🚀 go-pugleaf

"Werner" <whetzner@mac.com> wrote in message 
news:1163778563.489782.302610@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> mcs wrote:
>>.. For instance, if we had cameras that were able to see
>> the head of a penny from space in early 70s how is it we can't defeat
>> terrorists who have no army persay, no organized communication system, no
>> airforce and  no armored tanks?
>
> Guerrilla wars sometimes succeed. Guerrillas are very ruthless. They
> murder without mercy teachers, officials, police, doctors or anyone who
> opposes them; anyone who represents the 'established order'.
>
Ha I am not saying they are not lethal but how organized  and  effective can 
many terrorists be  without  education  and the total  ammunitions we have 
in technology  and arms  against the best trained army in the world . At 
some point you think the technology and total number of weapons would close 
the gap in winning this war. Lets say the same five people plant bombs and 
then they go to the same two houses all the time. How hard would it be to 
form some kind of strategy to even tighten the noose of those who associate 
with them over time, by setting up traps and monitoring the same people? 
Something is not right. . True terroism is lethal but do we know why many in 
Congress say we fought an ill prepared war?  .

> I'm sure we could stop the Iraq insurgency. But I expect it requires
> the same kind of ruthlessness practiced by insurgents. We don't have
> that kind of will. For example, Saddam basically wiped out Kurdish and
> Shiite towns to stop insurgencies. We could easily wipe out Baghdad and
> the surviving insurgents would reconsider their efforts. But we will
> not.

then we will win or we will not win and if we don't win then what was the 
point? At any point we have to know that any one terrorist or ten terrorists 
can do more damages then killing thousands of them. It only takes one to to 
ten terrorists to plot weapons of mass destruction. The sad fact is we know 
who has the weapons of mass destruction and thats not who we are going after 
are we?



>
>
> Its the same for pollution, tell them you
>> know exactly how and how much poison people are made to inhale why don't
>> they do something about it? These questions will never be asked which 
>> makes
>> you wonder about the types of freedoms we really have. The thing is when
>> they decide to kill people to maintain jobs for others thats when 
>> citizens
>> should know they crossed the line. The pharmacy industry and energy
>> companies now can get away with murdering people because they promote 
>> jobs
>> for those in power Yet how many Americans would believe all this?
>
>
> I don't see any industry murdering people. I always had the impression
> that pharmacy industry seeks to saves lives and energy companies
> provide energy. What would we do without either?
>
First off you don't probably see 50 percent of commercials in our area for 
health care. You should compare our health to other cities. we have more 
violence and diesease and less longevity. We almost have twice the amount of 
cancers and heart disease. My argument is if we are concerned with errant 
car seats why we are not concerned with one in five kids getting asthma in 
some places in ne? I am more concerned with why reporters don't think this 
is important then why Pharmacies do know why and are here ready to pounce on 
people whose health is compromised. In addition like I said ten times 
before. if one were objective we have epa and Amercian Lung Association and 
new studies pointing out studies that says tens of thousands are dying from 
this moderate polution and I am one of them. I don;t take being poisoned 
lightly. So then you see other things and you realize that whats happening 
is what I consider all amercians being protected equally. to say the least.