Debate : 17849


Off-Topic / Debate / 17849	17848 \| 17850

Subject:	Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:22:03 GMT
Viewed:	458 times

> > Iraq is not a destabilising force. SH is far too concerned with his own > > self-preservation. > > Iraq is not a destabilizing force? I take it you feel his track record is > something that should be sealed by the court and not considered. ...for how much of his track record did he have the support of the ‘West’? Did we act when he started gassing his own people? Was Bush Sr not willing to let his invasion of Q8 go with only mild rumblings until Thatcher convinced him otherwise? Can it not be argued that his track record is partly shared with the ‘West’? Scott A

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) Notice how you never answer questions? That you just shift to a new attack? Iraq is not a destablizing force? Just say yes or no for once, and then append your explanations instead of this constant dodging. (...) Actually, yes, but not as (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) And that means said foreign policy must be analyzed in a vacuum? Nonsense. You are doing so because it suits your purpose and you explanation is just an excuse. (...) What? Not even "facts" this time? (...) You didn't answer it before, and you (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

61 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

Custom Search