 | | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) Business, sure, but look at the circumstances. Cheney was Secretary of Defense in Gulf War I and CEO of Halliburton in 1995, and in 1999 oil deals were struck with Iraq. Let's remember that this was during the time when Saddam was already (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) The Sons of Saddam seem to have forgotten that trite statement. Or perhaps, "He who lives be the sword, dies by the sword." So, yes, it's trite, but it also kinda backfires against David since it can also be used to explain why it happened. I (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) That can't be applicable, the institutions whose legitimacy for trial was recognized have been overpassed. Trial would therefore be a farce without an impartial judge. (...) No longer "if". IMO it's just a question of taste (or sensibility, if (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) And yet you still keep on missing the point--you didn't give the inspectors this long to do their job--doing their job without the support and 'proof' that you "Mericans supposedly had, btw, (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) And the memory loss from the right must have the same short-life: the inspections were there to confirm the known WMD had been destroyed, and logic says what was destroyed can no longer be found. Can you prove those WMD were not destroyed? (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) Life is choices, and learning from past mistakes, and hopefully, as I probably don't have to mention to you, redemption. If yer dead, how can you work at that. I'm not an opponent to the death penalty, I am an opponent to 'vigilanty-ism'. As (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) Life. It's about choices (1). Be a mountain climber? You might fall and crack your skull open. Race cars? You might hit a stationary object at a rapid rate and scramble your brains. Break into someone's home? You might find that that occupant (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Wow! Little Canada in a 'International' issue!
|
|
(URL) which 'tit for tat'... One Canadian dead, one Iranian dead. This is getting ugly. Dave K (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) Lives? How many criminal acts are there? And how many of them end with a death? I think the percentages speak for themselves. I always love people who rant and rave about how Playboy leads to sexual molestors and predators "All those sexual (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) Well I certainly will not risk my life to try and find out first. If a person breaks into my house I will assume the worst and act accordingly. (...) No, I wonder how people can be so pacifistic when it comes to their lives and property. -Mike (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
