 | | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
(...) Well of course many people think we shouldn't have placed the sanctions on Iraq. Of course I'm not sure what they think we should have done to convince Iraq to "play nice". Of course there is a point that perhaps we weren't justified in (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Hmm, doesn't each of the original 13 states have a copy of the constitution? Of course nuking D.C. wouldn't get the oldest constitution in effect (you'd have to nuke Boston to do that). Also, the nuke isn't going to incinerate the whole city, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Are you saying that Gore isn't a Christian? Quick internet check: Southern Baptist. Oh hey, his favorite movie is Local Hero and TV show is Futurama. Well, alright! Oh, sorry for the digression. So, if what you say is true, then the Left hates (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Excellent summation of truths and falsehoods about our little war
|
|
A lot of that stuff is still hotly debated, Larry. Those are not precisely facts; and it's not as if Buckley doesn't wear his political leanings pinned to his chest. ::cough:: right-wing::cough:: A lot of it was straw man stuff -- easy targets (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) No that would not end our society as we know it. It would go a long way toward restoring the government though. At the very least we should try to go back to the pre-FDR days. Ask your grandparents about how the elected representatives used (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
Fox is hardly a cite I consider without bias -- I'll wait until at least a few other sources join in confirming the story. And while I don't claim any conspiracy exists to make Saddam appear to be a bad guy (I mean, I accept that he is a bad guy), (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Speaking of trolls... (...) Please cite for me examples in history where the taking out of a capital by a nuclear weapon has been manifestly unimportant in the grand scheme of things. (...) So, let me get this straight-- you assert that the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: <snip> Thanks for this cite, David, it's interesting and thought provoking reading. (...) other approach, it isn't always the best choice. Let's assume for this post that it's our problem to solve (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Excellent summation of truths and falsehoods about our little war
|
|
Pitched at students, it's still a good summation of a lot of the arguements flying around. It's also a good scorecard you can to use to evaluate the players here and their relative grips on reality. (note that RM fails point 3 badly) (URL) that (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) (URL) didn't because it's too early to know whether there's anything to this. Maybe it's a false alarm... Of course with our great powers of fakery, all part of the Vast Conspiracy(tm), it wouldn't take more than a day or two to knock up a 100 (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) hehe maybe not for long: (URL) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
Did you not read how Bush and Blair both admit they cannot connect AQ and SH? It's on the white house's own pages. So your hypothetical is just that -- entirely imaginary. And I have yet to see where Iraq has these fearful weapons of mass (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
(...) I appreciated the approach of this article, because I agreed with their premise-- that to simply cry "no war" without providing any alternate solution is mindless. It is unfortunate that the examples they gave to elucidate their hypothesis in (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geneva Convention on POW treatment is just another inconvenience to the Iraqi Regime?
|
|
(...) Another reason to kick their miserable a$$es. If we did that in the U.S. people would practically overthrow the government... this just goes to show how bad Saddam has gotten and why we should remove him and his corrupt, totalitarian regime. (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Hypothetical Situation: Let ! =a group of terrorists Let @ =an autocratic country with wmds, built or in progress. Also, they dont have a single resource anyone would want Let # =a country that the 2 above hate with every fiber of their being (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Fair enough. (...) Yeah, because I *do* make a distinction between the deadly force perpetrated by both sides. The Israelis desire to root out and kill *terrorists*-- the fact that these cowardly scumbags hide in and among the civilian (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geneva Convention on POW treatment is just another inconvenience to the Iraqi Regime?
|
|
Gadzooks! That's just intolerable. I guess we should just go over there and teach them a lesson. O wait... Risks of War: death, maiming, mutilation, maltreatment, rape...doesn't much matter which side you are on from what I have understood of it. (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geneva Convention on POW treatment is just another inconvenience to the Iraqi Regime?
