 | | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) 4 Words: France, Israel Suez & Nukes. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dubya and Osama--Separated at Birth?
|
|
(...) I heard they were twins once before: The algebra of infinite justice (URL) who is Osama bin Laden really? Let me rephrase that. What is Osama bin Laden? He's America's family secret. He is the American president's dark doppelganger. The savage (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) It's the inconsistent foreign policy that I really want to see the end of. I was being a little 'over the top' to make the point, but it's like, "Hey Joe Schmoo, until you get your act together, don't bother coming out!" So yes, I was a little (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) Have I done that? Does public opinion amount to evidence of a threat? ;) <snip> (...) A very good point! (...) That's a little sad. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) I saw a poll the other day (cited on CNN, but I can't remember the uber-source) that showed that about 45% of Americans believed that the Bush administration would intentionally falsify information to make its case, and something like 58% (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) Usually the list of Who The US Won't Sell To is the same as the list that France Will Sell To. Pretty much where there is a demand, there will be a supply. As to meddling, David (not Dave!), at what point should the US have stopped "medlling" (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) I think the U.S. public is becoming wary of Bush's motivation. They may not like Saddam Hussein, but the Al Queda connection is tenuous at the very best. (...) Those governments that support the US against the wishes of their citizens may find (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) I would certainly support that plan. Can we rely on our allies in France (for example) likewise to cease the sale of arms to any country that doesn't belong to France? (...) Sadly, this is hardly a US-only phobia. Other nations likewise have (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Dubya and Osama--Separated at Birth?
|
|
Game 1--You choose the power that said it! "The enemies we face are resourceful, merciless and fanatically committed to inflicting massive damage on our homeland, which they regard as a bastion of evil," says <Osama><Dubya> "In this war, there can (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) Oh please do! And while you're withdrawing your troops from non-US countries, please remove your diplomats, your meddling, and your arms sales from any country that is not yours. I (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) Honestly, it's hard to say. There's the rabid (and, frankly, fascist) campaign by the Bush administration to marginalize and demonize anyone voicing reservations about prosecuting this unjust war, so it's difficult to assess the actual (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
(...) It could be argued that NATO and the UN are gaining respect in the international community for failing the follow Bush's line. Indeed, it is notable that a large proportion of the public internationally will only support a war which has UN (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:HA6Joo.M94@lugnet.com... (...) 8, (...) Parliament (...) on (...) asked (...) NATO (...) welcome. (...) This is how it worked when I was a little kid and wanted some icecream: Ask (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes: <snip> (...) That's right - he didn't mention the relationship at all - he made claims about contracts and agreements. (...) What 'property is involved involved in the relationship' is not my concern. (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) You mean they're less welcome at home than they are in Germany? ;-) Richie (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
This is awesome news... not only might this little war we're about to have finish up the UN as an active force, it might well do in NATO too. From the text of a speech by Senator John McCain (R., Ariz.) on February 8, 2003, at the Munich Conference (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) Chris wasn't saying the relationship is not propery. He was saying the contract is not a property, it is documentation of the agreement of what property is involved in the relationship and how to handle disolving the contract. Chris also added (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Capitalism (was: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) Hmm, if land is not a good, then what rules should govern trading it? If you always have a right to some land as part of your right to exist, then what stops you from "selling" your land, and then demanding a land grant because you're now (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) I would agree with this refinement. It also better supports the idea that the wife terminating the relationship is different than a murderer terminating the relationship. (...) Right, it's not so much that the value of the relationship (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) No. There may be an agreement, but Frank said clearly in (URL) that "The relationships that make a family a family are property". The example of marriage may also have a contractual element which may also have value, but according to Frank's (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
