those barbaric`s in the middle east before.  ANd its time we showed 
them whose in charge.  How and why are we letting ourselves be held
hostage by a group of people whose numbers equall no more than a 1000.
I am all for dialogue, but when one of our own gets killed needlessly
its time to step in.
Reagan should ask Isreal for the realease of the Shiite prisoners then 
blow beruit off the face of the map.  How can he even trust Berri, when 
he himself is a Shiite.
It is my belief that Shiite stands for SHIT!!! {FLAME ON BABY}
Why is it okay for Russia or an other country to use military force, but
if the US does we get stepped on by the whole world?
Damn am I pissed:  I hope when Reagan goes before the country tonight
he advises the Shiites that the US will not give into Terrorist Threats..
How do you feel?

-- 
                       
suicide is punishable   
>-------------------->  Mark Friedman, Red Bank N.J.
by the death penalty  

lkk@teddy.UUCP (06/20/85)

In article <171@nvuxb.UUCP> mark@nvuxb.UUCP (Scum of Earth) writes:
>I pissed as hell.  I`m pissed because the U.S. is being held hostage
>by a few Shiite Lebonanesse,<sp>.  Reagan should have wnt in right 
>away and freed the hostages.  Now it is to fuckin late, the hostages 
>are all hidden away in the slums of Beruit.  I think its time America 
>puts it foot down and stops being the big brother to the rest of the
>world.  
>I know its hard to be a democratic society and refrain from military
>intervention.  But that time has come !!!  The US has been held hostage
>by those barbaric`s in the middle east before.  ANd its time we showed 
>them whose in charge.  How and why are we letting ourselves be held
>hostage by a group of people whose numbers equall no more than a 1000.
>I am all for dialogue, but when one of our own gets killed needlessly
>its time to step in.
>Reagan should ask Isreal for the realease of the Shiite prisoners then 
>blow beruit off the face of the map.  How can he even trust Berri, when 
>he himself is a Shiite.
>It is my belief that Shiite stands for SHIT!!! {FLAME ON BABY}
>Why is it okay for Russia or an other country to use military force, but
>if the US does we get stepped on by the whole world?
>Damn am I pissed:  I hope when Reagan goes before the country tonight
>he advises the Shiites that the US will not give into Terrorist Threats..
>How do you feel?
>
>-- 
>                       
>suicide is punishable   
>>-------------------->  Mark Friedman, Red Bank N.J.
>by the death penalty  


Now, now, calm down, get off your pedestal, and
remember, this is reality, not the A-team.

The current hijacking crises IS quite appalling.
It makes you sick to see innocent victims being
terrorized for political reasons of which they are
entirely ignorant.  and selecting Jewish passengers
for special treatment, etc.


BUT, LET US KEEP OUR PERSPECTIVE...
This hijacking did not happen in a vacuum.
The overall situation in the middle east is very
much the responsibilty of the United States govt.,
and the Amal is a product of that situation.  According to
the NYTimes, Nabih Berri used to be a moderate before the Israeli
invasion of Lebanon.

When the U.S. govt. wants to apply pressure against
an adversary, they have many resources at their
disposal to do so SUBTLY.  The can apply
economic pressure, or use the C.I.A or what have you.
Dispossed groups like the lebanese Shiites have
only one means at their disposal to prod the
superpower U.S. to action, and that is terrorism.
Hit them where they're vulnerable.

I'm not condoning the hijacking.  All I ask is
that you cut the flag-waving jingoistic shit
and realize that the US govt., in supporting
contras, or random tinpot dictators, plays
the exact same game as the Shiites.  But since
they only terrorize third-world peasants, we
can conveniently turn a blind eye to THEIR terror.


A plague on both houses.

-- 

Sport Death,
Larry Kolodney
(USENET) ...decvax!genrad!teddy!lkk
(INTERNET) lkk@mit-mc

akl@leopard.UUCP (Anita ) (06/21/85)

()
> I pissed as hell.  I`m pissed because the U.S. is being held hostage
> by a few Shiite Lebonanesse,<sp>. ....
> 
> How do you feel?
> 
> >-------------------->  Mark Friedman, Red Bank N.J.
 
