Of course not. He's a frail old man who decades ago employed terrorism against a dictatorship, presumably in order to replace the dictatorship with a democracy.
I and even Bush oppose even that sort of terrorism. But how does that guy's attempt to use terrorism against Cuba's dictatorship 30 years ago in order to create a government there for, of, and by the people pose any threat to civilization today?
Paul, your response to the demonstrates the blatant hypocrisy that many in the US have. If a person is a terrorist FOR America, then he is advancing the cause of "truth, justice and the American way" ala Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, Ossama bin Laden, Pervez Musharaff, the Shah of Iran, Mobutu Sese Seko, Blackwater USA, John Negroponte and any number of other tyrants, despots and terrorists who were employed by the US.
I certainly do not understand how you can sanction and approve of this man murdering innocent people on a civilian airliner, an act that did NOTHING to advance the cause of Castro's downfall. This old man was the mastermind behind this terrorist act, and others, and could still be masterminding plots of terrorism today.
If an aged Adolf Hitler turned up alive in Argentina today, would you oppose his extradition to Germany? If Ossama bin Laden were captured in Pakistan today or ten years from now, would you say he should be let go because to try him for 911 would be bringing up "old $h!t?
Why should this terrorist be treated any differently?
I do not condone this guy; I merely reject sticking him in Gitmo with the people attempting to overturn civilization and replacing it with an islamic tyranny. Although I oppose terrorism even to advance self-rule, and although I support imprisoning this guy, I see no purpose in sticking this guy in gitmo with the al qaidis.
I oppose all those examples that you cite, and it was the neocons who stood at the vanguard in opposition to supporting pro-US tyrants as a keystone of US foreign policy.
5 comments:
Of course not. He's a frail old man who decades ago employed terrorism against a dictatorship, presumably in order to replace the dictatorship with a democracy.
Oh, right..the good kind of terrorism.
I and even Bush oppose even that sort of terrorism. But how does that guy's attempt to use terrorism against Cuba's dictatorship 30 years ago in order to create a government there for, of, and by the people pose any threat to civilization today?
Paul, your response to the demonstrates the blatant hypocrisy that many in the US have. If a person is a terrorist FOR America, then he is advancing the cause of "truth, justice and the American way" ala Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, Ossama bin Laden, Pervez Musharaff, the Shah of Iran, Mobutu Sese Seko, Blackwater USA, John Negroponte and any number of other tyrants, despots and terrorists who were employed by the US.
I certainly do not understand how you can sanction and approve of this man murdering innocent people on a civilian airliner, an act that did NOTHING to advance the cause of Castro's downfall. This old man was the mastermind behind this terrorist act, and others, and could still be masterminding plots of terrorism today.
If an aged Adolf Hitler turned up alive in Argentina today, would you oppose his extradition to Germany? If Ossama bin Laden were captured in Pakistan today or ten years from now, would you say he should be let go because to try him for 911 would be bringing up "old $h!t?
Why should this terrorist be treated any differently?
I do not condone this guy; I merely reject sticking him in Gitmo with the people attempting to overturn civilization and replacing it with an islamic tyranny. Although I oppose terrorism even to advance self-rule, and although I support imprisoning this guy, I see no purpose in sticking this guy in gitmo with the al qaidis.
I oppose all those examples that you cite, and it was the neocons who stood at the vanguard in opposition to supporting pro-US tyrants as a keystone of US foreign policy.
Post a Comment