|
|
(...) The Iraq military really knows how to treat people....they received a report that a pilot ejected and landed in the tigris river in baghdad...so what does the irag military do? ...they shoot at the river....nice way to take pows. (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) (URL) should be required reading for all the gun-toting "Shoot first, ask questions later" yahoos who think because they have the ability to shoot a gun, that using one solves problems better than any other way. Anti-war does (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
John: You really will just argue inanely over almost anything won't you? Frank's post was so reasonable, so even-handed as to almost be void of interesting comment. At face value, and as history has taught us again and again -- taking out a single (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Geneva Convention on POW treatment is just another inconvenience to the Iraqi Regime?
|
|
From: (URL) this: Iraq's Defence Minister, Sultan Hashim Ahmed, said Iraq would "not harm the captured prisoners of war". "It will treat them in accordance with the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war." with this: An ICRC spokeswoman said it was (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
(...) protestor who takes up an anti-war sign. JOHN (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Come on, Frank, you can't possibly make the comparison of the incineration of 2 *buildings* to the incineration of an entire *city*. And I wasn't talking about just *any* city; I specifically meant Washington, D.C. And what if the attack came (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
(...) --Anyone with half a brain must see that Saddam has --to be taken out. It is extraordinarily ironic that the --anti-war protesters are marching to defend a --government which stops its people exercising that --freedom. particularly interesting (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) That's just silly. I have no problem calling it terrorism. Any tactic designed primarily to inspire fear (or "shock and awe?") is a terrorist tactic. I still stand behind the notion that terrorism sometimes makes good sense. My verbiage was (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for Motives
|
|
Look, this is just counterproductive. There is no on-point discussion being advanced. If you were looking at my resume you would absolutely assume that my past record had at least some relationship to the trajectory of my present and future career (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm just going to take a back seat.... Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
|
(...) More on this: (URL) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Interesting juxtaposition
|
|
(...) It sure is interesting. It also certainly says a lot about what is going on inside Iraq for the officers to have been shot. It is hard to comprehend the officer's mindset since I can't believe they were given sufficient support to have any (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Hmm, in a "totally open and free US society" (which we've never had, or certainly haven't had this century), I don't think nuking one city would collapse us. See, the thing is, with a totally open and free society, the power is sufficiently (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Palestinian "aggression"? You can't even bring yourself to call it "terrorism". I don't really want to go here, though, because I fear it is an issue of differing perspectives. (...) Agreed. (...) Well, I bet you can guess how (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
|
|
(...) Has Quebec seceded already, then? Else I am not following you. By the way, not everyone in Canada shares your view... (URL) I know... he's from the west coast. (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for Motives
|
|
(...) John, try to be a bit more serious... you'll never get him to ADMIT it. Normally I ignore him but he's gone too far this time. In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes: "Please show me where I claimed the work of some hidden (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for Motives
|
|
(...) So you admit you are a conspiracy nut... JOHN (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for Motives
|
|
This isn't reasonable discussion of the issues. All of this "conspiracy" nonsense is just that. Please show me where I claimed the work of some hidden conspiracy? I gave a cite from CNN, for crying out loud. All I did was then analyze the (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for Motives
|
|
(...) Those guys are pikers. It's the Robot Sea Monsters aligned with the Orbital Mind Control Lasers that are behind this vast conspiracy. (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
|
|
(...) So, why does the US have any Nuclear weapon? for self defense? against whom? Iraq? Oh, wait, US attacked Iraq, not the other way around... And nuclear weapons against Bin Laden, well, it's unlikely... Your argument doesn't make sense. (...) (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
|
|
(...) I agree. (...) Of course! But the dream is getting even better by the minute! :-) (...) Yes they do. But which country has been involved in the most ars since, let's say, 1950? Don't even think about Russia or, hehehe, Iraq... (...) Well, (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
|
|
LET THIS BE CLEAR : I AM NOT CANADIAN. You want to know Canada's opinion on the issue? Well, there is Ontario, who is against a war without the UN, but wishes the US wil win the war. Totally opposite statements. That's Ontario for you. Then there is (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for Motives
|
|
(...) How about the Skull & Bones society angle? JOHN (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Looking for Motives
|
|
"Russia: No move to legitimise war" (URL) which has big economic and oil interests in Iraq, aligned itself with France and China in opposing U.S.-led military action to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and disarm Iraq of banned weapons that (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Sun is not being very nice.
|
|
(...) I reviewed the Sun-- it wasn't that bad. It's like an R rated People/Car&Driver/Time rolled into one. I especially enjoyed Clarkson's article on SUV's: (URL) rags include The Inquirer-type pubs. You call it "gutter" probably because you don't (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Wasn't it Napoleon Bonaparte that said something like this? (...) It cannot be that he rolls out of bed each morning and says to himself: "God, I am so stupid I think I'll declare war today." He has to have motive. He has to think there is (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Interesting juxtaposition
|
|
(...) "IRAQI conscripts shot their own officers in the chest yesterday to avoid a fruitless fight over the oil terminals at al-Faw." Nobody thinks Iraqi soldiers can stand up to our vastly superior forces -- not with conventional weapons. But where (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Sun is not being very nice.
|
|
(...) This issue [excuse the pun] aside, the Sun really is gutter press. See it online: (URL) at Sun Chirac jibe: (URL) all of News International's >150 papers, it supports the war. Scott A (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Why does the word "hypocracy" come to mind? [Yep, it's Bush again.]
|
|
Well it looks like Turkey is getting itchy feet. But guess what; the USA has rebuked Turkey for daring to invade Iraq! See: Turkish troops enter Iraq (URL) does the word "hypocrisy" come to mind? Scott A (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Chest Beating
|
|
I loved this: (URL) Bell never fails. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) "Do not ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -Richard Feynmann (...) The French are upset because of Dubya's stOOpid actions. I'd describe his "diplomacy" as perhaps the worst I've ever seen (and this from a (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Interesting juxtaposition
|
|
first: (URL) you think the Iraqi conscripts might know more about reality than the SF protestors? I can't take credit for discovering this juxtaposition, I saw it on a blog. (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Sorry Larry, you're thinking is too simplistic in my view. You ascribe everything to stupidity and not everything works that way. What is their motive? Or had you forgotten that most people have motives for the things that they do? And what? (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) And most if not all of the Palestinian aggression is in retaliation for Israeli terrorism. I'm not even saying that you're wrong. I think you're right. But that doesn't change the rightness of what I said. They are in a cycle of violence (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) What you are failing to place into the Israeli question is Palestinian terrorism. Most if not all of Israeli aggression is in retaliation for terrorism. What is going to bring peace in that region is for the Palestinians to eschew terror and (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Making Israel play by "the rules" would, I think, be the first step in reaching a peace in the region. Most of the Arab world objects to the way that Israel is treated to a double standard. I know you just don't think that's a reasonable (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) You contradict yourself. How would letting Israel fall *decrease* their misery? (...) Very good question. The answer is because of the UN. We didn't have a mandate to enter Iraq; only to free Kuwait. We *should* have continued on to Baghdad (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) But of course; it's a game. (...) But of course! (...) Now that's when it *really* gets fun for the kids! And they are actually learning something about cooperation and teamwork! (...) Never said that. It's a game. (...) But of course. It (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) I snipped it because it's another debate. JOHN (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
(...) him (...) I (...) which (...) It was a serious comment at first. How to get rid of an evil dictator with nuclear weapons other than to strike first? The man is clearly insane enough to: (Insert your own "facts" from below). The facts are (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) False. It was doing no such thing. (...) False again. Tell that to the Kurds, er, Shiites, er Chaldeans he gassed/starved/paved over during the peace Hussein's imposition of his will on his oppressed people cost how many hundreds of thousands (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Well, you're welcome, but I wish you would have left at least one more sentence of what I posted, *the very next one* in fact: "Ashcroft (and his bunch) actually ARE out there undermining liberty" This is true, you can't argue it, so maybe (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Because one way people don't die. Inspections and containment was working. The other way people die--bombing and fighting. There had better be a physical "smoking gun" for me to consider the very option of thinking about