To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *19621 (-20)
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) That's exactly why he does it. He knows he can't even get his own countrymen to support him, so he's using his power as a figurehead to 'rally the troops' among the rest of the Arab world. Hopefully, they'll see him for the madman he is and (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Whoops! Let me clarify: Inasmuch as we have previously agreed that communist nations are evil (as opposed to Dubya's fire-&-brimstone pulpit definition of evil), then I agree that DPRK is evil. (...) Nice usage, once again! (...) I'm not sure, (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Not lost, but misplaced. No one really thinks that Dubya should have leapt to the front lines as soon as danger reared its head (though that might have been nice), but he should have addressed the nation much more promptly than he did, and he (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I'll agree completely that 'keeping the peace' is the paramount concern here. That, and the prevention of the proliferation of more WOMD. Saddam thumbed his nose at the UN resolutions and sanctions imposed on his country. Now it's time to put (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  War Ousts Sex and Britney
 
I copped this link from a certain blog I sometimes watch... (URL) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Why? I wouldn't have cared if Saddam had been allowed to thumb his nose at resolution after resolution after resolution, ad infinitum...I have no ego investment in making others obey my every word, as long as they also keep the peace. Everyone (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Rats Leaving the Sinking Ship (Re: Just Teasing...)
 
(...) This actually sums up a lot of the reasons I oppose this war. It is an unnecessary distraction. Even with UN sanctioning, it is terribly mis-timed. This should not be our focus; this war has diluted our efforts against Al Qaeda at best, and is (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) I am merely pointing out that it was a matter of greater personal importance than of national importance; consequently, I don't really care about the nature of his answers or evasions. Focus, focus, focus -- on what really matters. I am (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Rats Leaving the Sinking Ship (Re: Just Teasing...)
 
"Top White House anti-terror boss resigns" (URL) March 19 (UPI) -- The top National Security Council official in the war on terror resigned this week for what a NSC spokesman said were personal reasons, but intelligence sources say the move reflects (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Is the DPRK evil or not? I missed where you answered this one, Dave! (...) Pin it on the current administration, eh? That's quite the stretch, even for you, Dave! I'm completely happy to place most of the blame for where we are now on the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Yes, the invasion of Kuwait is over. That business is finished. What was never finished was the removal of Saddam Hussein from his nice, cozy position of power. This is something Papa couldn't finish and something Hill Billy Clinton wouldn't (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Hmm...last time I checked, it is US policy to remove the president from harm's way aka the White House. That doesn't sound like running to me. Perhaps when a threat to national security occurs, we should just have the president step out on the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) See, John? That's how one properly invokes Dave! RE: Evil--I think, Larry, that your (and my) definition of evil is markedly different from the definition supported by our Appointed Theocrat Lil' Bush. Even Reagan's reference to The Evil (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Larry's stance at the time, and I'm sure it is now the same, is the obvious. President Clinton should have called them inappropriate questions and simply dismissed it as a crude joke / witch-hunt. He should have stood up for the right by (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) There is absolutely nothing hypocritical about what I wrote. Look very closely at the region of the world we are talking about. How many countries immediately surrounding Iraq are gunning for it's immediate destruction. 0. Now, take a look at (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Actually, I've read a good deal of stuff that points out exactly why it wasn't perjury. Specifically, the Starr-crossed prosecutors were operating according to the definition of "sex" or "sexual relations" (I'm not sure which, at this point) (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Indeed! Look, the U.N. is a joke -- but at least I am willing to hear the punchline because it means people do not have to die RIGHT THIS MINUTE! And yes, of course, the U.S. has become imperialistic. Look at our feigned concern for the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It's a sad day
 
(...) Sure, I'd buy that. The problem is, Canada isn't on the UN Security Coucil while France, Germany, and Russia are. That's what I was referring to-yet another slam at the ineffectual UN that just wasn't worded right. -Dave (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) I think that SH talks about the Palestinians in an attempt to obtain more support among the Arab world. Fredrik (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) You weren't paying attention, JOHN: how can the U.S. use a UN resolution as a pretext for war when the UN doesn't back us on it? Yes, the UN shouldn't have passed such a resolution if they weren't prepared to back it up, but we have no legal (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR