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 / *19631 (-100)
  Shame on Us (was Re: Just Teasing...)
 
"Opening War Salvos Spark Global Protests" (URL) and Australia, the only nations to commit significant numbers of troops to the U.S.-led effort, resolutely stuck by Washington. ---...--- So, that's basically the English speaking world except for (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Whose Wealth is it Again? (Re: Just Teasing...)
 
"Iraq Oil Wells May Have Been Set Ablaze" (URL) before the war began, the Pentagon (news - web sites) expressed fears that Saddam Hussein had planned to sabotage Iraq's oil fields by booby-trapping wells so one person could blow them up. A loss of (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Evidence, please. The Secret Service is, as I understand it, trained to secure the safety of the president, even if he's appointed rather than elected to the position. I think that should take a maximum of about half an hour. I'm no expert on (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) All sarcasm is lost on him, but I digress. (...) I think you mean "Secret Service", but there are those that would argue that your statement is equivalent to the one made by Dave! They may seem to have different words but they come out to the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I think a lot more of us could benefit from being separated from Cheney... Perhaps he can be placed in a rocketship and sent into space with what -- a 2 hour supply of oxygen? Works for me. Although I guess some kind of "conflict of interests" (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) One can hope! (URL) is a week or so old and not necessarily a representative sample of all Arab thinking but I did find it interesting, and agreeable. (the shots at the US and Britain and other western powers are well placed, in my view)... (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) And I think his own countrymen would rather support him than an invading and greedy foreign power. Once their loved ones are killed, lets see how quickly those sweet Iraqis embrace americans in exchange for chocolate bars and a hovel to live (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) No, he had to wait until the Secter Service was satisfied that the he was relatively safe from harm and separated from Cheney. -Dave J. (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I thought what was wanted was justice for the "helpless" Iraqi people? Why should we let SH slip away quietly when it is our "claimed" agenda to make him pay for his supposed crimes? Or is there another agenda that doesn't care about justice (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Rats Leaving the Sinking Ship (Re: Just Teasing...)
 