I feel that this discussion does not belong in net.women, and I also
feel you have need of a dictionary.
-- 

							*
	From the musical keyboard of:			**
							* *
	Anita K. Laux   leopard!akl			*  *
	Bell Communications Research		     ****
	331 Newman Springs Road			    *   *
	Red Bank, NJ 07701			    *   *
					            ****

markr@garfield.UUCP (Mark R. Dawson) (06/24/85)

In letter <171@nvuxb.UUCP> mark@nvuxb.UUCP writes,
> I pissed as hell.  I`m pissed because the U.S. is being held hostage
> by a few Shiite Lebonanesse,<sp>.  Reagan should have wnt in right 
> away and freed the hostages.  Now it is to fuckin late, the hostages 
> are all hidden away in the slums of Beruit.  I think its time America 
> puts it foot down and stops being the big brother to the rest of the
> world.  
 Honestly mark, you have been watching to many of Ronnie's Westerns.
You don't really believe that that the great U.S. Marines could just storm
into Beirut and rescued the hostages, do you? The only result from that
kind of action would be the deaths of the hostages, of marines, and of
innocent bystanders.
 The only people who see U.S.A. as the world's big brother are you americains.
If you ever did some travelling into the third world you would find that the 
United States along with the U.S.S.R. are two of the most hated countries in the world. I remember being told to state my country of origin as Canada and to never let people think that you are an americain.
You shouldn't find these statements to susprising, your governments policies in
Central and South America and the rest of the developing world do not tend to
make to many friends.
 How do you expect a Nicaraguan women to accept your ideas of liberty and demo-
cracy when her only son is killed by U.S. supported right wing scum from the
Somoza era?    
 
> I know its hard to be a democratic society and refrain from military
> intervention.  But that time has come !!!  The US has been held hostage
> by those barbaric`s in the middle east before.  ANd its time we showed 
> them whose in charge.  How and why are we letting ourselves be held
> hostage by a group of people whose numbers equall no more than a 1000.
> I am all for dialogue, but when one of our own gets killed needlessly
> its time to step in.
 The main problem with the U.S.A. is that it wants to be in charge of the
whole damned world. You want to shove your psuedo-democracy down the
world's throat. The reason americains were held hostage by those 'barbaric`s 
in the middle east' was because you stick your probing noses in other peoples
affairs, you are hated by other nations because of you lust for power, those
'barbaric`s' know that you want to be in charge and that is why they strike
out against you. This small group is trying to fight with a lumbering, festering
, cancerous giant and the only way they can do that is through the use of t
terror. The 'one of our own' that was killed was a marine, the most hated form
of Americain intervention. 'The Green Beret' is definitely not one of the 
favorite songs of the third world.

> Reagan should ask Isreal for the realease of the Shiite prisoners then 
> blow beruit off the face of the map.  How can he even trust Berri, when 
> he himself is a Shiite.
> It is my belief that Shiite stands for SHIT!!! {FLAME ON BABY}
 Why the hell doesn't he! The old moose is standing tall, he wants Israel
to save the hostages and protect him from the press.
 Why not blow up Beirut, lets all do our part to advance world hatred of the
U.S. of A. You americans are willing to sacrifice anything and anyone to get
to your goals.
 It is my belief that American stands for AROGANCE!!!

> Why is it okay for Russia or an other country to use military force, but
> if the US does we get stepped on by the whole world?
 When the Russians invade Afghanistan horror stories are thrust on us for years,
but when the U.S. of A. slaughters Nicaraguan citizens in order to protect their
 business interests I have to turn to foriegn news sources like 'Le Devoir' to
read about it. Your media is eating out of the hand of the government.

> Damn am I pissed:  I hope when Reagan goes before the country tonight
> he advises the Shiites that the US will not give into Terrorist Threats..
> How do you feel?
> 
> -- 
>                        
> suicide is punishable   
> >-------------------->  Mark Friedman, Red Bank N.J.
> by the death penalty  

I feel sick reading this crap.

