XPost: soc.culture.china, soc.culture.usa, soc.culture.iraq   
   XPost: soc.culture.african, soc.culture.syria, soc.culture.pakistan   
   XPost: rec.sport.tennis   
   From: skriptis@post.t-com.hr   
      
   jdeluise  Wrote in message:   
   > *skriptis  writes:   
   >   
   >> jdeluise  Wrote in message:   
   >>> acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn) writes:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And for Trump, if ISIS is a problem, then "we should bomb the hell   
   >>>> out of them" and make them run as Putin's Russia has done.   
   >>>   
   >>> So you don't really have any problem with interventionism after all,   
   >>> just run in with some nukes (as Trump has said he'd consider) and get   
   >>> the job done and declare victory.   
   >>>   
   >>> Sounds like something a neocon operative would say...   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> It's like saying a police officer doesn't have problems with   
   >>  killing people. You equate him killing an armed criminal on the   
   >>  street and him raping and killing a women (or a man) off duty.   
   >>  That's the same to you.   
   >>   
   >> What a sicko.   
   >   
   > While lo yeeOn rails against the interventionist behavior exhibited by   
   > Bush and "the neocons", he seems to also support a candidate who has   
   > said he'd make all the same choices (mistakes).  Now lo yeeOn is explicitly   
   > in favor of increased bombing campaigns in the region along with all   
   > that it entails from the standpoint of collateral damage to civilians   
   > and civilian infrastructure.  Let's not forget Trump wouldn't be opposed   
   > by default to using nukes here, by his own admission.   
   >   
   > Simply put, lo yeeOn regularly speaks out of both sides of his mouth on   
   > this and many other topics, simply cannot be trusted and is very likely   
   > a neocon operative.   
   >   
   > Whatever incoherent comparison you were trying to make is irrelevant, as   
   > you clearly didn't understand the context of the thread.   
   >   
      
      
      
   It's not that difficult.   
   Interventionism is morally controversial. Lots of pros and cons.   
      
   Destroying e.g. Libya or Iraq was not intervention, it was a   
    blatant aggression and war crime. In an ideal world perpetrators   
    would receive life imprisonment.   
      
   --   
      
      
   ----Android NewsGroup Reader----   
   http://usenet.sinaapp.com/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)