adt@minster.UUCP (08/27/86)
There have been many postings in net.followup concerning the morality of
sanctions against SA USSR etc. What winds me up is people dithering over
over sanctions against a blatantly evil government (oppressive as perceived
by its people) when the US is happy not only to impose sanctions against
Nicaragua but to positively (ie money) support the contras who, by all
independent accounts, are a bunch of sadistic thugs. By contrast the Nicaraguan
government is probably more popular than any Western government (as perceived
by its population) and its human rights record is certainly better than any
other Central American country (many of whom are supported by the US). It seems
that sanctions used will only be used by the US if they will be effective and
the US does not like the government in question.
Def { Lesson 1: the easiest lessons to learn are the hardest to accept. }
SENDER ::= NAME ADDRESS
NAME ::= ADT
ADT ::= Alan David Turland
ADDRESS ::= ..!mcvax!ukc!minster!adt
End Def { The house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in. }cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (09/02/86)
> There have been many postings in net.followup concerning the morality of > sanctions against SA USSR etc. What winds me up is people dithering over > over sanctions against a blatantly evil government (oppressive as perceived > by its people) when the US is happy not only to impose sanctions against > Nicaragua but to positively (ie money) support the contras who, by all > independent accounts, are a bunch of sadistic thugs. By contrast the Nicaraguan > government is probably more popular than any Western government (as perceived > by its population) and its human rights record is certainly better than any > other Central American country (many of whom are supported by the US). It seems > that sanctions used will only be used by the US if they will be effective and > the US does not like the government in question. > Nicaragua has a better human rights record or more popular government than Costa Rica? The fact that you can make such a blatantly nonsensical statement shows how little you really know about the subject. The subject of Nicaraguan human rights abuses has been discussed at great length on Usenet. The complexities of the various groups involved in the Contras has also been discussed at great length. This kind of inaccurate and ignorant nonsense is just more Big Lie tactics. Clayton E. Cramer
david@ztivax.UUCP (09/08/86)
Cramer, you grabbed a rather minor point (on which you are probably right), and then you _TOTALLY_ ignore the major premise. That is poor debate tactics. If you can think of a reason that Raygun is always Right (I mean, morally, not politically), then state it. I think you must agree that somethings Raygun does is in fact good. Other things are blatent international terrorism. And in general, he is inconsistent. I think it is fun to flame on various non-sensical issues, but if you want to have content, think first. David Smyth uucp: seismo!unido!ztivax!david
cramer@kontron.UUCP (09/10/86)
> Cramer, you grabbed a rather minor point (on which you are probably > right), and then you _TOTALLY_ ignore the major premise. > > That is poor debate tactics. If you can think of a reason that > Raygun is always Right (I mean, morally, not politically), then > state it. I think you must agree that somethings Raygun does > is in fact good. Other things are blatent international terrorism. > And in general, he is inconsistent. > > David Smyth I don't think "Raygun is always Right" -- he's wrong at least as much as he is right. I just don't have much tolerance for his opponents misrepresenting his position. If you look around USENET, you will find me criticizing the way the media have misrepresented Jesse Jackson as well -- and he's much less my preference than Reagan. Clayton E. Cramer