Text 6316, 150 rader
Skriven 2004-12-16 10:08:46 av John Hull (1:379/1.99)
   Kommentar till text 6311 av FRANK SCHEIDT (1:123/140)
Ärende: Breaking News!
======================
16 Dec 04 06:28, FRANK SCHEIDT wrote to BJöRN FORSSTRöM:

 FS> -=> Quoting Björn Forsström to Frank Scheidt <=-

 FS>> Based upon my experience in the U.S. Army during WWII I'd say if a 
 FS>> soldier questions mistakes he had better do it very, very 
 FS>> carefully.  In general, the opinions of Enlisted Swine were not 
 FS>> sought.

 BF>> Hope that something to the better have happend in 60 years then.

 FS> We served under The Articles of War.  After WWII the military 
 FS> justice system was changed radically.  I'm not familiar with the 
 FS> details.

Then why are you trying to "instruct" others in the ways of the military as it
is today?  

 BF>>> What answer do you think you will get today if you would ask a 
 BF>>> majority of the American teenagers?

 FS>> Good question.  I think the response would be far less general 
 FS>> than it was following the Jap attack of Pearl Harbor -- the World 
 FS>> Trade Center bombing elicited a lot of patriotism, but it didn't
 FS>> last.   During WWII, patriotism was strong all during the war.
 FS>> This time things have more or less gotten back to normal.  The 
 FS>> nation isn't mobilized the way we were in WWII.  Of course back 
 FS>> then our *freedom* as a nation was at stake.  There's no such 
 FS>> situation today.

First, teenagers in 1941 were a hell of a lot more informed, as a group, than
teenagers are today.  Second, patriotism was viewed not only as a privilege,
but one's duty in those days - as it should be at all times.  It isn't that way
today because of 50 years of anti-American liberalism poisoning the well.  And
if you think I'm making too much of it, just listen to what the Democrats say
to this day about the impeachment of Clinton, the 2000 election, and 2004
election, and a long list of other things that have taken place over the last
50 years.

Our freedom as a nation is STILL AT RISK, even today - maybe even more at risk,
because damn few people seem to care that it is.

 BF>> I agree.

 FS>> There's no way terrorists can conquer the nation -- they can only 
 FS>> cause a lot of scattered misery.

Don't be naive, Frank.  They don't have to achieve a military victory to
destroy us, they only have to make us afraid of our own shadows, raise the
paranoia level such that people quit traveling, that people no longer trust
their neighbors or their government, and go back to distrusting anyone who
isn't the same race, creed, color, and religion as themselves.  If they can
destroy our morale, they will ruin us as a nation - and the liberals are
helping them every step of the way.

 BF>> I agree.

 BF>>> And now even the Swedish PM, Göran Persson, have agreed to that 
 BF>>> the Americans were the once who did the transporting of the two 
 BF>>> Egyptians to Egypt. It's now up on the highest political level 
 BF>>> here.

 FS>> I'm surprised no mention of it has been made here ...

 BF>> As I have said before, it isn't *that* big here either but it's
 BF>> mentioned on the news.

It never appeared here because it couldn't be corroborated with any degree of
accuracy.  No newspaper is going to stick its neck out over something like that
unless they can prove it.  Besides, there are all kinds of articles printed in
the British press that never see light here, why should Sweden be any
different?

 FS> OK, if it's merely an incidental item in Swedish papers it might 
 FS> just not have been considered of sufficient American interest for 
 FS> our "news"media to pick it up.

 FS>> Intense hatred is almost a mental flaw rather than merely 
 FS>> righteous indignation directed toward some injustice.

 BF>> When intense hatered turns into fanaticism it's dangerous.

 FS> True enough ...

 BF>>> I agree but that will never happend I guess. Fanatics will always 
 BF>>> exist in one way or another.

 FS>> Fanaticism is a mental problem ...

 BF>> That's very hard to do someting about. They don't listen to 
 BF>> logical reason. 

 FS> About all one can do is to assume a defensive posture.

 FS>> No president should be considered a fool for believing the 
 FS>> conclusions of not only his own intelligence serves but those of 
 FS>> several other nations also.  There are either fools involved, but 
 FS>> it's not the president.

 BF>> As the absolute highest chief he's responsible for his employees 
 BF>> and must take the blame for if they are incompetent.

 FS> Theoretically, yes, but consider if that's carried to extremes -- 
 FS> as the anti-Bush people do it -- an employee at the lowest level 
 FS> of any organization commits a minor crime, say, steals $5.  Would 
 FS> the president of that company be held accountable?  I don't think 
 FS> so.

He is responsible for setting policy.  It is the responsibility of the various
Cabinet Secretaries, department heads and supervisors to make sure the jobs get
done.  The mundane bureaucratic day-to-day tasks of agency employees in NOT the
responsibility of the president except on the most superficial level.

 BF>>> and in, January or Febuary, Rumsfeld
 BF>>> is coming to Europe to ask for military help in Iraq I heard. If 
 BF>>> that's true, who is then
 BF>>> asking who for help? Whos problem will it then might be?

 FS>> The burden is as it always *has* been -- the entire civilized 
 FS>> world's. Terrorism is basically anti-people, including people in 
 FS>> Spain, Russia, Indonesia, the US, etc.

 BF>> It still didn't answer my questions.

Then you aren't asking the *right* questions.

 FS> Yes, it does -- it becomes the civilized world's problem ...

 BF>> About photographing in war the answer from my chief was that he 
 BF>> thinks it's against the Geneva convention to do it but IIRC USA 
 BF>> haven't signed that...or? Amnesty also prohibit it.
 BF>> Then he said that it's even up to you to decide if you want to do 
 BF>> it for personal
 BF>> use but then it's not allowed to publish them without permission. 
 BF>> He also had a few other explanations to why one shouldn't do it but
 BF>>  that would take me to long to translate.

 FS> That's a far less restrictive situation than what we Enlisted 
 FS> Swine faced during WWII.

This guy is full of sheep dip.  The Geneva convention has nothing to do with
taking pictures.

John 

America:  First, Last, and Always!
Go to www.madgorilla.us for all your Domain Name Services at the lowest rates.

--- Msged/386 TE 05
 * Origin: We are the Watchmen of our own Liberty! (1:379/1.99)