::: Are you saying that the government that the US propped up in Vietnam was better than the Communism there? Yes.
::: Now imperialistic Communism maybe bad, but imperialistic
capitalism is purely anti-social and highly destructive except to
those pulling the strings.
Drivel. You assume that the Vietnam conflict was motivated by a desire to spread capitalism. You don't know many people who would fight
for the principle of freedom do you? First of all, the supression of
the free elections of Laos and Vietnam were a result of
intelligence which understood exactly what choosing communism meant
for its initiates. I'm saying the U.S. action was motivated by a desire
to stop tyrannical communist imperialism and the principles of freedom.
This is in contrast to Chomsky's mischaracterization of the hearts and
minds of men he'll never understand.
Secondly; I'm still looking for a system which has done more for its
citizenry than western style capitalism so I don't know what your
highly destructive and anti-social even mean.
::: As for the sarin nerve gas incident I have two points. 1. The existence of the gas in the first place is criminal. 2. From what I have seen so far indicates to me that it might have been used, though I have not been convinced either way yet.
And the only reason you have the idea rolling around in your head
is because of someone who decided to make the story up. Why don't you
just drop the issue until someone proves it?
::: As for the fight against tyranny, there has not yet been a need to go abroad to fight tyranny. We have plenty right here.
You mean there has not yet been a need which would motivate you to go abroad to fight tyranny. That's clear enough.
Whatever domestic tyranny you have fabricated in your head is
not comparable to the acrid stench of historic communism unless
you're extremely adept in you mental gyrations.
Stuart Gort
None.
