 | | Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Daniel Jassim
| | | | (...) They guy's a greedy thug and a butcher, no problem with that. Invading Kuwait was his fault, no problem with that. But we still supported the bastard throughout the 80's, right? The Kuwaitis still aggravated the issue and America rejected (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Lindsay Frederick Braun
| | | | | (...) Why did the US support Saddam? Why, because he was better than that bloodthirsty, nasty Shi'i Khomeini, that's why! (If you can't detect sarcasm there, you need your brain checked.) We figured that since Saddam was "secular" and willing to (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Daniel Jassim
| | | | | (...) Hah! My fault, I'm used to the Arabic way of calling it "Saudia" instead of "Saudi Arabia." (...) Good for you! We need more!!! Dan (24 years ago, 13-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | |
