AW: [ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S. Army in Afghanistan

Tue Nov 4 06:57:41 CST 2008

Franz made the comment (see below), Here on RADSAFE I 
>read about proposals to attack China, Iran, Cuba and North Korea. Unbelievable - shame on you!

I do not believe anybody was proposing attacking China, etc; your (Steven Dapra) comment  had to do with the US being selective on  what dictators they should attack, as they should be.  Do you really believe that the US or anybody should negotiate with every country, every person, every situation the same why?

________________________________

From: Steven Dapra [mailto:sjd at swcp.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 8:22 PM
To: Riely, Brian P.; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: RE: AW: [ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S. Army in Afghanistan

Nov. 3

        I'm not sure what this is about, and I am choosing to not comment.

Steven Dapra

At 08:26 PM 11/2/08 -0600, Riely, Brian P. wrote:

	Franz, Steven is the one who came up with the phase about attacking  China, Iran, Cuba and North Korea.  Shame on you for not understanding the context of that statement.

	-----Original Message-----
	From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Franz Schönhofer
	Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 5:51 PM
	To: 'Steven Dapra'; radsafe at radlab.nl
	Subject: AW: AW: [ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S. Army in Afghanistan

	Dear Steven,

	Thank you so much for your information. I apologize for the misunderstanding of the title of the Graham Green - book: The correct title is "The quiet American". It describes anyway a very naive American who accepts in nowadays Vietnam anything leading to the death of natives, if it only is in the interest of his country. He has not the slightest scrupels to take the girlfriend of the narrator, who had saved his life. 

	I have returned this afternoon from three weeks in Marokko. Fortunately I did not meet any ugly Americans, ugly Germans or - worst of all - ugly Austrians, only very nice people, mostly from France and Spain. Ugliness seems to be restricted to certain parts of a country or rather of a city.
	The further the places are away from tourist centers, the better the communication is. 

	Fortunately the average population has no force to start a nuclear war. What frightens me on this thread is, that some persons think they are entitled to claim nuclear attacks on some countries.

	Best regards,

	Franz

	Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
	MinRat i.R.
	Habicherg. 31/7
	A-1160 Wien/Vienna
	AUSTRIA

	-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
	Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag von Steven Dapra
	Gesendet: Sonntag, 02. November 2008 23:10
	An: radsafe at radlab.nl
	Betreff: Re: AW: [ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S. Army in Afghanistan

	Nov. 2

	         According to Wikipedia, "ugly American" is an epithet used to refer to perceptions of loud, arrogant, demeaning, thoughtless and ethnocentric behavior of American citizens mainly abroad, but also at home.  Although the term is usually associated with or applied to travellers and tourists, it also applies to US corporate businesses in the international arena."  (citations omitted)  Wikipedia invokes the Encarta dictionary and Dictionary.com as giving similar definitions.

	         My sister (who was born and raised in the United States) traveled in Europe frequently between approximately 1980 and 2000.  She and her husband lived in West Germany for some five years in the 1990s.  She told me once that during her travels she had personally observed many loud-mouthed, demanding, and arrogant Americans.

	The book "The Ugly American" (1958) was written by William Lederer and Eugene Burdick.

	         The link to the Wikipedia article is <ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugly_American>.  The site has a summary of the book.  I read it over 40 years ago, however I can remember virtually none of it and hence will not comment on it.

	         Franz makes a few legitimate points, however at present I'm not going to address any of what he wrote.

	Steven Dapra

	At 07:30 PM 11/2/08 +0100, Franz Schönhofer wrote:
	>RADSAFERs,
	>
	>I try to comment on Howard Longs political excursion from a context 
	>including radioactivity and nuclear topics - they are involved indeed 
	>and I hope that Marcel accepts this opinion.
	>
	>Reading Howard Longs bla-bla about "liberation, freedom, democracy, net
	gain
	>for the US, "prosperity" (for whom?)" is annoying and only shows that 
	>he
	has
	>not the slightest clue about the situation of states, their 
	>infrastructure, the living conditions of their inhabitants, diseases, 
	>poverty, risk for
	life
	>etc. Etc. Howard Long is a typical species called "The Ugly American", 
	>a term created to my knowledge by Graham Greene in one of his books, 
	>where he gives an excellent characterisation of this type of American 
	>set against
	the
	>background of the French war in Indochina. Needless to say that I have 
	>during my many visits in the USA not encountered any of these "ugly 
	>americans" personally, but judging from the press and its description 
	>of US politicians and of course Howard Long I know, that they exist. 
	>Needless to say that people I meet are usually not of the lowest 
	>classes. But it was amazing during my visit to my beloved South West 
	>last October, that most people I met at the cultural and outstanding 
	>landscape sites started to complain about the then and still present 
	>administration, without any provocation from my side. Here on RADSAFE I 
	>read about proposals to attack China, Iran, Cuba and North Korea. Unbelievable - shame on you!
	>
	>I am not going to react on the "benefits" for the USA, but I have 
	>noticed that a so called "radiological threat" has been used 
	>extensively by the US administration to spread fear among US citizens 
	>and to gain support for the most suppressive actions. All those 
	>nonsensical actions and the waste of money for "surveillance" (which 
	>actually has another purpose!!!!), which
	are
	>obviously there only to scare people and to put them into a state of 
	>insecurity. Only today morning in Rabat, the capital of Marocco they 
	>took away at the airport from me a very expensive tiny scissor for 
	>nails, about three centimeters long without handle.
	>
	>The possible consequences of a "dirty bomb" have been discussed 
	>extensively on RADSAFE and except some hardliners agreed that the 
	>damage of this would be mostly the conventional explosive - but still 
	>we read on RADSAFE about the terrible threat of dispersion of some 
	>radionuclides like Co-60 or iridium.
	>
	>Using this irrational fear mongering with radionuclides or nuclear
	material,
	>combined with ultra-nationalistic ideas is deeply despicable. I hope I 
	>made myself clear Mr. Howard Long.
	>
	>Best regards,
	>
	>Franz
	>
	>Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
	>MinRat i.R.
	>Habicherg. 31/7
	>A-1160 Wien/Vienna
	>AUSTRIA
	>
	>
	>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
	>Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im
	Auftrag
	>von HOWARD.LONG at comcast.net
	>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Oktober 2008 17:19
	>An: Peter Bossew; Radsafe Message
	>Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] Benefit/Harm from U.S. Army in Afghanistan
	>
	>Radsafe pertinence of this topic is risk of radioactive attack on USA, 
	>- need for HP preparation..
	>
	>  I respond to Peter and Steven (and the U Tube sarcastic fiction) with 
	>gratitude that threatened attacks on USA have not occurred following so 
	>far successful (incomplete) Afghan Liberation and Iraqi Freedom - wars 
	>designed primarily to destroy alQaeda operations, but also hoping that 
	>democracy there will give freedom, trade, prosperity - disincentive to attack us.
	>
	>Not yet as feasible are the liberation (and destruction of USA or 
	>Europe attack sources) in China, Iran, Cuba and N Korea. Hopefully, 
	>commerce self-interest in China (now dependent on USA prosperity) will 
	>effectively dampen imposition of failed Marxism-Maoism.
	>
	>USA carbon fuels are as plentiful as in the Middle east, but 
	>politically restricted by fears that should go away (glaciers now enlarge).
	>Big Oil (most monopolistic where government-owned) will have less 
	>influence with the 45 nuclear plants encouraged by the more free-market 
	>Presidential campaign.
	>
	>Howard Long

	[edit]