Re: News Release

"Volker Birk" <bumens@dingens.org> wrote in message
news:443f3f07@news.uni-ulm.de...
> Cliff <whidbey.us@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Ah, then the police in Germany is much better, I see ;-)

Really?
http://www.mltranslations.org/Germany/AntiNazi.htm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/9/15/204329.shtml
http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=26&story_id=29165&name=German+anti-foreigner+serial+killer+strikes+again

So....it seems that Germany is just like the US in alot of respects, the
police do not show up until there is a body or a crime. I feel sorry for
people that allow themselves to be taken advantage of by criminals.

>> > I would feel very insecure, if I would know, that
>> > everybody is carrying along a weapon.
>> Why?
>
> Because of the possibilities of accidents. Because of the possibilities
> of people who will not handle with care. Because of the possibilities of
> drunk people with a weapon. Because of the possibilitis of mad or crazy
> people with a weapon. I would not feel more secure with an own weapon,
> because if he hits me and I'm hitting him, we both have a big problem...

I have carried a weapon for the last 25 years, never had an accident. Most
drunks, mad people, crazy people do not have the right to carry weapons.
This right is reserved for those with clean records and that pass a
stringent background check.

>> Here it is perfectly normal but then again I don't live in a city.
>
> Yes, I know that many people in the US feel like you. I just cannot
> understand why. But: forget that topic.

It IS one of our constitutional rights:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

>> > Hm... what do you think a father of a kid feels, when his kid was shot
>> > say by accident by US teenagers in uniform, and he sees the officially
>> > censored film about the US teenager in uniform who listens to this
>> > special rock song with the text "Burn, motherf*cker, motherf*cker,
>> > burn!" and bangs with his vehicle-mounted machine gun onto everything
>> > which moves?
>> Sorry, I didn't see that propaganda film.
>
> It was not a propaganda film, but a reportage which officially was
> allowed by the US army. You have censorship now for such pictures.
> One thing, which interferes with democracy, too, BTW.

I did not see the film so I cannot answer to you.

>> > Can you imagine the hate, the US Army there is breeding? Hate against
>> > the
>> > USA? Hate, comparable to the hate against Saddam?
>> I have talked to a lot of soldiers that have served in Iraq. That is not
>> their perception.
>
> I'm not talking about the perception of US soldiers. And I don't want to
> accuse someone here.

Thank you.

>> >> Have you read the recent documents from the Saddam regime? They are
>> >> pretty
>> >> enlightening:
>> >> http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm
>> >> Most of them are in Arabic, many of them have been translated and the
>> >> translations are stunning.
>> > Really, I'm not willing to compare the government of the United States
>> > of America to this vermin of a dictator. Sorry, this is no base we can
>> > discuss on.
>> It has nothing to do with comparisons, it has to do with facts,
>> historical
>> facts now.
>
> I tested. But the document I downloaded was Arabic. Sorry, I cannot read
> this. Could you explain, please, what you want to tell me?

The documents show that Saddam did have a relation ship with al queda, they
also show that the WMD's that we thought he had, Saddam also thought he had.
The documents show that we did indeed have good cause for removing Saddam.

>> > That Saddam is the last person I want to see holding an office, we
>> > don't
>> > need to discuss. About the US we can, we must discuss. About Saddam,
>> > there is nothing to discuss, and never was. Why did Rumsfeld support
>> > Saddam at all? I really don't understand.
>> > http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2003/02/rumsfeld-saddam.jpg
>> An enemy of my enemy is my friend.
>
> Yes, this is the ever repeating error of US foreign policy. And this
> everytime failed and leads into desaster.

Just like the disaster that led to the fall of the Soviet Union and the
tearing down of the Berlin Wall? Sometimes things are part of a larger
picture. Every body at the time was pissed as hell at Reagan for his posture
against the USSR but in the long term the strategy worked, to the benefoit
of the world. Saddam was just a pawn in the larger picture, that is why
Rumsfeld, actually the US, Rumsfeld was just a spokesman.

> When will the US government learn, that this should not continue any more?
>
> An enemy of your enemy could be your friend. But he also can trick you
> and be the enemy of the both of you.
>
> Your political friends you can recognize in a very easy way: they share
> your basic ideas with you. Saddam never did.
>
>> Doesn't mean we were right.....I'm just
>> stating the facts.
>
> Yes.
>
>> > I don't think so. A great leader makes intelligent decisions, which
>> > lead
>> > into a situation, the people she/he leads are benefitting of.
>> Great leaders make decisions not based on popularity, some of these
>> decisions are tough decisions.
>
> Yes. But: intelligent decisions, please. Not dumb decisions, which lead
> into a situation, people are suffering from.

You call it dumb, but remember we did not start this. We did not declare
war, war was declared against us.

>> > I don't think that losing so much friends in the world and gaining so
>> > much enemies can lead into a situation where the US people bill
>> > benefit.
>> > This war will not end this way. It will only grow and get harder.
>> We have been at war for quite some time just no one has recognized it.
>> Militant Islam against the world. I would think that someone would
>> appreciate us fighting your battles also.
>
> I'm appreciating your efforts to fight for the ideas of freedom and
> democrathy, even if I'm thinking that you're spending too much energy
> into the completely wrong places.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

> Look, we're fighting both at the same side. We're using very different
> provisions, though.
>
> What we need is to win the hearts of the Arabic people, if we want to
> bring democrathy and freedom to them. We need their hearts, not the
> Islamistic criminals.
>
> To win the heart of man, you first need to try to undertstand him. Then
> you have to show him, that you don't want to cheat him, but really help.
> You have to show him, that you're caring about him, that you're not
> ignoring his situation and his problems.
>
> After winning his confidence, you can try to take him by the hand and to
> teach him by showing him possible positive results.
>
> Gaining enough confidence, you have to ask him for helping, because he
> must improve himself. And you can support him and argue the people who
> want to inhibit his change. And, at last, you ask him to help to spread
> your ideas, which are now his own ideas. Not because you forced him,
> but you convinced him.
>
> This can work, I think.

Wishful thinking. I also wish that would work but how is that to work
against a country like Iraq? One that was controlled with a strong hand by a
dictator? How would that work against N Korea and kim il? What about Iran
and almedijani?

> With a weapon, you cannot win the heart of a man. You can hit it, but
> not win.
>
> Please think about the fact, that we're not fighting a war in the
> meaning of a war between states. We're fighting a war to win the minds
> and the hearts of people, for inhibiting them from being abused by
> Islamistic criminals, and for convincing them that the ideas of freedom
> and democracy will really change their life for their own benefit.

I agree, the problem is that with a dictator form of government how do you
win the hearts and minds of the people when dissent is punishable by death?
Saddam controlled his people with fear, same with kim il. How do you win the
hearts and minds when any form of dissent is crushed.

>> Somebody has to stand up against
>> Muslim extremists and Sharia law. It certainly sounds like you or your
>> leaders don't have the gumption to.
>
> This is only an error based on misunderstanding.

Misunderstanding? Or a unwillingness to put your actons and deeds where your
mouth and heart is? Unwillingness to make tough decisions and stick by them.
Received on Mon May 1 01:07:07 2006