[extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense

[Stephen J. Van Sickle]

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 18:18, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> I agree that its unpleasant to see only bad or spurious reasons
> given for opposing things, but unfortunately, unless you are referring
> to what's good for an email list, rather than what is good for an
> electoral outcome, it isn't self defeating. 

Well, we'll see what is or isn't self defeating in November, the only
real test.

> When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting resolution 
> 1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that he
> alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the UN 
> Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization 
> (a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
> better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of the
> US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a timetable 
> and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and 
> invade. 

How would a more capable President have handled the situation?  The only
alternative I can see was standing down the troops and letting the
sanctions collapse.  And how, exactly, was the invasion in violation of
1441 and the Charter?  Although, that is really beside the point. 
Arguing fine points of international law is silly when no one else seems
to feel a need to be bound by them.