BartCop wrote:
> By the way, just to piss off a lot of people who didn't like my
> "If the Afghans want to be free why aren't they willing to fight for it?" rant,
> NBC has a "special movie event" coming about how a lone village
> fought back against the Nazi's.

I guess you didn't recognize which story NBC has dramatized.   The "lone village" was the Warsaw Ghetto.
NBC is presenting its program as some sort of revelation -- and this may be true for the people who get
all their historical knowledge from "special movie events."
 

So, you open with a cheap, personal shot.
Your determination to make this personal is disturbing.

Did I say I get "all my historical knowledge" from TV movies that haven't been broadcast yet?
I'm surprised a friend would do that.
Do you treat all your friends this way?
...or am I no longer your friend?
 

 BartCop wrote:
> From the previews, it looks like what I've been saying the Afghans should do.
> The previews showed townspeople (even women) throwing gas bombs on the Nazi's
> from their roofs as they stormtropped thru their town.  To me, that looks like a people
> who refused to be conquered. People who refused to bend over for anybody.

Well, if it's on TV, it must be true, or should be true.  The people may have "refused to be conquered,"
but they were conquered anyway.  Their fate was a lot worse than to be forced to "bend over for" the Nazis,
as they well knew.  In the Warsaw Ghetto, they were resisting deportation from miserable living conditions
and harsh oppression to what they knew were death camps, and they were fighting in support of the Allies.
Hurrah, they took some Nazis out before they were taken out.  They still lost -- the ones who weren't killed
outright were deported.  (You did know that the Nazis won this particular fight, didn't you?)
 

Margaret - I am unaccustomed to fielding cheap shots from you.
Is this a one-time thing, or is this the new Margaret?
Yes, history scholar that I am, I'm familiar with who won World War II.

I hereby appoint Margaret Shemo as Queen of the Doves. You seem to have just said,
"If the fight looks difficult - surrender immediately to avoid making your conquerers angry."
Yes, I am on the other side of that.  I'm with the "Fight back and defend yourself" group.
 

There were resistance fighters ("lone villages") all over Europe.  There were plenty of people who overtly
or covertly opposed the Nazis, in symbolic or substantial ways; some of them were killed by the Nazis for
their efforts.  However brave those people were, it still took American arms wielded by American soldiers,
sailors and airmen fighting in alliance with the armed forces of other nations to defeat the Nazis.
Luckily, FDR didn't share your view that  "If the Europeans want to be free why aren't they willing to fight for it?"

Again, all I'm hearing is, "If it looks like a tough fight - surrender early and often to save time."
 

Your argument can be turned against the Jews who didn't "fight back."  (I'm not saying that's what you're doing,
merely that it can be done.  And it would be outrageous to do so.)  I assume that where captive populations
didn't "fight back" against the Nazis, it was not because they didn't want to be "free," but because they didn't
like their chances as unarmed civilians against stormtroopers.  They thought they might get out alive.

Better red than dead, eh?
If our founding fathers agreed with you, we'd have a English king instead of a Texas king right now.
Freedom is either worth fighting for - or it's not.   If someone doesn't think the fight is worth it - fine,
but they shouldn't complain about their fate if they've chosen to accept it rather than fight for change.

I'll also bet 90 percent of the Jewish people agree with me.
Do you think the phrase "Never again" means, "I can't wait to surrender peacefully?"
 

You can compare the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto to the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 who put up a fight.
After the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto got word of what was happening at Treblinka, some of them decided to fight
deportation to the death.  After the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 got word of what happened in New York
City and at the Pentagon, some of them decided to fight the hijacking.  They all accepted that they were going to die,
whether or not they fought back.  We should honor the choices of the people who decided to resist.  But I won't go
further with you, and condemn the people who were too frightened and confused, too hopeful of surviving their
suffering, to "fight back."  A concept like "death camps" must have been unimaginable to European Jews, just as
Americans never thought that hijackers would use passenger planes as weapons.

You seem to pick the examples that do your position the most harm.
You've rightly put me on the side of the people who are willing to fight back.
You've also rightly put yourself against those goals.

The heroes on Flight 93 only had minutes to make their decision.
The Afghans have had two decades to make the decision to fight.
I don't think I've ever comdemned those who were unable to fight.
I want them to stop whining about how bad things are if they're unwilling to take a risk for change..
 

If our bombing of Afghanistan destroys the Taliban -- and with all our armed might, we can't be sure that we
will accomplish that -- that's more than the Taliban's victims can do for themselves.  The survivors of our bombing,
civil war, unrelieved cold and hunger may decide that it was worth their increased hardships and the deaths of friends
and relatives.  (Of course, we're making the decision for them, but we did that in Kosovo, too.)  The problem is,
removing the Taliban leadership isn't the same as putting something better in its place.  My principal objection is
to the pretense that Americans who support the bombing really care about the freedom of Afghans.  Powell is
already looking for "Taliban moderates" to deal with, or should I say to be snookered by?  Just five months ago,
the Taliban were our allies in the War Against Drugs.  Now, they're the enemy in the War Against Terra.
You're doing what the Bush administration is doing:  making Afghans our enemies, because -- so far -- all we've
done with our bombing is to kill Afghans, and as we all know, Americans don't target innocents.
But if bombing makes YOU feel better, it can't be all bad.

Margaret, you've fallen so far.
You're a clever craftsman with words, but you just said "BartCop enjoys bombing innocent Afghans."
If you were anybody else you'd get the quick, two-word response.

I can only assume your passion has clouded your judgment.
You come into my house and accuse me of murder "so I'll feel better?"
My tongue is bloody right now.

I hate to be in the position of debating a lady I respect and find myself having to holster my weapons.
Gee, that almost makes me LESS than a gleefully murdering scumbag, doesn't it?
Too bad self-restraint isn't an option you exercise with your friends.
 

"If the Afghans want to be free why aren't they willing to fight for it?" is worse than a "rant," it's a slur.

No, it's a goddamn question, Margaret.
It's a question you've chosen to answer with cheap-shots and personal attacks.
Funny how we can't disagree on this without you painting me as the gleefully murdering scumbag.

Why are you willing to give the benefit of the doubt to bin Laden but not a fellow American?
You keep looking for ways to "get along" with the Taliban, but you want my head on a stick.
You have this dove personality for the murderers of 7000, but the talons come out for Ol' BartCop.
You're a classic dove - Peace to the enemy, and fight your own at home.
If I was using your tactics, you'd be "Margaret Fonda" by now, but I wouldn't do that to a friend.

Twenty years ago, the Afghans fought to be free -- they fought the Russians, and they won -- and then they got
the Taliban and the Northern Alliance.  And let me point out again, as others have done, that Americans were not
willing to fight, in any sense, against the people who stole our last presidential election.  If anyone should reproach
the Afghan people, who have nothing left after their last fight for freedom but their miserable lives, for not risking
those lives in a fight against the leaders who betrayed them, it shouldn't be Americans.

Where are you going with that absurdity?
You're implying I should've fought harder in Florida?
I've got no right to urge the Afghans to fight their oppressors because some Florida
Democrats wanted Thanksgiving turkey more than they wanted their votes to count?
 

I sure miss my friend, the sane Margaret Shemo.
Is she gone forever?  ...or just on vacation?