As I've said, new is not necessarily better. Yes Mubarak and Gaddafi were bad evil men. But are the people of Egypt and Libya any better off with their replacements? Israel is wondering the same thing.
In the case of the Libyan rebels here's a shocker: some are al Qaeda!!! Gee, and I thought there were only a handful of AQ left! Or so the left and Doc would have us believe. Although, I do have to ask, since when did AQ keep a membership roster so we'd know how many there were?????
http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2011/03/the_telegraph_l.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Hyscience+%28Hyscience%29
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime.
Yeahhhh right.
And since when do we have money to help ANYONE these days? We should not have gone in there, we didn't for Iran, Rwanda, Darfur, Egypt, so why for Libya? Oil ya say. Even though Libya only supplies about 2% of the worlds oil and almost nothing directly to the US, many critics will claim this is yet again a war for oil.
Tunisia? That's only 260,000 barrels A YEAR!!! That's nothing.
So, again, why Libya? Maybe there really is something to this United Nations "Responsibility To Protect" Doctrine. I may have more on that later.
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Saturday, March 5, 2011
The minds of the south
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/04/the-minds-of-the-south/
As Jefferson Davis put it in his inaugural address as provisional president of the Confederacy, “Our present position … illustrates the American idea that government rests upon the consent of the governed, and that it is the right of the people to alter or abolish a government whenever it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established.”
This contrasted with prevailing Unionist ideas, articulated by Abraham Lincoln, which held that first there had been an American people and a Union, and then this Union had sanctioned the political subdivisions that were the states.
Sounds like they thought more like Jefferson Davis! Most people think southerners of the time (and now) were stupid uneducated buffoons. And they think the Civil war was all about race. Little do they know that Lincoln said if he could have held the union together by keeping slavery, he would have done so.
More history being re-written.
This surprisingly from a NY Times writer!
As Jefferson Davis put it in his inaugural address as provisional president of the Confederacy, “Our present position … illustrates the American idea that government rests upon the consent of the governed, and that it is the right of the people to alter or abolish a government whenever it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established.”
This contrasted with prevailing Unionist ideas, articulated by Abraham Lincoln, which held that first there had been an American people and a Union, and then this Union had sanctioned the political subdivisions that were the states.
Sounds like they thought more like Jefferson Davis! Most people think southerners of the time (and now) were stupid uneducated buffoons. And they think the Civil war was all about race. Little do they know that Lincoln said if he could have held the union together by keeping slavery, he would have done so.
More history being re-written.
This surprisingly from a NY Times writer!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
