Re: Off Beat: U.S. Navy to Mask Swastika-Shaped Barracks

["Brian Loe" <knobdy () gmail com>]

On 9/28/07, Åke Nordin <polymorpevz () gmail com> wrote:

> > Never said they did - your mixing arguments. Choose one and argue it.
>
> Uhm, then I dont know how to interpret the following:

> I believe this was so early in the thread that the sattelite images that
> were discussed was those of the swastika-shaped buildings at
> Coronado. At least I made that connection when you wrote about
> censoring sattelite images to mitigate threats to the bases when
> the fear mongering part of this thread flowered.

I'm sorry you don't know how to interpret an example pulled from
current news. Its not fear mongering, it's arguing. I could have said
Korea, Japan or the UK - it doesn't matter. You don't prepare just for
the known threats, but all threats.


> > > I fail to comprehend how outspoken animosity towards Iran from
> > > another Head of State with strong backing from another set of
> > > religious fundamentalists could have any positive effect at all
> > > in that matter.
> >
> > I don't either, so what's your point?
>
> Seismic testing of your opinions, I think. That is, having you state
> just that.

Okay, wtfe. That wasn't an opinion, it was a verbal shrug and a
request for more info. I don't know what heads of state your talking
about or how they relate to the discussion. And I'm afraid we'll need
to recompile this thread in order to regain context if you do explain
this further...

> > And are you calling Israel a
> > bunch of religious fundamentalists?
>
> I can't say that I've followed developments that close that I got the
> scoop on Shimon Perez or Ehud Olmert threatening Iran with
> full-scale war. Neither does "strong backing" necessarily imply
> the entire population. A vocal minority with a strong agenda
> certainly fits in.

Israel is a nuclear power - there is an implicit threat of full
nuclear attack anytime your show animosity toward a nuclear power.
That's the utility of a nuclear arsenal without having to wipe out all
life on the planet.

> So no, I wasn't primarily thinking of ultraorthodox jews, rather
> the usual suspects of U.S. TV evangelists, creationists and
> what else we illuminated europeans perceive your religious
> right wing Washington lobby to be. Explicit enough?

I guess we need to decide on a new word for "fundamentalists" when it
comes to muslims then. I have yet to see a video out of DC depicting a
priest beheading someone...

> > If they are, we could use a lot
> > more of that kind of fundamentalism in the muslim world - then they'd
> > be more focused on trade and building something out of their dessert
> > heap as opposed to slobbering all over themselves about what another
> > group was able to do with theirs!
>
> Couldn't agree more. That has been a subject of my fascination
> ever since I was a kid (around the time of the Yom Kippur war
> and on). I primary blame that on their liberal, democratic soft
> underbelly that never could function as effective as the very
> efficiently run totalitarian states that are their neighbours.

Okay, you appear to be writing in code. Please decipher:
First, you're blaming someone's liberal underbelly and I have to
assume you mean Israel's. But Israel isn't the one that is wrong in
what you agreed with me saying. In other words, what are you blaming
on that underbelly?

Second, what "efficiently run totalitarian states" could you possible
be talking about? Not one of their neighbors is remotely as stable as
Israel, even with Israel being under the constant threat of attack!

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.