You don't read what you post, do you? The Pasha of
Tripoli wanted protection money from pirates attacking
our shipping interests. We'd been paying it since 1796
or so because we had other issues to deal with first, but
didn't want to pay the "increase" the Pasha wanted.
Doesn't sound like a "first thing we did was attack Muslims
on the other side of the world", with the implication that
it was preemtive in any way. If you want to build your
case, you'd better a) read the entry first, and not just
hope we don't read it, and b) learn a little history from
some books (I'd recommend Tindall's "America: A
Narrative History" volumes for a general overview)
before you sound off.

--Mike L.


"David" wrote in message
...
As soon as the paint was dry on the ''USA Open for Business''
shingle
the first thing we did was attack Muslims on the other side of the
world. No wonder they think they have to kill us. They are acting
in
self-defense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripoli

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:18:50 GMT, m II
wrote:

David wrote:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:45:37 -0500, "Jack Painter"

wrote:



Well, its too bad you are so disconnected from the boys and girls
that make
up the American armed forces. We have fought animals and defeated
them
before, and we're defeating them now. Not one generation of
Americans has
known exemption from having to deal with countries and peoples
who tortured
and murdered their prisoners as well as their own countrymen. The
muslims
aren't much different in that respect than the Germans, Japanese,
Koreans,
Vietnamese, Sandanistas, Serbs, Taliban or fundamentalist muslim
anywhere.
We can and do defeat them without turning into something
repuilsive, or
proscribing a lack of freedoms in our own country that would
alarm Thomas


Nagasaki, Dresden, My Lai, etc.


not forgetting the half million killed in the Phillipines.


http://home.wanadoo.nl/ndf/special/R...0US%20Terroris
m.html

http://snipurl.com/atbv


====================================
The Americans have killed up to EIGHT million worldwide because of
their activities. The term 'Banana Republic' was used to describe
the
'Democracies' they set up. Talk about a Rogue State (and the Dole
empire).

http://www.doublestandards.org/ded.html
====================================

If you want to defeat someone, it helps to see through their eyes.

Crusades, Tripoli, 1920, Al Saud, Operation Ajax. Perception is
reality, moreso than ''truth''.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_ajax

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:52:31 -0500, "Michael Lawson"
wrote:

You don't read what you post, do you? The Pasha of
Tripoli wanted protection money from pirates attacking
our shipping interests. We'd been paying it since 1796
or so because we had other issues to deal with first, but
didn't want to pay the "increase" the Pasha wanted.
Doesn't sound like a "first thing we did was attack Muslims
on the other side of the world", with the implication that
it was preemtive in any way. If you want to build your
case, you'd better a) read the entry first, and not just
hope we don't read it, and b) learn a little history from
some books (I'd recommend Tindall's "America: A
Narrative History" volumes for a general overview)
before you sound off.

--Mike L.

::yawn:: How original. I'm surprised you didn't bring
up the Romans and the Greeks to support your viewpoint.

If you want to defeat someone, do what Genghis Khan
did.

--Mike L.


"David" wrote in message
news
If you want to defeat someone, it helps to see through their eyes.

Crusades, Tripoli, 1920, Al Saud, Operation Ajax. Perception is
reality, moreso than ''truth''.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_ajax

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:52:31 -0500, "Michael Lawson"
wrote:

You don't read what you post, do you? The Pasha of
Tripoli wanted protection money from pirates attacking
our shipping interests. We'd been paying it since 1796
or so because we had other issues to deal with first, but
didn't want to pay the "increase" the Pasha wanted.
Doesn't sound like a "first thing we did was attack Muslims
on the other side of the world", with the implication that
it was preemtive in any way. If you want to build your
case, you'd better a) read the entry first, and not just
hope we don't read it, and b) learn a little history from
some books (I'd recommend Tindall's "America: A
Narrative History" volumes for a general overview)
before you sound off.

--Mike L.