[thechat] name of Operation Infinite Justice to be changed

[spinhead]

I have friends who spent WWII in prison because 'they weren't with US.'
Neutrality during wartime was viewed as sedition. If this war really happens
and my 20-year-old son DOESN'T end up in prison for his refusal to go to
war, I'll be very surprised. Human nature and the political machine haven't
changed that much in 50 years.

spinhead


----- Original Message -----
From: <martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com>
To: <thechat at lists.evolt.org>
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 6:24 AM
Subject: RE: [thechat] name of Operation Infinite Justice to be changed


>
> Memo from Martin P Burns of PricewaterhouseCoopers
>
> -------------------- Start of message text --------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> Please respond to thechat at lists.evolt.org
>
> Sent by:  thechat-admin at lists.evolt.org
>
> To:   thechat at lists.evolt.org
> cc:
>
>
> Subject:  RE: [thechat] name of Operation Infinite Justice to be changed
>
>
> >> ---
> >> President Bush urged global support for his war on terrorists, warning
> the
> >> world: "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Does that mean that those who don't support military retaliation are
> "with
> >> the terrorists"?
>
> >I think it means pick a side - no mention of military action in that
> >particular statement.
>
> None needed - if the decision is for military retaliation, then
> non-supporters
> are 'with the terrorists' by this logic.
>
> >This might be tricky for nations whose previous choice in matters of
> >conflict has been neutrality, though.
>
> It makes it almost impossible, just as it attempts to make impossible any
> kind of debate
> of whether this is either humane or effective.
>
> As a first and final ultimatum, it's backed the entire region into a
corner
> I think, with war
> the only way out. Some might say that it's a perfect example of
> manufacturing a pretext for an invasion.
>
> Cheers
> Martin
>