 | | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) That fills me with (URL) skepticism> (...) (reverting to FTX:-) (...) He was a known entity when re-elected. You had your chance and muffed it. Wait until '08. (...) Specify, and include to whom we should apologize. (...) If you really (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Personally, I prefer pin-up (URL) nose art> It still offends, but has the added bonus of (presumably) tweaking feminists:-) JOHN (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Correct. Because then we would have been satisfied that he didn't have WMDs at his disposal to possibly provide to terrorists. <snip off-topic material> (...) No, Scott, it is not "clear" by any stretch of the imagination. That is your (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) As well you shouldn't-- looked natty to me. JOHN (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsweek (to touch on something I said in a n erlier post)
|
|
(...) Correction: Clinton was impeached specifically for lying under oath. He should have said "I refuse to answer, because it's none of your business" instead of lying. But he looks pretty small time compared to these guys (and I'm one of those (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) BIGOT! <okay, only kidding> (...) My point which I believe Lar picked up on is this: you expressed laments about continued support for the war. So, I asked, what should we do? Leave? You responded by saying we shouldn't have gone in the first (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
Someone expressed frank misgivings about the formatting of this post: (URL) can I say? The FTX shows up just fine on my browser. But because I am a kind and generous soul, I am reposting in plain text -----repost begins here----- Here are a few (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newsweek (to touch on something I said in a n erlier post)
|
|
And the Teflon Prez... (URL) it turns out that the FBI has documents showing that detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, complained about the mistreatment of the Koran and that many said they were severely beaten. The documents specifically include an (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Hey, I'm not playing to the cheap seats. Looks fine on the web. Dave! (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Wow, that's almost unreadable in a newsreader... Not sure how this looked in the original submission, or how it looks in the web view, but people might want to pay attention to their postings formatting... Frank (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Like (URL) this,> for example. Nice! Dave! (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I thought their Nukes were French? Scott A (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Rubish! If it was agreed he had complied with 1441, he would have been able to stay in power. Anyhow, why start with him whilst training the (URL) Uzbek security forces> and bank-rolling (URL) Israeli belligerence>? (URL) Funded by Washington (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I agree with any of your summary. However, think about this: If I catch you having sex with your cat; do I have to offer you an alternative in order to suggest you stop? Or is up to you to find an alternative? Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Whoops! 11. Do something about Israel. No, Israel's not 100% wrong in all things, and yes, Palestinians are not without blood on their hands, either. But if we had to pick one thing (other than cultural imperialism (as opposed to militaristic (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Here are a few thoughts--not sure how feasible they are, and some will require greater diplomacy than is currently available to the administration. 1. Get rid of Bush. His handling of this entire debacle has been nightmarishly inept and (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
Snipped bunches. Some I agree with (the venality of leaders everywhere, but certainly in the US) and some I don't (it's not just "about the oil!")... focusing on one bit. (...) What I'm not seeing the current participants in this debate providing is (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Mmmmm. This green light in your mind that allows you to do awful things with dubious grounds, and with scant care for human life. Not the green light of well thought out, systematically supported, equitable and respected authorisation I think, (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Is that a rhetorical question? We are actively engaged in the process of securing a sovereign nation's natural resources for our own benefit, and this is exacerbated by the fact that our hegemonic military presence in that country is intended (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Clinton didn't propose an unprovoked invasion in defiance of the UN, and he didn't endorse the removal of inspectors before their job was done, and he certainly didn't advocate the murder of 100,000 Iraqi civilians. If removing him was the (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) No, there really doesn't seem to be much support in any quarter. And the remaining pro war camp is much quieter and harder to draw (apart from the determined political apologist rearguard, and the shrill cries of the mindless faithful), (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Please point me to where Resolution 114 mentions Iraqi freedom. That may (possibly, eventually) be a consequence, but it is NOT what Americans are dying for. ROSCO (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Look, even Clinton acknowledged that SH would need to be deposed eventually. Removing him was the bottom line, even without the threat of WMDs. His mere existence was a "green light" in my mind. JOHN (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) What you seem to have never internalized is that we went into Iraq for one reason, and one reason only-- to depose SH's evil regime. We issued an ultimatum for him leave or we would make him. He didn't, and we did. He was the threat, he was (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) And not just farce, but expressly known to be false, months before Dubya invaded Iraq unprovoked. Dave! (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) WHAT????? You seem to have conveniently forgotten the war in Iraq was primarily to remove the "threat" of nuclear weapons and the (apparent) harbouring of terrorists, as part of the "war on terrorism". THAT is why Americans (and others) are (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
Stating something is wrong and *proving* it is wrong are entirely different things, John. I don't like SA's rantings, but I also don't like the bile that often spouts from your fingers into this group. At this point, I call Put Up or Shut Up - if (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) If you humbley say so yourself? ;-) (...) Anarchy? Where are you getting your information? (...) Now I must really question your sources, because what you have just said could not be further from the truth! Virtually all if not all of the (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) SH was not the biggest fool on the world stage. (...) You mean the "scandal" (URL) and abetted> by Washington? Who do you think bought that oil and burned it in their bloated "SUV's"... your countrymen! John, you are being played like a (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I'd suggest a little humility is in order. (...) ...and replacing it with violent anarchy. That's what I call progress! (...) Hmm. I recall reading that only ~5% of the insurgents were "foreign" and the majority of Iraqis want Bush to pack his (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Actually, I don't adhere to that scenerio. I believe he actually was hiding WMDs and their whereabouts is still unknown. But since we haven't found any, I am willing to concede the above scenerio, which would make SH out to be an idiot. It (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) I'm glad to see that revisionist history isn't limited to the US administration. Looks as if John has the bug as well. <snip> (...) Dave K (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) By the looks of it, Helen is one of the few who are still asking the tough questions. The rest apear to be 'bauble heads', spreading the propaganda of Dubya. I also think you missed the point where she asked if the 'newly established gov'ts' (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Now it is I who must ask you what on earth are you talking about! (...) So, you'd advocate somehow going back in time and not rushing in. (...) The "mess" meaning liberating the Iraqis from the yoke of dictatorship? The "mess" in helping the (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) What is it that you think we would do with that huge stockpile of oil? Steal it? (...) A lot of countries have them. Not many actually use them. Guns don't kill; people do. (...) Let's face it-- SH was an idiot. The guy read the tea leaves all (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) What the doddering old idiot Helen Thomas didn't get was that we are there at the request of the newly established governments of Afganistan and Iraq. McClellan wasn't talking about our initial invasions. Did I mention that Helen Thomas is an (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Won't work--my family doesn't have a huge stockpile of oil. Nor did you supply me with chemical weapons in the 80's out of a criminally short-sighted sense of expediency. Nor did you all but grant me permission to invade Kuwait just weeks (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote: <snip> (...) And then we have my personal favourite rendition of 'reinventive history'-- " MR. McCLELLAN: That's all I have to update at this moment. And with that, I'll be glad to go to your (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) To you? Yes! (...) I would not have rushed there to start with. (...) Well, given the mess people like YOU got us in, I suppose I'd start by trying to hand over power to Iraqis. I would NOT rig their constitution or setup permanent bases in (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) You have something against marriage? (...) Well, you obviously don't support the war, so what would you advocate instead? That we all go home tomorrow? Or do you prefer just to sit around and complain about things? (which is your perogative, (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