(...) Exactly. I love peace, but I am not a pacificist. When terror comes home they can expect a fight, more likely a serious beating, and possibly death. And they will have gotten what they so richly deserved. From the word go on 911, I have stated (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  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)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) I don't really want to argue this point overmuch, disliking almost all politicians anyway, but... Such questions should never have been put to the man in the first place. And who doesn't lie about a furtive affair? I expect better of you, (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) No John, you said one thing and I called you on it: "sometimes violence is the only way (because the bad guy starts it)." Okay, we started the current violence, so your statement has a certain irony to it. You'd be far better off amending your (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I don't drive a Hyundai, go ahead! Seoul is the one that requested we show restraint, so I don't have a problem with them eating the consequences. (...) Oh dang, I drive a Mazda. Time to switch to that BMW, I guess. Anime? They are welcome to (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) How is that being called "anti-semitic" has almost become an honor? If this is code for "has no interest in supporting Israeli aggression" then I would accept such an attack readily. I remain, of course, a friend to the Jewish community all (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Absolutely not. It was a condition of surrender, Dave, that SH disarm. He has violated that treaty, therefore it is *unresolved*. (...) Who else's would it be? (...) Rez 1441 states that "serious consequences" will occur if there isn't (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Agreed. They protested peaceably. They didn't get guns, they didn't blow things up, and they made a point that was 'heard 'round the world'. You know a long time ago someone e-mailed me this quotation: "it's a lot nicer when spray paint (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) If you think that what the Tien An Min Square protesters were saying/doing was merely "give peace a chance", you may have misunderstood. They were FIGHTING for what they believed in, and they had pledged their lives, their fortunes and their (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) The violence is a CONSEQUENCE of his FAILURE to comply. You are making my case for the impotence of the UN. If the UN isn't willing to back up their threats, they are empty and worthless. Without violence, there will be no disarming SH. That's (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) 2004: DPRK: Give us food, or Seoul gets it... you know we can do it, you saw that nuke that OBL set off earlier this year? That was us. And we made more. RoK: OK, I guess so, but just this one time... 2005: DPRK: Give us food AND a good stock (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Begin violence. (...) End violence. (...) No violence.... (...) No violence.... (...) No violence.... (...) No violence.... (...) No violence... (...) Violence, started by the U.S.! Hey this is *your* sequence of events. "sometimes violence is (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) That's a pretty good house of cards you built there. If that's the 'domino effect' that gets us to now, you cannot use "Kuwait's invasion" as the foundation building block for *this* war. The issue--the invasion of Kuwait--has been resolved. (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Um, not exactly. When a war ends the armed hostility phase with a truce agreement, it's not over until a negotiated peace is in place. In this case, the truce agreement specified that SH would disarm and change his ways. He didn't. Violations (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) No. That was resolved 11 years ago. But hey, I was just trying to give you a chance to rephrase your statement before you were jumped all over for such an inviting statement, considering that Bush is initiating the violence. I see the jumping (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Ploughed ground, but I'll explain 1 more time, and I'll type extra slowly in hopes you get it this time: 1. SH invades Kuwait. 2. UN forces repel SH from Kuwait. 3. SH agrees to >>>DISARM<<< 4. SH yanks weapons inspectors around for 11 years, (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) Easy: 1. both are victims of Bush's foreign "policy". 2. Most of the world has no respect for Bush on either issue. Scott A (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) …which Bush only mumbled about until Thatcher kicked him in the proverbial ass. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I'm not sure what would be a bigger danger: a) Bush the pilot. or b) Bush the "president". ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Kuwait was liberated. That war is over. This cannot be about that invasion--it's over. You're so quick to tell us to 'get over' Bush and the election--get over Kuwait--it's done. SH wasn't massing a force to re-invade. What is it you are (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) Did you happen to hear all the speeches coming out of the White House for the last year? Maybe someone could explain to me why they referred to SH and the Iraqis multiple times. What do they have to do with anything that is going on with OBL? (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Yes. This started 11 years ago with the invasion of Kuwait. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) Did you happen to hear SH's little speech? Maybe someone could explain to me why he referred to the Palestinians multiple times. What do they have to do with anything that is going on in Iraq? JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Ummmmmmmm, you sure you want to phrase it that way? -->Bruce<-- (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Perhaps if you click your heels together three times and say "There's no place like home! There's no place like home!" you will magically be whisked off to a place where the president of the United States at least tries to be Just, and not (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) [if true]…and now Bush is about to cause a refugee crisis in the region. Can you think of better cover to smuggle proscribed bio-agents [say] out of the country? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) But can he create a stone he can't lift? You raise some heavy theological issues, not the least of which is circular in reasoning. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) Agreed completely, Larry. When your country was smacked, I had no qualms, issues, or problems with you going after OBL. I did, and still do, have issues with your foreign policy, but that gave no right, no excuse for him doing what he did. (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Heck, yeah! He was *the Lord* according to the myth. If he allowed it to occur, then it's tantamount to causing it to occur. Dave! (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) You mean *self-inflicted* crucifixion? JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Thank you for bringing that moment of *perfect* clarity, Dave! I'll walk and talk peace, thanks. Dave K (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Perhaps if you say it enough times, it will magically become true. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) We already know he has them. He would show that he has destroyed them. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Not even if they're crucified? Dave! (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Sorry, I don't share your admiration for suicide martyrs. (...) Not when dealing with thugs. In that case, the bigger the gun the better-- it's called "results". Stand in front of as many of SH's tanks as you dare; he will roll over you every (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Exactly. Hence the entire concept of inspections is flawed... certainly with the number of inspectors that were going to be used. Now, maybe with more inspectors and a systematic examination of every square inch of countryside, it might be (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Even if true, it was working. It made for crap tv, but it was working. Bush could not take the credit, but it was working. Bush's buddies were not getting gov contracts, but it was working. Scott A (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Explain for us exactly how Saddam would prove that he doesn't have banned weapons. Dave! (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) It wasn't Blix's job to *find* them! It was SH's job to simply produce proof that he had destroyed all of the illegal weapons. Blix was merely supposed to verify this. The whole affair was a charade to make the Lefties feel good about (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It's a sad day
 
(...) I've been watching CNN so much lately that I haven't been watching "Canadian" news--the last I saw of JC, he was saying that "we have acheived what we want--the containment of SH--no need for the war". I also heard that we wouldn't support the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) It's the colour - pink ones never crash. ;) Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) [If true] It proves he was wrong; Blix would have found them. Everyone said the scenario where he'd use any WOMD was the one where he was attacked! Scott A (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) What I want to know is this: Did any of the Bush clan make money out of the war Jr was too scared to fight for his country in? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
(...) It sounds like you're tempted to plagiarise again? ;) Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It's a sad day
 