starting a war. And if (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Thank you for saying so! I have about had it with RM's silly conspiratorial blathering. JOHN (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Oh, let me count the ways: 1. The adult can obviously overpower the children, so any overpowering action taken by the adult must be greatly tempered by thoughtful restraint 2. If the adult has any kind of maturity, he wouldn't simply squash (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) You condescending jackass! If this is what you believe America portrays, or even should portray, to the world, i.e. "The Responsible Adult", while all the other countries, i.e. "The Kiddies" play around--oh my goodness--you truly are (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) People like Saddam Hussein? Emphatically YES! JOHN (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Not what I said. Might *can make* right, if the might is right(eous). JOHN (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Yes, because a UN weapons inspector says something, that makes it true. That's the same bunch that includes members who tipped off the Iraqis that inspections were about to happen so that they could shift stuff around. (...) You know, for (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Are you out of your mind? That would be like me saying: 1. I believe Spencer plans to acquire a gun (though I have no evidence of this) 2. I believe that Spencer dislikes me intensely. Therefore 3. I am justified in lauching a mammoth (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Really? In what way? JOHN (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) You and I agree that we should not be contributing aid to the worst nations in the world. It is a disgrace that China is a PNTR partner. Supporting Israel with no strings attached (and maybe at all) is also bad. Being there to help them up (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) I could say the same... why do we need "hard evidence" to go to war(which, by the way, we have given saddam ample chances to avoid by simply telling us what he has) and "soft evidence" to stay home and let a US hating dictator get wmds? (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
(...) Yes it does help. You're merely being dismissive of the author, writing him off with "nuke 'em all", as if that's what the author is advocating... but I made the mistake of taking your comments seriously, when I pointed that isn't what the (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
Thank you for being so transparent about your thinking. I leave you to the horror that is your thought process. Might makes right. He's a John Neal. The Arm of the Lord. Pathetic. -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:HC469J.1tE7@lugnet.com... (...) Well, why did you respond with: "Doesn´t say nuclear there" if you referred to my statement instead of referring to the article? I have never said that (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) For the adult, perhaps. But in that case, the adult is behaving like a jackass. Dave! (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Ever play "King of the Hill" with a *really* big guy (an adult)? The adult *stays* king and all of the little guys have fun trying to topple him. He may feign that he is almost fallen, but that, too, is part of the game. The end result is that (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Sun is not being very nice.
|
|
(...) What do you think about Canada, John? I mean, because France may have ulterior motives to speak against this war(their own oil interests in Iraq), what about the other countries that are speaking up against this fiasco your own United States (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
(...) "Nuke em all." was the phrase you used. Did you mean something else by the use of "nuke" than nuclear? Nuke is colloquial english for nuclear. Hope that helps. As for N Korea selling stuff, do your research. (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:HC40sL.1DEt@lugnet.com... (...) it (...) I never said that. (...) Is it the same guy that also said "The war party, of which I count myself a member, is therefore now in full (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Sun is not being very nice.
|
|
(...) It's a UK paper, IIRC, it's just the French edition of it. Editorially controlled from the UK. So I wouldn't read too much into it. (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Sun is not being very nice.
|
|
(...) But I'm glad they did; it helps me to believe that there indeed might be hope for France after all. JOHN (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Proof! (was Re: The Sun is not being very nice.)
|
|
Sorry, I should have included this before. It's from Larry's link. "Chirac Sets Strict Terms for Post-War U.N. Role" (URL) statement from "Colon" Powell:] "We're going to use the assets of the people of Iraq, especially their oil assets, to benefit (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Proof! (was Re: The Sun is not being very nice.)