Mark Dawson
markr@garfield.UUCP

ps. my apologies to my relatives in Orono and San Diego.

zubbie@ihlpl.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/28/85)

THe fact that American citizens are being used as hostage to force
another coutry into action would seem to indicate that the people 
responsible feel that the US has some sane influence on the 3rd country.
What has been advocated here is that the US involve itself in a
Vietnam style way.
The John Wayne approach to diplomacy and international relations only
works in the movies.
Any violent overt action at this point might have three possible outcomes:

	1) The death of some or all of the hostages, innocent bystanders
		and those guilty of the terrorist act before they can
		be brought to trail for their illegal acts.

	2) The loss of esteem (face if you will) of the US through
		reason of having to stoop to the level of the violent 
		to achieve a solution to the situation.

	3) The establishment of a precedent which would cause the US to 
		resort to violence at every turn in the furture which
		begins the dominoe thought of retaliation and counter-
		retaliation and the involvement of other aligned powers
		to protect their interests and alliances. 
		(World War III if you will)

I find it hard to believe that give enven the potential for any one of these
points to become fact that anyone with a functioning brain and some common
sense would advocate instant action with deadly force.
The Isreali Army demonstrated the manner of operation against Idhi Amin
some years ago and most terrorists who care to take captives as a means
to an end are as aware of how that was done as most governments. I doubt
that such a tactic would ever again be succesfull ( I have been known to be
wrong .. wasn't that just last week (;=) _ )

jeanette l. zobjeck
ihnp4!ihlpl!zubbie


================================================================================
These are my opinions!
I worked for them and I intend to enjoy them.
Handle carefully or else someone might think they are yours also.
================================================================================
         ~~~
        (o o)                  *************************
|WMWMWMWMWMWMWMWMWM  /MWMW|    *  TO HELL WITH THE DOG *
|MWMWMWMWMWMWMWMWMW | WMWM|    *      -*-*-*-*-*-*-    *
_________I_I________|/_____    *   WATCH OUT FOR THE   *
                               *         OWNER         *
                               *************************

don@umd5.UUCP (07/01/85)

In article <183@ihlpl.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpl.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes:
>
>Any violent overt action at this point might have three possible outcomes:
>
>	2) The loss of esteem (face if you will) of the US through
>		reason of having to stoop to the level of the violent 
>		to achieve a solution to the situation.

(From an editorial in the Washington Post, written by Alexander Haig,Jr.
 on this subject.)
  
"...Second comes the moral fallacy that somehow counterterrorist action,
 which may risk innocent lives, 'dirties' our hands. This fallacy condemns
 us to paralysis and puts the terrorist and his victims - and the United
 States is a victim - on the same moral plane.
    The use of force may miscarry. Military operations do go awry. But the
 alternative to risking a few precious lives today may be to risk many more
 no less precious lives tomorrow, as terrorists and the governments that
 support them become convinced that we lack the moral strength to defend our
 values...
 ...We must deter terrorism by lowering the rewards and raising the penalties
    for those who encourage it..." 

No flames, please. I just felt that I should bring this article to your
attention in order to enhance the current discussion.


  
-- 
--==---==---==--

___________      _____ ---- _____
       \        //---- IDIC -----
       _\______//_     ----
        ----------

  ARPA: don@umd5.ARPA   BITNET: don%umd5@umd2
SPOKEN: Chris Sylvain
  UUCP: {seismo,rlgvax,allegra,brl-bmd,nrl-css}!umcp-cs!cvl!umd5!don

al@aurora.UUCP (Al Globus) (07/03/85)

> >I know its hard to be a democratic society and refrain from military
> >intervention.  But that time has come !!!

Correct me if I am wrong, but a year or two back I distinctly remember
news reports about U.S. naval vessels blasting Lebanese villages with
high explosives.  I think it was a battleship and a few destroyers.  I
can also remember TV pictures of Lebanese homes reduced to rubble.  I
don't remember the casualty figures, but given the general inaccuracy
of unspotted naval gunfire they were probably quite large, and very likely
civilian.  Shelling people is an act of war.

