Subject:
|
Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 7 Oct 2001 10:25:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
678 times
|
| |
|
|
> > > What about the "evidence" the USA had when it bombed Sudan?
> >
> > I'm not convinced that we didn't get snookered on that, and that it wasn't
> > actually his plant after all.
>
> Can you justify this in any way?
Well can you? Over the weekend that has been used as an example of how
things can go wrong. Can you justify your words?
>
> > But please provide a cite where I said I
> > supported that bombing (or any other bombing by the US for that matter), if
> > you would...
>
> Did I say you did?
Perhaps *I* did not, but *you* did say this:
"I would indeed *like* this to be a real war (...), because I see one as
needful"?
Did you mean a war without bombs? What did you plan?
Scott A
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Bouhours
|
| Larry: (...) Scott: (...) Scott: (...) "Silence is a virtue in those who are deficient in understanding." Scott A (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Thank you, Britain.
|
| (...) Why not? (...) The fact that the evidence which is been presented is all circumstantial, very simplistic in nature and collected by agencies who have failed in the past. When I read the evidence, I have to ask myself why the USA was not on a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
118 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