|
|
For those demanding proof, dicover what the whole of the world knows already -- a simple truth <<<YOU>>> have failed to understand. This war is about oil. This is the money/oil trail. Follow it. You may learn something about the value of american (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Sun is not being very nice.
|
|
According to the following Guardian story, anyway: (URL) if it's true? Wonder if The Sun will get fined... I guess I can see where they're coming from given this statement by Chirac today: ""France would not accept a resolution which authorizes (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Disagree. I do not believe in the one peace -- not the Pax Romanus, nor the Pax Americana. Ever play "King of the Hill" -- where one person stands atop a rock or a small dirt mound and everyone else tries to forcibly remove the king from his (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
(...) Doesn't say nuclear there. (...) Saying that nothing else will work does not make you "pro" war. It merely makes you resigned to the inevitable (assuming your analysis is correct). (...) Their track record speaks for itself. They sell anything (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Hmm, the question of what to do if the locals don't want a a free state. It seems obvious to us that anyone (who won't have substantial power in the alternative state) should prefer a free state, but is that really true? If it isn't, what do (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:HC3xvn.14rq@lugnet.com... (...) making (...) to (...) the (...) No, I´m not reading wery closely. English is my second language. And yes, it was sarcasm. "Nothing short of war will (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
I'm sort of not following you here, Chris. (...) I don't know if we *have* but some think we *can*...see (URL) gives a link making the argument that working to overthrow tyrants is useful. Again, I'm not sure I agree with that writer's view. Do you? (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
(...) If that's a serious suggestion, it is a terrible idea. If sarcastic, well then, not reading very closely, are we? Or perhaps you were referring to the DPRK strategy? Mr. Kurtz is not saying we should definitely nuke anybody. Too bad we're at (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:HC3vLD.wMn@lugnet.com... (...) Yeah.. better safe than sorry. Nuke em all. /J (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Stop speaking in "initial"!!!
|
|
(...) I don't speak Initial. I can take a stab at french, I might be able to eventually decipher latin, and given enough time I can figure out what someone from England might be trying to pass off as english, but I don't speak Initial. At least LP (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on the DPRK
|
|
For those joining the discussion late or for those (like me) who weren't immediately able to realize what "DPRK" stands for, it is NOT an abbreviation for Dorney Park. Dave! (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | More on the DPRK
|
|
In: (URL) makes the case (partly by reanalysing a New Republic article making the opposite case!) that either - war with the DPRK or - an eventual loss of a US city to terrorist nukes is inevitable as they have already been reprocessing and are not (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) I've been wondering about that point for a few weeks, and it's given me perspective on a similar issue from a few decades ago (my apologies to those among us who've already heard this story): Anyone who invokes Godwin's Law with the same zeal (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Just sit tight, Chris--after Spencer spends about six quarts of his own, then the market will probably run dry for him. Dave! (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) What I don't get about all this is how much we have failed to appreciate the 11 September 2001 attack and what it could do for us. We were gifted with the opportunity to walk in the other guy's shoes. We were, just for a day or two, knocked (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) So, I wonder why you require "hard" evidence for one side of the coin, but such amazingly soft (ie clearly fabricated) evidence for the other. (...) What better objection could there be? You are essentially claiming that blood is a fine (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Blogs
|
|
I'm not a big blogger, don't normally even read them much, but lately my blogconsumption has gone way up. There are a lot of warblogs out there... Forbes picked their favorites: (URL) you follow some of the links, you'll find collections of other (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
I previously noted: (...) Q: One question for you both. Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th? THE PRESIDENT [Bush]: I can't make that claim. THE PRIME MINISTER (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) My current proof is the currently skewed state of affairs that leans our govt. very heavily in the direction of multinational corporations. These corporations are stealing our collective wealth through tax breaks, reporting fraud, stock fraud, (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
|
(...) Show me hard evidence that proves we are only there for oil. otherwise i will regard you as just another empty-headed anti-war protester jumping on the no blood for oil bandwagon for lack of a better objection.... (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
