Subject:
|
Re: Looks like the attacks on Kabul have started
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 8 Oct 2001 07:55:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
228 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lawrence Wilkes writes:
> > > Live on CNN of course
> >
> > Well, here's to hoping it remains an attack against the Taliban and that we'll
> > do the right thing when we're done. At least the immediate plans include a
> > massive perfusion of aid to refugees, so that's a start.
>
> Indeed.
>
> I realise that I was insufficiently precise when I said I oppose bombing by
> the US, what I should have said was "bombing by itself".
>
> BTW the Taliban has responded. CNN is a bit slow right now so you may want
> to try to find this AP story other ways.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/10/07/taliban.statement.ap/
>
> A quote: "The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has always chosen the path of
> talks and reason to solve problems."
>
> Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
> Talking, and cutting off hands.
> Reason, and flogging people for flirting.
>
> Do they seriously think anyone believes them, or are they just going through
> the motions? I'm not sure which is worse.
They did offer to work with us more if we showed the some evidence - a smart
move on their part. We refused. It should have went to the UN. Instead we
have ignored international law (as I understand it) and bombed them.
Let's all hope the action is "efficient".
Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