Shortly after we started pounding the people of Lebenon
the marines were attacked, later the embassy was attacked, and most recently
the TWA jet hijacked and a **US NAVY** man killed.  I can't help but think that
if we hadn't shelled the Lebanese they wouldn't have fought back.  I can
assure you that if the Lebanese navy shelled the Virginia hills I would be proud
of any American that drove a truck loaded with explosivess into a Lebanese
military compound or highjacked a Lebanese jet and killed a Lebanese navy
man.  We attacked them and now complain when they fight back the only way
they can.  I say we stop killing people without a congressional declaration
of war as required by the Constitution.

don@umd5.UUCP (07/04/85)

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ANOTHER NEWSGROUP ***

The posting that I made to these groups was in error..
I only intended to post to net.flame, and failed to notice the
followup-to line. Sorry......

-- 
--==---==---==--

___________      _____ ---- _____
       \        //---- IDIC -----
       _\______//_     ----
        ----------

  ARPA: don@umd5.ARPA   BITNET: don%umd5@umd2
SPOKEN: Chris Sylvain
  UUCP: {seismo,rlgvax,allegra,brl-bmd,nrl-css}!umcp-cs!cvl!umd5!don

pwb@fritz.UUCP (Phil Bonesteele) (07/09/85)

In article <> al@aurora.UUCP (Al Globus) writes:
>> >I know its hard to be a democratic society and refrain from military
>> >intervention.  But that time has come !!!
>
>Correct me if I am wrong, but a year or two back I distinctly remember
>news reports about U.S. naval vessels blasting Lebanese villages with
>high explosives.  I think it was a battleship and a few destroyers.  I
>can also remember TV pictures of Lebanese homes reduced to rubble.  I
>don't remember the casualty figures, but given the general inaccuracy
>of unspotted naval gunfire they were probably quite large, and very likely
>civilian.  Shelling people is an act of war.
>
> . . .
>
> (more justification of attacks on U.S. embassy, U.S. Marines, etc.)

If  my memory  of those  events serves  me correctly,  you are indeed
wrong.  The Battleship New  Jersey and  said destroyers  fired on GUN
EMPLACEMENTS ONLY, and with great accuracy at that  (our modern naval
vessels are equipped with automated means of determining trajectories
of incoming rounds, and thus the exact coordinates of  the firing gun
emplacement ...  of  course these coordinates can be fed to automated
fire control systems ...  isn't it a wonder what  computers have done
for surgical warfare?).  The rounds fired by the U.S.   naval vessels
were in RESPONSE to shells fired at  the ground  based Marines and/or
the ships themselves from gun emplacements in the hills around Beirut
and in the Bekka Valley.  The objective was to  silence the offending
guns and the Navy  was quite  successful in  achieving that objective
with little loss of life (except for those stationed at the offending
guns),  a minimal  number of  rounds, and  without "blasting Lebanese
villages with high explosives".  Never during the U.S.'s
participation in the MULTINATIONAL peace  keeping force  did any U.S.
military unit fire without having  been fired  upon.   Remember, as a
jesture of this policy, the Marines  stationed at  the Beirut airport
were ordered to maintain their weapons unloaded.  

I  would  be  pleased  if Mr.   Globus  would attempt  to restate his
justifications of the bombing attacks on the U.S.   Marines stationed
at  the  Beirut airport  and the  U.S.   Embassy, and  the recent TWA
hijacking in light of the above recollection of the past  events.  My
opinion, briefly stated, is that the reasons for  the various attacks
on U.S.  personnel, installations, and civilians is not  as simple as
Mr.  Globus presents in his original article.  


			Phil Bonesteele
			FileNet Corp.
			Costa Mesa, CA
			{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!trwrb!felix!pwb



"Government after all is a very simple thing."  - Warren G. Harding, 29th
							President of the U.S.