Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site v1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!v1!charliep
From: charliep@v1.UUCP (Charlie Perkins)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Defending the US-a Questionaire
Message-ID: <151@v1.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Apr-85 10:24:01 EST
Article-I.D.: v1.151
Posted: Mon Apr  8 10:24:01 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Apr-85 04:35:33 EST
References: <3531@alice.UUCP>
Organization: IBM Research, Yorktown Heights, N.Y.
Lines: 83

> 1)  Does the word "liberal" often describe your personal political ethos?
	NOTE: Nobody in their right mind would let themselves be
		called liberal these days.  I used to think of myself
		as liberal until that word began to be associated
		with mindless spending, disregard for "family" values,
		Communist duplicity, and jaded naivete.

> 2)  If the United States were attacked on its own landmasses (50 states
> or possessions), would you take up arms to protect the US? (When I say
> taking up arms, I include other actions of a defensive (of the US) nature
> for those who would be better suited to things other than armed combat.)
	NOTE: You do not specify whether taking up arms includes full
		nuclear retaliation.  Some people who would favor
		self-defense might answer no even to this question.

> 4)  Are you best described as PRO (answer yes) or ANTI (answer no)
> nuclear weaponry of the sort usually referred to as "tactical"?
	NOTE: You should have explained what "tactical" means, unless
		in fact you were hoping that the "uncognoscenti" would
		not even answer.

> 5)  Does the word "conservative" often describe your personal potitical
> ethos?
	NOTE: Many "true" conservatives would not allow themselves to
		be classified as such today, since the word implies
		that one favors mindless faith in Biblical myths,
		interference with other people's value systems, xenophobia,
		"nuking 'em till they glow", and says practically nothing
		about how one interprets the constitution.
		I consider myself to be a "conservative", in the sense
		that I understood that word from civics class.

> 6)  Are you best described as PRO (answer yes) or ANTI (answer no)
> nuclear weaponry of the sort usually described as "strategic"?
	See NOTE to question 4).

> 7)  If the US were threatened by direct military action from one of the
> nations in the "western alliance", would you support or engage in the  use
> of arms?
	See NOTE to question 2).

> 8)  Does the word "libertarian" often describe your personal political
> ethos?
	I might have thought that it did until I read what libertarians
	were saying in this newsgroup!

> 9)  If the US were threatened by direct military action from one of the
> nations in the "third world", would you support or engage in the use
> of arms?
	See NOTE to question 2).

> 10) Does the word "pacifist" often describe your personal political/moral
> ethos?
	If "pacifist" meant "one who favors peace", then I am sure I
	would be a pacifist.  Unfortunately, it means wimpy, credulous,
	weak, shortsighted, frightened, and lacking convictions.

> 11) If two nations of the "Western Alliance" were at war, would you
> expect or support US intervention via use of ARMS? (i.e. a conflict
> of the Faulklands variety)  (Note that I do NOT care whose side you would
> be on.)
	See NOTE to question 2).
	Also, there is a lot of difference in this context between
	"expecting" and "supporting" US intervention.  And there is a lot
	of difference between supporting with conventional arms and
	supporting with nuclear arms.

> 12) If there were a conflict anywhere in the world that involved
> either the supply of essentail materials (i.e. oil, manganese, etc)
> or the chance of the use of fissionables/fusion weapons, would
> you support or engage in the use of arms to prevent the perceived
> catastrophe?
	See NOTE to question 11).

> 13) Does the word "independant" often describe your personal political
> ethos?
	Many people would recognize that "independant" is not a word
	at all, and therefore is not a word that could describe anyone's
	political ethos.  (Don't worry!  Everyone knew what you meant!!)
-- 

Charlie Perkins, IBM T.J. Watson Research
philabs!v1!charliep,  perk%YKTVMX.BITNET@berkeley,  perk.yktvmx.ibm@csnet-relay