 | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) You forget that everyone bit on the bait, including the UN. (...) Of course it is. Not exclusively. But it most certainly is a front. (...) Does it matter where the front is? The terrorists are a part of no particular nation. We must fight (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) The game is the 'bait 'n switch' done by George and anyone who follows him. The 'War on Terror' isn't in Iraq, though. At least, it wasn't until George invaded. The varying ideals for the war (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Which would you prefer: a near-total media blackout on the real impact of the Iraq war on its innocent civilians and our soldiers, or honest and thorough reporting of the state of the war? Me, I'd prefer the latter, and it's a shame that we (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) I'm saying that the MSM objects to Bush's handling of the war, so that is the opinion of the GP. Don't you think people would have a better view of the war if the MSM portrayed it in a better light? Seriously, I honestly believe that the media (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Yup. (...) Yes. And why I think Specter was being obtuse. (...) And not nearly enough "John's":-) JOHN (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Well, that explains the chickenhawks and diehards, but the overwhelming majority of Americans object to Bush's handling of the war, so you're essentially saying that Republicans are fundamentally out of touch with their electorate. (...) Well, (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Resolve for the war is sacred. Don't underestimate the passion for this issue. All others pale in comparison. (...) Not on THIS issue. As far as silly goes; come'on, what is the point of "non-binding" resolutions? Let the Dems stop playing (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) The ostensible goal of Al Quadea is to create an international Islamic State by force. Since this would involve overturning the policies of nations and the acts of terror are (ostensibly) designed to create a situation in which this can happen (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) OK. I think that manner of pronunciation is more accurately attributed to some like Jimmy Carter. President Bush's famous mispronounciation is, of course, "nuclear":-) (...) (URL) Here's> another perspective. (...) Not at all. If we had info (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Why is it silly, in your view? And what does it say about Republicans in general that they're willing to oust someone who expresses an opinion that didn't come from the party's marching orders? Lately Repubs have claimed to have a larger tent (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Hard to say, honestly. I've been giving this some more thought, and it seems to me that a necessary component of rebellion is a desire to break from the targeted nation (or break from some or all of its policies) without necessarily requiring (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) If Hagel votes "yay" for this silly and pointless non-binding resolution, republicans will throw him under the bus, gahr-un-teed. And that goes for ANY senator with an R after their name. Even HE knows it, as evidenced by his own questioning (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Agreed. So much for .debate! :-D Tim (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) My sediments exactly;-) JOHN (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Yeah. Most (if not all) of the Tube bombers and failed tube bombers were UK citizens. Many of them were even born here. I'd personally count that as rebellion. Tim (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) The 9/11 guys weren't US citizens (I think one or two were). But hasn't the UK had trouble with terrorism by citizens? (not the Ireland troubles, but the 21st century kind). Tim (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) If most of them weren't US citizens then I agree with the latter part of this argument. With Terror tactics and WMDs (such as a Boeing 747) then a viable body of rebels doesn't have to be large. Were the hijackers US citizens by and large then (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) Speaking of Demogoguery... (URL) wait, he's a Republican. I guess his speechifying can't be considered that. As an aside, I agree with everything Hagel stated and consider him a man of class. (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) In a literal meaning, war on a noun--eh, hardly humour there In the meaning that we both probaby agree on--a war against fanaticals who appear to have no issue with killing civilians of any (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
|
(...) Sorry, Tim--I missed your post, or I would have responded earlier. DaveE has already offered good thoughts on this point, but I'd go in a slightly different direction. In my view, a rebellion necessarily consists of a viably large body of (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
