Subject:
|
Re: Who are we to judge?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Sep 2001 12:27:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
254 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Stanley writes:
[snip]
> But in the context of the rest of the speech Bush made I think it
> is clear that he was saying that the *nations* who are with the terrorists
> are the ones who harbor, train, and fund them.
So it's OK for GWB to unilaterally dismiss the notion of neutrality? I too am
not particularly happy with this particular line. Though my government (and
myself) are behind the US in this, I'm particularly worried about some of your
current leader's words.
ROSCO
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Who are we to judge?
|
| (...) I don't think he's dismissing neutrality - do you? Should a nation continue to host terrorist training camps would you consider it neutral? Should a nation harbour terrorists knowingly and refuse to turn them out or turn them over would you (...) (23 years ago, 23-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Who are we to judge?
|
| I think in the context that this remark was made it was pretty clear what our President meant, and I think the answer to your question is pretty obvious. You're entitled to your opinion. Heck, I don't even have a problem if you or anyone else wants (...) (23 years ago, 23-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