(...) <snip> Dave, we are. We have a PM who is making things up as he goes. Simply put, I think he is wrong, misguided and selfish and that the US is justified. I will let that be know come the next election, although that does not matter with our (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Speaking of which, are there any Black Hawk helicopters that HAVEN'T crashed? Lately it seems like not a day goes by that we don't hear of one crashing somewhere in the world. Perhaps we should re-examine the design of that fine vehicle. Dave! (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: <snip> (...) Then you obviously have no clue how much strength and fortitude it takes to, unarmed and undefended, stand in front of a rolling tank. Getting what one wants with a gun is mere thuggery. (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I just Googled him-- I had a suspicion that he was the president from the WW.... guess not. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) There's rumor that Iraq fired a Scud earlier today. Just a rumor, who knows if true, but if it is, it puts paid to the notion that Iraq had already disarmed, as Scuds are banned. This does not defuse the "inspections would have disarmed (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Tell that to the 20,000 who died in the Lebanon. (...) Justify that; if you can. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Nope. It will be flown in by black heliocopter. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Well that just shows what you know about American History! [joke] Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) You are right, and for 2 reasons-- inspectors can be so easily thwarted, and the man is (was?) a liar! Scuds are flying everywhere-- where the hell did they come from? It's all been a big lie. The fact is that Bush was right. (...) That's a (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) <snip> I'm going to say this one more time--it came across my desk--I'm not defending every jot and tittle, but it made me think. (...) Do you realize what you just wrote? Let me phrase it like this-- (...) Hypocritical. SH has committed (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate... (...) The subtext of Scott's 100% correct point [ie, that Lil' Bush shirked his duty] underscores the fallacy of the so-called "liberal media." During the 2000 campaign, many dozens of articles were written about Gore's (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It's a sad day
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Johann writes: <snip> (...) <snip> Surely that same arguement cannot extend to the other countries against this war, countries, say, like, ummm, Canada? Are we misguided and selfishly looking at our own interests (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) The Security Council is designed so the really powerful can stop any actions against its interests, including the United States (which has used it's veto power liberally). But the UN suffers from a lack of conviction in general. If it imposes (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes: <snip> (...) Vive Le Canada!!! Oh wait, I'm Canadian--we never talk ourselves up! Sorry about that indiscretion... ;) Dave K (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) I second this sentiment absolutely. Specifically, I have the feeling that at least one of the vehicles in our convoy is carrying a 600lb payload of "forbidden" chem weapons, all set to be loaded into a captured Iraqi al-Samoud missile to be (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) I've said before that France is hardly morally clear on this matter, since they're motivated at least in large part by their past financial investment in Iraq, as well as promised contracts for future oil rights. So, to that end, you're (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: America need not apologize
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Erik Olson writes: <snip> How refreshing to have a voice not often heard in .debate actually say something intelligent, articulate and well thought out, in contrast with so many of our recent visitors. Thanks for that (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Who the hell is he? JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) It is not a "fact", it is your anti-semitic opinion. (...) Who said Jews couldn't be anti-semitic? (That was rhetorical; I'm finished with this conversation). JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Are you implying that it is his duty to get *in* harm's way? That he can't do his duty in safety? I would submit that it is a large part of his duty to *not* get killed-- an event that would have serious national implications. All hell broke (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) What do you think President Thomas J. Whitmore would have done? ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) What is "anti-Semitic" about that statement of fact? Am I racist because Snipes is a bad actor? Am I sexist because Thatcher's policies lacked compassion? Am I homophobic because George Michael’s last album was a dud? Face facts: Israel is a (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) What about his duty? (...) youch! (...) My point is that he is "gutless"! (...) How ironic! Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Give your tired, anti-semitic trolls a rest-- you have ploughed that ground enough. JOHN (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) Those weren't his decisions, but of the secret service. It is their job to ensure his safety-- they did what they felt prudent. You are a cretin to imply otherwise. (...) predecessor? What is your point? Merely more blathering? (...) Trolling (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) It would have been even nicer if the west had not armed SH to start with! (...) So why does the USA support Sharon; is he not a psychopath with chemical weapons? (...) Why? (...) What does Bush do about Sharon using "living shields"? (...) (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "gutless" bush?
 
(...) I seem to remember he ran around like a headless chicken? How many bases did he hide in? How long was it before he spoke to the nation? Rather than leading your country in a time of need, he chose to hide under his bed. His own words: “I was (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
 
(...) Fine, let's all chip in and help, but first, ensure that no warlords, dictators, tyrants or the like will EVER recieve any of this funding. Prove that every penny will go towards aid and none of it will make anyone else rich and I'll back the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 100 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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