 | | level of debate —Scott Arthur
|
| | | (...) The text below was via an e-mail from a friend, it made me wonder just what the level of debate in the USA is. I ckecked out a couple and they appeared valid. Scott A ==+== "Going to war without France is like going duck hunting without your (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: level of debate —David Koudys
|
| | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: <snip> I heard lots of those, I do watch Letterman (yes, my CBS strike is over--I missed Letterman too much ;) )... I'm not defending Chirac... I'm defending people's rights to have an opinion which (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: level of debate —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Well, be fair. Almost all are unattributed or from comedians. And Limbaugh is hardly an icon of thoughtful debate. That leaves Roy Blount and Rumsfeld. Nuff said... (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: level of debate —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) To Scott: That's *nuthin'!* You should see what the *other* side is doing! The Anti-war crowd for the most part are radical fruitcakes. I mean, feminists protesting *naked*???? <shudder> Wearing *pink* to protest? It's all entertainment to the (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | (...) Please tally all protests and render the percentage of those that took place naked. And what's wrong with pink? I mean, other than I won't be seen in it? :-) You seem to be taking the cheap-shot demonizing route in trying to belittle a (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | (...) "The anti-war crowd *for the most part* are radical fruitcakes"?? Okay. Those 100,000+ people marcning in Toronto that I was with--were most of them radical fruitcakes? Were half of them radicak fruitcakes? Were 10 percent of them radical (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) Be careful of using a non-representative sample to ridicule the whole, or as a basis for undermining the soundness of the argument. If certain, shall we say, unusual forms of protest have occurred, that hardly discredits the thinking of the (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: level of debate —Soren Roberts
|
| | | | | Sounds like they need to learn their history. IIRC, the French Army won the Battle of Verdun, under the heaviest shelling and most hideous battlefield conditions in history. Call that what you will, but cowardly it is not. The Germans won in 1940 (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: level of debate —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | (...) Yep the 1930's equivalent of "star wars" was an expensive dud... [parts of it were moved to the "Atlantic Wall" IRC]. (...) French resistance: The fig leaf that covers the truth. (...) Is it not the other way around: "didn't the fledgling USA (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: level of debate —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) And that in 1940 the xenophobic US weren't in the war at all whilst the Allies were fighting and dieing for freedom against tyranny, the US didn't get into it until the end of '41, but they'll take all the credit for winning the war... History (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | (...) Actually, I'd say Joe Steel was fighting *for* tyranny. (...) The rest of the world starts a stupid war (excuse me, *stOOpid*, can't emphasize that enough) and has us bail 'em out, and resents it? That chip on yer shoulder big enough? ;-) (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) Are we talking about the same thing? He marched into Poland, He was on some sort of 'expansionist kick' and the 'eliminating all but the 'Supreme race'. Of course we stood up to that. I wouldn't necessarily call that stOOpid. The war with (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | (...) After all the other spineless concessions... (...) Didn't listen to us at the end of the first world war, and look what came about? Oh, and what country in particular lead the way in not listening to us? StOOpidity. (...) You supported the (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: level of debate —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) <snip> (...) This I did not know--thanks. (rest for later... :) ) Dave K (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: level of debate —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: One other thing... (...) This has also been credited to Schwarzkopf, but according to www.snopes.com the correct attribution is Jed Babbin (URL) Dave! (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
